As the Government of Alberta begins implementing its climate plan, announced last November, we ask climate change expert Debra Davidson, an environmental sociology researcher in the faculty's Department of Resource Economics & Environmental Sociology, her take on it. A former member of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, she was a contributing author to the Fifth Assessment Report, released in 2014, and attended the Paris climate conference last December.
Key promise #1: A tax on carbon - $20 per tonne in 2017 and $30 per tonne in 2018, rising at inflation plus two per cent, every year after that
What does that mean?
According to government figures, this means Albertans will pay an average of 4.7 cents more per litre of gas in 2017, and 6.7 cents in 2018. To produce the electricity that heats some of our homes, on average we'll pay an extra $320 in 2017, rising to $470 by 2018. (Coal-fired generating units produce 55 per cent of Alberta's electricity, with the rest supplied by natural gas.) However, these figures apply only if there are no conservation efforts or changes in behavior in households, and will vary substantially by home size and lifestyle.
The estimated $3 billion raised annually by this tax will go into building green infrastructure and public transit. A program to provide rebates from this tax for low-income Albertans is being developed.
Is it feasible?
"People are going to be irate and then we'll get over it as we all realize it isn't that big a deal," says Davidson. "We have the lowest taxes in the country. And we tend to forget that the revenue that's collected will be invested in things that are positive for Alberta. The impact on household pocketbooks is sufficiently small that it will lose our attention fast. For households for which it represents a bigger dent in pocketbooks, they have the option to change their emissions (by taking measures to reduce the house's carbon footprint like insulating and sealing the home, using more energy efficient appliances and lightbulbs, for example). That's the incentive for a change in behaviour.
As for industrial users, Davidson says: "Large emitters have already been paying a 'tax' for years, through the existing carbon trading system (CCEMC), so the new rules will not likely affect them much. Businesses that are associated with high electricity usage will be affected, but the whole idea of a carbon tax is to incentivize conservation and innovation."
How will it affect rural and urban Albertans?
"Probably the biggest difference between rural and urban populations will be in the amount of automobile and truck use," says Davidson. "Relatively speaking, people in rural communities put more miles on their vehicles, so they're going to feel it more at the pumps. But this is going to be a drop in the bucket compared to all the other factors in the economy … even at $30 a tonne, that represents a few cents (per litre of gas)."
Key promise #2: A cap on oilsands emissions of 100 megatonnes annually
What does that mean?
Alberta's oilsands operations currently emit approximately 70 megatonnes annually and will never exceed 100. In 2013, Canada's total GHG emissions were 726 megatonnes. Alberta's total was 267.2 megatonnes.
Is it feasible?
This is the most symbolic and least ambitious part of Alberta's policy, says Davidson. "It's a big move to put a limit on carbon emissions, but the limit is so high that it's not compatible with our national climate-change reduction goals.
"Canada has set a goal of reducing emissions to 60 to 70 per cent below 2006 levels by 2050. So, meeting Canada's mitigation goals will require that total emissions for the entire country in 2050 do not exceed 220 to 250 or so megatonnes. If the oilsands alone takes 100 of these, that leaves only 120 to 150 for the rest of the entire national economy - not exactly our fair share is it?"
What's the real question Albertans need to face?
"The scientific reality is, if we're going to be carbon neutral by the end of the century (as the Paris Agreement promises) then the vast majority of carbon deposits have to stay in the ground," says Davidson.
"This sentiment is widely held in the scientific community. A paper published in Nature in January 2015 (McGlade and Eakins, Vol 517) assessed the amount of carbon that is still locked up in fossil fuel reserves and the amount we can reasonably still burn in the coming years while staying within our 2C target. The yet unburned carbon sitting in reserves is three times the amount that can be safely burned. And Alberta's oilsands reserve alone represents a rather huge proportion of that unburned carbon. The authors conclude that 'any increase in unconventional oil production is incompatible with 2 C.' "
Key promise #3: Phase out coal-fired electricity by 2030
What does that mean?
