isramart : Critics see holes in Alberta’s CO2 plan

Isramart news:
CALGARY - The Stelmach government has given tentative approval to three carbon capture projects that will share in$2 billion in public money–but critics say the plan still faces a difficult battle during a period of deficit spending and budget cuts.

Confronted with U. S. and international pressure on reducing the environmental footprint of the oilsands, the province is relying mainly on expensive technology to curtail surging emissions.

The investment in capturing greenhouse gas from industrial sources–and then injecting it into the ground for storage — is meant to be the province’s means of avoiding economic penalties as the world looks to a new global climate change pact in Copenhagen this December.

“We’re taking a look at what we can do to ensure that Alberta’s largest economic sector can move forward into the future in a sustainable sort of way,” said Alberta Energy spokesman Bob McManus.

“We’re working toward ensuring there are government revenues into the future.”

However, critics and environmentalists say the province is putting too many of its eggs in one basket.

“In light of the sharply worsening budget position of the provincial government, we need to look at reviewing the subsequent phases of this strategy and consider down-scaling it–squeezing more value out of those dollars,” said Alberta Liberal energy critic Kevin Taft.

“If it comes down to a choice between carbon capture and storage or hospital beds, I for one am going to choose hospital beds.”

On Tuesday, the government announced it will head into final negotiations this month for three projects –including a new carbon-capture power plant next to the existing Genesee facility west of Edmonton, an Alberta Carbon Trunk Line that will gather CO2 from industrial sources and transport it to central Alberta for injection, and a full capture and storage project for the Scotford Upgrader — a joint venture between Shell Canada, Chevron Canada, and Marathon Oil Sands LP.

Neither Energy Minister Mel Knight nor Environment Minister Rob Renner were available for comment on the three projects Tuesday.

But the news came on the same day thegovernmentannouncedmajorbudget woes in the health-care system.

“This is something industry should be paying for,” said NDP environment critic Rachel Notley, who called it “a gross failure to get the priorities straight.”

The NDP has never supported the public expenditure on carbon capture, Notley said, adding “this is really an exceptionally overpriced public relations stunt to greenwash the oilsands for the sake the of the U. S.”

The first round of commercial scale projects will be expected to achieve annual carbon dioxide reductions by 2015.

In Alberta, the utilities sector accounts for more than 40 per cent of all industrial-sourced greenhouse gas emissions, while the oilsands represent less than a quarter. However, oilsands emissions are expected to rapidly increase with expansions.

In April, it was revealed that most of Alberta’s largest oilsands producers had abandoned their bids for a share of the $2 billion.

Dan Woynillowicz, a senior policy analyst for the Pembina Institute, an environmental think-tank, said none of the three chosen projects focus on reducing emissions during the oilsands extraction process.

Two of the projects are likely to reduce emissions from upgrading oilsands bitumen near Edmonton, he acknowledged. But more energy-intensive methods of extracting bitumen from the oilsands are increasingly being used around Fort McMurray.

“Are we actually on track to address those emissions in a significant way?” Woynillowicz said.

Although the Pembina Institute considers the carbon capture an important part of a “suite” of strategies for reducing greenhouse gas emissions, Woynillowicz said he is concerned the Alberta government is overly focused on one solution.