Efficiency is key - for now

Coal-fired energy condemned

The government of British Columbia should rethink its support for coal-fired electricity generation and instead require all future additions to BC's energy supply to come from renewable sources, says a report to be released today by environmental groups. BC should set targets for lowering greenhouse gas emissions mirroring those already endorsed by municipal governments across Canada, says the report which was co-authored by Pollution Probe and the Pembina Institute. BC should also set targets for both energy efficiency and energy conservation through building design codes, and redesign the mandate of the BC Utilities Commission. The regulatory agency's mandate includes consideration of the social, environmental and health impacts of energy consumption along with the cost of electricity and natural gas delivery, says the report. The report argues that BC still has "significant untapped renewable energy resources and energy efficiency potential" that renders unnecessary the development of coal-fired generation and its attendant adverse impacts on air quality. Two coal-fired generation projects were recently listed by BC Hydro on a list of successful applicants in an open call for new private sector sources of power to contribute to the province's electricity grid. Pembina and Pollution Probe said in a prepared statement that the plants "will provide approximately 2,000 gigawatt-hours (GWh) of electricity per year and will increase BC's greenhouse gas emissions from electricity production by almost 120%." In contrast, the report shows that BC Hydro has identified nearly 6,000 GWh/year in currently untapped potential energy efficiency that could be achieved by 2015 - almost three times the energy provided by the coal plants with no increase in emissions."
(Vancouver Sun 061024)

There is much room for improvement of efficiencies in our power generation systems as well as our transportation systems, from the old technologies like coal-fired power to wind turbines (I saw a report on TV yesterday that said wind turbines being manufactured today for wind farms are 30% more efficient than those built even 10 years ago). As well, infrastructure technology is much more efficient than that of 20 years ago, it's just that replacement of old systems takes so long to implement. The amount of untapped efficiencies in the archaic North American grid is amazing. If we could tap into all that potential and switch from AC to HVDC without even having to expand the current system, it would probably unleash huge amounts of power that has basically been wasted up to now as heat, friction, resistance, radiation, and/or transmission/conductor loss. And we wouldn't have to build a single new coal-fired generation plant. I don't think the government incentives are set up to improve old systems versus simply building new ones. Another thing that's wrong.

Sustainable transport: A glaring omission from Ottawa's "Green Plan"

On Saturday, Transport 2000 Canada, the advocacy group for sustainable public transportation, celebrated its 30th Anniversary at its board meeting in Regina, SK, and unanimously called on the Harper government to re-think its new "Green Plan". The board echoed criticisms by other organizations, citing a serious lack of practical measures to address pollutants and greenhouse gas emissions now. "Canada is lagging behind the rest of the world in adopting public transport measures to reduce emissions and greenhouse gases", said David Jeanes, president of Transport 2000 Canada. "We call on the government to take practical steps now to promote sustainable transportation. Setting goals to be achieved more than forty years in the future does not address the reality of global warming or the expectations of Canadians." The government must foster sustainable public transport by rail and bus to encourage a reduction in personal automobile use, one of the largest contributors to greenhouse gases and urban smog. Urban transit, long-distance travel, and rural transport must all be part of the strategy. Tools to create a balanced transportation network could be available with sustainable funding for VIA Rail, retention and development of underutilized rail corridors, and investment in urban transit systems. Transport 2000's board calls for such policies as an urgent priority.
(Canada NewsWire 061023)

Passenger rail is another huge point of contention. North America's rail system is abysmal from decades of neglect and the entrenched idea that it isn't profitable. However, the other side of this is that we now have an overdependence on personal vehicles to move us from place to place, which albeit profitable for the governments and corporations they sleep with are not the best solutions from a social or environmental view. Which is more important? Giving the average Joe an additional safe, (relatively) environmental option for personal travel? Or keeping the inefficient, stupid car manufacturers of North America in business for the sake of providing employment for lots of people (and lots of cash for government coffers (or is the car industry really as beneficial to North American economics as claimed))? These guys have been pushing back on demands for increased efficiencies and environmental controls for decades. Instead they'd rather push out the new and inefficient - built for planned obsolescence so that consumers are forced to replace much sooner than they would have had the vehicles been built well in the first place.

I wonder when/if Calgary will ever get passenger rail service back again? I hate the airlines so much, and flying is so wasteful from a fuel perspective. If I had the option to take the train and it cost the same as flying, I'd definitely get on the iron road.