Toymakers recycle junk into eco-friendly playthings
January 27, 2009
New aged toy companies are turning everyday garbage into interesting toys.
Carbon capture a focus of federal budget
January 27, 2009
A new $1 billion Clean Energy Fund the federal government hopes will leverage more than $2.5 billion in investment in carbon capture and storage (CCS) and other environmental projects over the next five years is the largest energy component of the 2009 federal budget as tabled in the House of Commons by Finance Minister Jim Flaherty.
Other than $351 million for Atomic Energy of Canada to cover mainly continued development of its next generation of Candu power reactors, there was little else in the way of direct support for the energy sector. The main focus was on general economic stimulus, which will move the government from a decade of healthy surpluses to a cumulative deficit of some $84 billion in the next four fiscal years, after which the government expects a $700 million surplus in 2013-14.
In a bid for support from the main Liberal Party opposition when the budget is put to confidence votes (the New Democratic Party and the Bloc Quebcois had already said they would not support it) the Conservative minority offered an array of initiatives which generally were seen as more liberal than conservative. Following on the heels of details released before the budget on elements such as “shovel ready” infrastructure projects and the need for deficits, Flaherty announced a range of personal income tax changes.
On the corporate front, there was $7.5 billion in targeted support for the automotive, manufacturing and forestry sectors – the latter despite the threat of legal action from U.S. lumber lobbies – and a promise to eliminate most remaining import tariffs on machinery and equipment.
Other industry-focused elements of the budget include a two-year Extraordinary Financing Framework which will make up to $200 billion available to businesses, a two-year extension of the 50% straight-line accelerated Capital Cost Allowance rate, and a one-year extension of the Mineral Exploration Tax Credit to help mining companies to raise capital.
“Budget 2009 . . . aims to protect our country from an immediate economic threat while providing the solutions we need to ensure our long-term growth and prosperity”, the Finance Department said in a budget background document, explaining that its initiatives mirrored those being taken by others in the G20 group of countries.
“It is only by acting together to boost global economic growth that countries can derive maximum impact from their actions. The government’s actions . . . fulfill Canada’s commitments at the recent G20 leaders’ summit (last November 15 in Washington) to provide timely stimulus to domestic demand while maintaining long-term fiscal sustainability.”
Details of the Clean Energy Fund in the budget documents show that it includes $150 million over five years in support of “clean energy technologies” with the other $850 million “development and demonstration of promising technologies”, including large-scale CCS.
Until this latest commitment, Ottawa had pledged $375 million in support of CCS technologies, including $250 million in its 2008 budget, mainly for a full-scale commercial demonstration at a Saskatchewan coal-fired generating station. The other $125 million is for CCS projects under the auspices of the ecoENERGY Technology Initiative overseen by Natural Resources Canada.
“Canada has committed to a 20% reduction of greenhouse gases (from 2006 levels) by 2020,” the Finance Department notes. “Clean-energy technologies have the potential to make a significant contribution. . . . This is particularly the case for technologies that capture carbon dioxide . . . at the point of production in industrial facilities and safely store it underground.”
Vatican looks to the heavens for power
January 27, 2009
The sea is blue, of course. Everyone knows that. But did you know the Holy See is turning green?
Seat of the Pope and the world’s smallest independent country, The Vatican, installed a new solar energy system. It supplies power to several key buildings in the complex, with more to come – the Vatican is committed to use 20 per cent renewable energy by 2020.
The system is installed on the roof of Nervi Hall, which is one of the largest buildings in the Vatican, and hardly a forgotten outpost. Among other locations, Nervi is where His Holiness Pope Benedict XIV grants audiences to visiting foreign and church dignitaries. Built in 1971, Nervi is – by far – one of the newest and most modern buildings in the Vatican. It was a natural choice for solar panelling. The hall can hold 10,000 people and serves as the Vatican’s unofficial concert venue.
Between papal audiences, concerts and day-to-day demands, Nervi has significant energy needs. The 2,400 individual photovoltaic panels installed on the roof are expected to supply 100 per cent of Nervi’s needs. It’s estimated the energy savings equate to around 70 tonnes of oil.
Those fearing the altering of one of the world’s most famous (and undeniably beautiful) skylines can rest easy. The panels will not be visible from below, leaving the view unchanged.