Alberta has 18 coal-fired generating units at six electricity plants. They create 55 per cent of the province's electricity, making Alberta the largest coal user in Canada. Under the federal/provincial Emissions Performance Standard Framework of July 2015, Alberta was already committed to retiring those units. However, the majority could have continued until they were 50 years old. So six could have operated to between 2036 and 2061. Now they won't.
The Coal Association of Canada says approximately 3,000 Alberta miners will be affected by closing the plants, and the provincial government says another 1,500 plant workers will be affected. However, the province expects to see billions of dollars in new renewable energy investment in Alberta.
Is it feasible?
Yes, absolutely, says Davidson. "We have lots of other options available to us here. Alberta has some of the best solar resources in the world and we're not capitalizing on them. If we were to substantially invest in them and combine that with downsizing coal, we'd probably come up with a net gain in terms of jobs."
How will it affect rural and urban Albertans?
"We do have some communities where coal is the main employer in town and without question there needs to be sensitivity to that with resources invested in retraining those individuals and support for economic development in renewable resources," says Davidson.
"But in the province as a whole there aren't a lot of coal mining jobs out there, and frankly, renewable energy is more labour intensive. It generates more jobs per kilowatt hour of energy. And it will be more beneficial to those communities too, because coal mining is not a healthy life."
How will it affect rural and urban Albertans?
A different potential windfall, says Davidson: "I'm hopeful that the government will pay attention to the opportunity to promote 'micro-solar,' which means you and I putting solar panels on our roofs and selling the excess energy to the grid … it could become very lucrative for those in a position to invest in solar."
Key promise #4: Put more emphasis on wind power.
What does that mean?
The Alberta Climate Leadership Plan promises that renewable energy will power up to 30 per cent of Alberta's electricity grid by 2030. The government will appoint an independent facilitator and negotiator to help Alberta make the transition, and offer financial support to retrain coal sector workers for new jobs. Additionally, the government has promised "market mechanisms such as auctioning" to keep the cost of renewable energy low. Currently, Alberta generates about nine per cent of its electricity from renewable energy sources.
Is it feasible?
Yes, says Davidson, now that the costs of wind power are coming down. "The other thing to note is one of the biggest barriers to renewable energy is that it's intermittent - you can't simply expand production when it is needed. But wind and solar are compatible. Solar is more active in the day and wind is more active at night, so it can reduce this intermittency problem."
How might it affect rural and urban Albertans differently?
"Technologically, wind power can only be developed at a large scale," said Davidson. "In Europe, wind power development has been happening as community-owned operations, with small rural communities that develop wind power cooperatively. For wind generation to become a really big feature in the cities, we're going to be waiting for further technological developments that would allow wind power on a smaller scale."
Key promise #5: Energy companies must reduce methane emissions by 45 per cent of 2014 levels by 2025.
What does that mean?
Methane is 30 times more intense as a greenhouse gas than carbon dioxide. It is emitted during the production and transport of coal, oil and natural gas. The oil and gas industry produced 30.4 megatonnes of methane emissions in 2013, representing 70 per cent of the provincial methane emissions.
Is it feasible?
Several months before Alberta's plan was announced, the clean technology sector noticed a surge in interest from oil companies seeking assistance in reducing emissions from tailings ponds, the National Post reported in January 2016. The paper said the sector "is poised to be one of the few growth businesses in Alberta in 2016."
What's the bottom line?
The major oil producers who backed the climate plan consider it a win for both the environment and the economy. Shell Canada president Lorraine Mitchelmore said it gives Canadian oil companies an incentive to become the world's most progressive energy producers. Natural gas producers such as Andy Mah of Advantage Oil and Gas Ltd., hope it will help them develop natural gas without as much opposition.
Environmentalists believe it will substantially cut Canada's carbon emissions and diversify our economy.
