作者pursuistmi (common people)
看板IA
標題[新聞] The greening of Canada?
時間Tue Feb 24 09:49:49 2009
標題:The greening of Canada?
Feb 23rd 2009
From Economist.com
Stephen Harper looks to Washington, not Alberta
DESPITE being two of the most profligate energy users on the planet, the
United States and Canada have spent little time over the last eight years
discussing what they might do together to combat climate change and protect
the environment. That changed on February 19th, when President Barack Obama
made his first post-inauguration trip abroad to meet Stephen Harper, Canada’
s prime minister. The environment was one of just three topics on their
official agenda.
Mr Obama seems the more committed environmentalist; clean energy and energy
reduction figure prominently in his stimulus package. Mr Harper is a more
recent convert to the green cause and it is not yet clear he has been fully
won over. He is torn between his allegiance to his adopted province of
Alberta, where Canada’s tar sands are located, and the need to align Canada’
s policies with those of America, which buys most of Canada’s energy
exports. As long as George Bush remained in office, Mr Harper did not have to
choose between the two, but a new president with decidedly greener views will
force his hand.
The tar sands, which account for about half of Canada’s crude oil exports
(almost all of which go to America, along with much of Canada’s natural gas,
hydro-electric power and uranium), were under attack by green groups and some
American policymakers long before the change of administration. Steaming the
heavy oil out of the ground, or mining and processing the tarry sand, require
large amounts of energy and water, and the deforestation of vast tracts of
boreal forest. The federal and Alberta governments have resisted imposing
environmental rules that would impede tar-sands development.
This stance is now shifting. Just days after the American election, the
Canadian prime minister proposed a continental cap-and-trade system to
control carbon emissions—something the oil industry in Canada adamantly
opposed. Earlier this month, the Alberta government brought out a 20-year
plan for the greening of the tar sands, which, while light on details, showed
more than the usual resolve. Even more surprising was the decision in
February of the federal and Alberta governments to charge Syncrude, a large
tar-sands processor, with offences under environmental and bird-protection
laws for the deaths of 500 ducks in one of the company’s tailing ponds last
April.
Mr Harper and his advisors are also aware that while Mr Bush blocked states’
efforts to regulate greenhouse-gas emissions (California and Vermont, for
instance, both wanted to set a carbon standard for transport fuels), Mr Obama
may permit such state-by-state laws. And Canada is still fighting for an
exemption from a rule inserted into the 2007 Energy Independence and Security
Act that bars the American government from buying fuels whose production
causes more greenhouse-gas emissions than conventional petroleum sources, as
producing oil from tar sands does.
At their meeting in Ottawa, Messrs Harper and Obama agreed to collaborate on
the development and use of clean energy—boilerplate stuff. But they also
discussed broader collaboration in the future, including matching their
countries’ environmental rules.
At first glance, this is bad news for tar-sands producers, already struggling
with the slump in oil prices from over $140 a barrel last July to less than
$40 today. During that time projects worth an estimated $80 billion have been
cancelled or postponed. Some people in the industry still believe that America
’s need for oil is so great that it cannot afford to reject oil, however
dirty, from a friendly, secure supplier. But with every green pronouncement
from Mr Obama, this becomes a fainter hope.
There is a bright side. Stimulus money is pouring out of Washington and
Ottawa, some of it already earmarked for research and technology to help the
oil industry produce cleaner fuels. Both Mr Obama and Mr Harper made
particular mention of carbon capture and sequestration, an unproven and
expensive technology that could eventually be used on the coal plants that
produce about 70% of American electricity, or on the upgraders and refineries
in the tar sands. If the industry is finally and reluctantly forced to go
green because of Mr Obama, at least taxpayers will help pay for it.
http://www.economist.com/daily/columns/greenview/displaystory.cfm?story_id=13167651&fsrc=nwl
新聞來源: (需有正確連結)
--
--
※ 發信站: 批踢踢實業坊(ptt.cc)
◆ From: 140.123.43.211