Pope Benedict has spoken out on environmental issues, saying that global environmental damage is making “the lives of poor people on earth especially unbearable.”
It’s only natural he would look to the heavens for a solution.
Obama green energy may lag growth pace of Bush years
January 26, 2009
According to some experts, president Obama’s green initiatives may take longer than planned.
Capturing the CCS debate
January 26, 2009
In 2008, Carbon Sequestration and Storage (CCS) became a bigger topic around the water cooler; for industry people, scientists, media, and Canadians at large. After the Alberta government’s official endorsement of the technology earlier in the year and subsequent pledge of $2 billion to advance CCS research over the summer, this was the year CCS moved into the mainstream.
The Alberta funding is part of that province’s climate change plan, which was launched by Alberta Premier Ed Stelmach in early 2008. The plan aims to cut GHG emissions in the province in half by 2050. CCS technology is expected to contribute to 70 per cent of the total 200 megatonnes slated for reduction by that time.
Even the federal government seemed keen on pushing CCS with Harper’s $240 million funding announcement for what they are describing as “the world’s first and largest CCS demonstration projects at the Boundary Dam Power Station in Estevan Saskatchewan.
But now as a new year begins and proposals for the fund are carefully reviewed in the background, some may be wondering, what happened to the CCS conversation? Where did we land with it in 2008 and what can we expect in 2009?
As a preamble, CCS is defined by the Alberta Government as “capturing carbon dioxide emissions from industrial sources and transporting them by pipeline to sites where they are injected into deep rock formations for permanent storage.”
Widely regarded as an important solution to reducing greenhouse gases, particularly those emitted from coal-fire plants and Alberta’s oil sands and bitumen upgrading facilities, CCS has been likened to many a metaphor. From CBC’s analogy of turning smoke stacks upside down, to Sierra Club’s more acerbic metaphor of sweeping dirt under the rug, everyone seems to be trying to wrap their head around CCS on some level or another. That there are multiple metaphors highlights the fact that CCS is a complicated issue with cost, risk and emissions factors all being hotly debated.
Climate change solution or just a bunch of hot air?
Everyone seems to have a perspective on CCS – whether they’re members of industry investing in its development, or NGOs that are intrinsically wary of industry and government touted solutions.
Environmental groups in particular often regard CCS as an unknown technology and are hesitant to jump on the bandwagon. The Sierra Club is a case in point. To find the organization’s views, one need look no further than their Coal FAQs: “If coal is to remain a part of our energy future, it must be mined responsibly, burned cleanly and guaranteed to not worsen global warming pollution. At this time, there is no existing coal technology that meets these standards, including Integrated Gasification Combined Cycle (IGCC) or carbon capture and sequestration (CCS).”
The Pembina Institute, on the other hand, is cautiously supportive of CCS. “There is no one green bullet,” says executive director Marlo Raynolds who believes CCS should be employed as part of a “portfolio” of climate change solutions. Raynolds says that Pembina has taken on the stance that, because Alberta is situated on sedimentary basins, oil sands operate on a geology that lends itself well to CO2 storage. “If we were in other parts of the world where we didn’t have that storage capacity, we would need to look for other options. For us CCS is one part of the solution.”
Percolating the debate even further is the presence of online forums in which citizens of all walks share their knowledge, questions and opinions about CCS. One such debate was fomented on the Canada’s Oil Sands website, which was launched early in the summer to provide a platform for people to air their concerns about oil sand development. The industry funded initiative, dubbed “a different conversation” saw the introduction of many discussion topics, and it wasn’t long before CCS was added to the mix.
“If you look at the hydrocarbons – oil, gas, bitumen and for that matter coal, they are essentially sequestered carbon, only carbon that was sequestered millions of years ago,” writes one contributor under the alias ‘Bill.’ “I think it is perfectly logical option to ‘resequester’ this same carbon in depleted oil and gas reservoirs where it once was sequestered. It would be sequestered as CO2 rather than as CH4 or other hydrocarbons. We have simply extracted the energy from it.”
The discussion on the site ranges from potential ground water impact to individual responsibility for reduction of emissions.