Critics, including the Wildrose Party, believe it will cause drilling activity to further collapse, with more oilsands job losses and the devastation of coal-producing communities.
Key promise #1: A tax on carbon - $20 per tonne in 2017 and $30 per tonne in 2018, rising at inflation plus two per cent, every year after that
What does that mean?
According to government figures, this means Albertans will pay an average of 4.7 cents more per litre of gas in 2017, and 6.7 cents in 2018. To produce the electricity that heats some of our homes, on average we'll pay an extra $320 in 2017, rising to $470 by 2018. (Coal-fired generating units produce 55 per cent of Alberta's electricity, with the rest supplied by natural gas.) However, these figures apply only if there are no conservation efforts or changes in behavior in households, and will vary substantially by home size and lifestyle.
The estimated $3 billion raised annually by this tax will go into building green infrastructure and public transit. A program to provide rebates from this tax for low-income Albertans is being developed.
Is it feasible?
"People are going to be irate and then we'll get over it as we all realize it isn't that big a deal," says Davidson. "We have the lowest taxes in the country. And we tend to forget that the revenue that's collected will be invested in things that are positive for Alberta. The impact on household pocketbooks is sufficiently small that it will lose our attention fast. For households for which it represents a bigger dent in pocketbooks, they have the option to change their emissions (by taking measures to reduce the house's carbon footprint like insulating and sealing the home, using more energy efficient appliances and lightbulbs, for example). That's the incentive for a change in behaviour.
As for industrial users, Davidson says: "Large emitters have already been paying a 'tax' for years, through the existing carbon trading system (CCEMC), so the new rules will not likely affect them much. Businesses that are associated with high electricity usage will be affected, but the whole idea of a carbon tax is to incentivize conservation and innovation."
How will it affect rural and urban Albertans?
"Probably the biggest difference between rural and urban populations will be in the amount of automobile and truck use," says Davidson. "Relatively speaking, people in rural communities put more miles on their vehicles, so they're going to feel it more at the pumps. But this is going to be a drop in the bucket compared to all the other factors in the economy … even at $30 a tonne, that represents a few cents (per litre of gas)."
Key promise #2: A cap on oilsands emissions of 100 megatonnes annually
What does that mean?
Alberta's oilsands operations currently emit approximately 70 megatonnes annually and will never exceed 100. In 2013, Canada's total GHG emissions were 726 megatonnes. Alberta's total was 267.2 megatonnes.
Is it feasible?
This is the most symbolic and least ambitious part of Alberta's policy, says Davidson. "It's a big move to put a limit on carbon emissions, but the limit is so high that it's not compatible with our national climate-change reduction goals.
"Canada has set a goal of reducing emissions to 60 to 70 per cent below 2006 levels by 2050. So, meeting Canada's mitigation goals will require that total emissions for the entire country in 2050 do not exceed 220 to 250 or so megatonnes. If the oilsands alone takes 100 of these, that leaves only 120 to 150 for the rest of the entire national economy - not exactly our fair share is it?"
What's the real question Albertans need to face?
"The scientific reality is, if we're going to be carbon neutral by the end of the century (as the Paris Agreement promises) then the vast majority of carbon deposits have to stay in the ground," says Davidson.
"This sentiment is widely held in the scientific community. A paper published in Nature in January 2015 (McGlade and Eakins, Vol 517) assessed the amount of carbon that is still locked up in fossil fuel reserves and the amount we can reasonably still burn in the coming years while staying within our 2C target. The yet unburned carbon sitting in reserves is three times the amount that can be safely burned. And Alberta's oilsands reserve alone represents a rather huge proportion of that unburned carbon. The authors conclude that 'any increase in unconventional oil production is incompatible with 2 C.' "
Key promise #3: Phase out coal-fired electricity by 2030
What does that mean?