CCS in depth
Another voice in the debate is that of CCS advocate Dr. Eddy Isaac, Executive Director of Alberta Energy Research Institute (AERI). While Isaac agrees with some concerns being raised – primarily the high cost required to test and implement – he regards CCS as a known technology with potential to address the emissions issue. Referring to the often cited challenge of transporting and storing the collected CO2, Isaac says it’s been happening everyday in the US for the last 30 years.
Already in a natural liquid state, companies have been pumping and transporting natural C02 from the ground as a solvent for enhanced oil recovery. A good example of this is the Weyburn-Midale CO2 Project in southeastern Saskatchewan which is home to a depleted oil reservoir containing deep underground rock formations called saline aquifiers. Transported via pipeline from a plant in Beulah North Dakota, pure streams of CO2 left over from the coal gasification process is injected into these underground formations for EOR. “The real challenge right now is being able to capture emitted CO2,” explains Isaac, adding the technology does exist, but is highly expensive to implement on the mass scale required to substantively reduce emissions.
Another component in the equation is storage. Isaac says this is being done already, albeit on a smaller scale, as acid gas from gas plants containing a mixture of CO2 and hydrogen sulphide is regularly stored in what’s called, saline formations. According to Isaac, there are 50 projects currently underway that involve injecting acid gas into these formations, but bringing the technology into mass commercial use involves major costs that should eventually start decreasing. “We’re going a step further and saying in the long run we need to find other formations to put the CO2 in – yes we can use it for enhanced oil recovery, but in the long run we want to also just inject it and forget about it.”
But perhaps it’s not that simple. Recent research points out the energy intensive process of operating CCS technology, suggesting a new metaphor for the technology might be in order – the Ouroboros, more widely recognized as a snake eating its own tale. It is a representation of infinity or, less inspiring, the impossible or self-defeating. A recent study reveals the possibility that CCS could result in increased emissions, due to the additional energy required to power the very process that was supposed to reduce air pollution in the first place.
Says Science News, “When the researchers factored in all the “cradle to grave” pollution of a CO2-burying plant, emissions of acid rain-causing gases like nitrogen oxides (NOx) and sulfur oxides (SOx) were up to 40 percent greater than the total cradle-to-grave emissions of a modern plant that doesn’t capture its CO2.”
Advocates of the technology, such as Isaac, believe this isn’t necessarily the case. “The technologies used in new power plants that will capture CO2 will be based on gasification technology or Integrated Gasification Combined Cycle (IGCC),” he says, adding that although plants using IGCC technology are expensive and seldom used today, the technology is suited, in many respects, to bringing emissions down to zero. “The use of this technology reduces SOx and NOx by orders of magnitude compared to conventional pulverized coal technology. So while I believe we need to do life cycle analyses, all the data I have seen indicate much lower SOx and NOx emissions.”
Another solution for the CCS energy use conundrum comes from Stephen Kaufman, Chairman of the Integrated CO2 Network (ICO2N) an industry supported carbon capture and storage (CCS) system proposed for Canada. “By undertaking CO2 capture there is a loss in plant efficiency and more energy is required for the same output,” says Kaufman. “The CO2 emissions from this additional energy use will also be captured in the majority of cases”
CCS – a question of politics
While the challenges and solutions for CCS continue being posed, the debate also veers into political territory. Should the high cost to implement CCS become the responsibility of industry or taxpayers? Such is a topic experts from all representations seem to have an opinion about as well.
“It’s subsidizing industry through taxpayer dollars. We end up paying to clean up industry’s mess.” says Jeh Custer, Northwestern Energy Campaigner with the Sierra Club. Describing the announcement as industry’s “get out of jail free card” Custer says the technology ultimately allows them to continue business as usual. “It’s an unproven technology. To think that we’re going to take carbon and put it under the ground and it will be there for hundreds or thousands of years seems over reliant on technological solutions.”
Kaufman, on the other hand, says that research from ICO2N shows large-scale CCS will not proceed if left to the market alone as the investment risks in the early years are substantial. “CCS is ideal for a public-private partnership as this approach enables industry and, both provincial and federal, government to work together to address long-term policy, financial risk-sharing and regulatory issues,” says the chairman.