Alberta has 18 coal-fired generating units at six electricity plants. They create 55 per cent of the province's electricity, making Alberta the largest coal user in Canada. Under the federal/provincial Emissions Performance Standard Framework of July 2015, Alberta was already committed to retiring those units. However, the majority could have continued until they were 50 years old. So six could have operated to between 2036 and 2061. Now they won't.
The Coal Association of Canada says approximately 3,000 Alberta miners will be affected by closing the plants, and the provincial government says another 1,500 plant workers will be affected. However, the province expects to see billions of dollars in new renewable energy investment in Alberta.
Is it feasible?
Yes, absolutely, says Davidson. "We have lots of other options available to us here. Alberta has some of the best solar resources in the world and we're not capitalizing on them. If we were to substantially invest in them and combine that with downsizing coal, we'd probably come up with a net gain in terms of jobs."
How will it affect rural and urban Albertans?
"We do have some communities where coal is the main employer in town and without question there needs to be sensitivity to that with resources invested in retraining those individuals and support for economic development in renewable resources," says Davidson.
"But in the province as a whole there aren't a lot of coal mining jobs out there, and frankly, renewable energy is more labour intensive. It generates more jobs per kilowatt hour of energy. And it will be more beneficial to those communities too, because coal mining is not a healthy life."
How will it affect rural and urban Albertans?
A different potential windfall, says Davidson: "I'm hopeful that the government will pay attention to the opportunity to promote 'micro-solar,' which means you and I putting solar panels on our roofs and selling the excess energy to the grid … it could become very lucrative for those in a position to invest in solar."
Key promise #4: Put more emphasis on wind power.
What does that mean?
The Alberta Climate Leadership Plan promises that renewable energy will power up to 30 per cent of Alberta's electricity grid by 2030. The government will appoint an independent facilitator and negotiator to help Alberta make the transition, and offer financial support to retrain coal sector workers for new jobs. Additionally, the government has promised "market mechanisms such as auctioning" to keep the cost of renewable energy low. Currently, Alberta generates about nine per cent of its electricity from renewable energy sources.
Is it feasible?
Yes, says Davidson, now that the costs of wind power are coming down. "The other thing to note is one of the biggest barriers to renewable energy is that it's intermittent - you can't simply expand production when it is needed. But wind and solar are compatible. Solar is more active in the day and wind is more active at night, so it can reduce this intermittency problem."
How might it affect rural and urban Albertans differently?
"Technologically, wind power can only be developed at a large scale," said Davidson. "In Europe, wind power development has been happening as community-owned operations, with small rural communities that develop wind power cooperatively. For wind generation to become a really big feature in the cities, we're going to be waiting for further technological developments that would allow wind power on a smaller scale."
Key promise #5: Energy companies must reduce methane emissions by 45 per cent of 2014 levels by 2025.
What does that mean?
Methane is 30 times more intense as a greenhouse gas than carbon dioxide. It is emitted during the production and transport of coal, oil and natural gas. The oil and gas industry produced 30.4 megatonnes of methane emissions in 2013, representing 70 per cent of the provincial methane emissions.
Is it feasible?
Several months before Alberta's plan was announced, the clean technology sector noticed a surge in interest from oil companies seeking assistance in reducing emissions from tailings ponds, the National Post reported in January 2016. The paper said the sector "is poised to be one of the few growth businesses in Alberta in 2016."
What's the bottom line?
The major oil producers who backed the climate plan consider it a win for both the environment and the economy. Shell Canada president Lorraine Mitchelmore said it gives Canadian oil companies an incentive to become the world's most progressive energy producers. Natural gas producers such as Andy Mah of Advantage Oil and Gas Ltd., hope it will help them develop natural gas without as much opposition.
Environmentalists believe it will substantially cut Canada's carbon emissions and diversify our economy.
Critics, including the Wildrose Party, believe it will cause drilling activity to further collapse, with more oilsands job losses and the devastation of coal-producing communities.