“Carbon sequestration is still a relatively new and expensive process,” says Jacob Irving, Executive Director of the Oil Sands Developers Group, adding that developing the Alberta oil sands was also expensive in the beginning. But as time passed and technology advanced, the cost to develop decreased substantially. “We expect the same would be true for carbon sequestration technology but only through the construction and generation of actual projects. And that can only happen with the ongoing efforts and investment of industry alongside the support of government through initiatives such as the recently announced CCS fund.”
Meanwhile, the wheels are already steering the CCS debate from the realm of talk and into the realm of action. The Alberta Government recently announced three Alberta test wells are slated for drilling in a “ground-breaking, long-term, large-volume CO2 sequestration project,” that will reach the end of the field test phase in June 2010. As well, with $2 billion flowing up the provincial pipes, many industry players and scientists are excited by the chance to push the technology so it can be brought to mass-scale commercial use. AERI, the organization responsible for fielding applications has been short-listing those proposals that demonstrate high potential for speed of development and ability to substantively reduce GHGs through CCS technology. Full project proposals will be submitted by early 2009 and the specific allocation of monies from the $2 billion CCS fund will be determined by March 31, 2009.
At that point, expect a little more conversation at the water cooler about CCS.
Smart bikes
January 26, 2009
Admit it – you’re guilty. At least if you’ve ever driven in the downtown area of a major metropolitan city. You are guilty of being driven to distraction – and frustration – by a cyclist.
Oh, you concede cyclists are much more eco-conscientious than you in your car – but cyclists can be something of a rogue element on the road. Definitely in need of a bit of organization. This phenomenon is even more pronounced in high-density cities, like Copenhagen.
That’s why MIT researchers unveiled a major new project – SmartBiking – in Denmark’s largest city. It aims to do nothing less than transforming bicycle use, promoting urban sustainability and building new connections between the city’s cyclists. The idea is to make bikes more appealing.
Copenhagen was a natural choice for the study. 30 to 40 per cent of its residents already use bikes as their primary transportation. The project aims to encourage even more Danes to ride their bikes, partly by forging social networks among them.
A Facebook application called “I crossed your path” was launched, allowing cyclists to link up with people they may have ridden past during the day. Or, to establish new connections – for business or, ahem, personal reasons.
Bikes will be fitted with smart tags to allow individuals to monitor the distance they travel while cycling as part of a citywide “green mileage” initiative. Sound familiar? The concept is freely borrowed from frequent-flyer programs.
As far as MIT or the city of Copenhagen can tell, this is the first program of its kind in the world. That’s the thing with good ideas, though: they tend to spread.
Could biodiesel power future rockets?
January 26, 2009
A California-based engineering firm has proven biodiesel could be a feasible alternative to rocket fuel.
Twinkle, twinkle, little laser
January 23, 2009
A new breakthrough can help farmers detect when to water their crops and when it isn’t necessary, thus saving precious water resources from being wasted.
Cleaner air adds 5 months to U.S. life span
January 23, 2009
Reduced air pollution over the past two decades has caused American life expectancies to rise by nearly five months.
What to expect from President Obama
January 23, 2009
President Barack Obama’s inaugural address may not have been heavy on details, but we can glimmer much from his surprisingly sombre words: “Starting today, we must pick ourselves up, dust ourselves off and begin again the work of remaking America…For everywhere we look, there is work to be done.”
For those of us interested in energy and environmental policy, Obama spoke little of his “Green Deal.” He did, however imply there was much, much work to be done. Obama has hinted that big – even seismic – changes are afoot.
His message has been clear: America needs to consume fewer natural resources and embrace green energy.
Obama has already pledged tens of billions of dollars to develop green energy. This represents a quantum leap of investment into research and development into energy-saving and pollution-reducing technologies. His inaugural address hinted at undoing much of the previous administration’s initiatives.
Again, inaugural addresses seldom divulge detailed policy plans, but one can guess. Expect Obama to remove legislation that eased penalties for polluters and encouraged the continued construction of non-renewable energy facilities such as coal-fired power plants.
He has already made a whirlwind of appointments, placing environmentalist scientists to senior posts in key scientific and energy agencies. These eco-friendly appointments already show a marked departure from the previous administration, which generally ensured these agencies were controlled by like-minded scientists.
The magnitude of change remains to be seen. Still, there’s no denying that change is in the air, at least over Washington, DC.
