5 ms·

Now it's mostly natural gas, instead! With a good chunk of wind, but the current government seems to dislike "renewables"

by kalupa 2y ago

dagmx 2y ago
Yep. The Alberta government has their head stuck in the sand (pun intended) around renewables as they existentially threaten their current economy. They have repeatedly shown that they’d rather double down than try and diversify. https://www.reuters.com/world/americas/canadas-alberta-set-ban-renewables-projects-prime-land-report-2024-02-28/ https://www.reuters.com/world/americas/canadas-alberta-set-b...
- SketchySeaBeast 2y ago
  To boost your point - that is literally what the Alberta government has been doing. They instituted a seven-month renewable's pause to "evaluate" them (evaluating renewables in 2023????), which introduced a lot of investor uncertainty[1]. When the pause was over they introduced rules around preventing wind turbines and solar from being developed in areas to prevent obstruction in "viewscapes"[2]. [1] https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgary/alberta-renewables-pause-moratorium-aeso-foip-1.7196943 https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgary/alberta-renewables-pa... [2] https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgary/alberta-viewscapes-buffer-zones-renewables-map-1.7145368 https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgary/alberta-viewscapes-bu...
xandrius 2y ago
Which is worse in terms of greenhouse emissions but it's something I guess. Instead of "natural gas", we should just switch to saying methane, which is what that generally is.
- gpm 2y ago
  No? Methane produces less than half the CO2 per kwh than coal. Which is still bad, but not worse or as bad. https://www.eia.gov/tools/faqs/faq.php?id=74&t=11 https://www.eia.gov/tools/faqs/faq.php?id=74&t=11
  - deleted 2y ago
    [deleted]
  - silverquiet 2y ago
    Methane burned for electricity is better than coal no doubt. But methane that escapes into the atmosphere is way worse than CO2 in the nearish term. And not every extraction company is super thrilled about proper containment.
    - mminer237 2y ago
      A very small percent is not contained though, and even most vented is flared.
      - silverquiet 2y ago
        I am under the impression that methane levels in the atmosphere have spiked significantly in the last decade or two, and the origin is not really understood. Extraction could be one source, but if it's from another source, that could be more bad news as it would mean that some tipping point has possibly been triggered. I'm far from an expert on this though.
      - _aavaa_ 2y ago
        Most of the consciously vented is flared. However, the infrastructure leaks like mad and there have been no incentives incentive for the companies to fix it, it's a cheap invisible gas after all with almost all reporting being self reporting.
    - gpm 2y ago
      Released methane is 27-30 times worse than released CO2 per unit mass measured over the next 100 years of warming [1]. Burning methane releases 1 CO2 molecule per CH4 molecule (CH4 + 2O2 -> CO2 + 2H2O), or 2.743 it's mass in CO2 [2]. To make up the difference in CO2 you'd have to be losing ~5% of the methane to the atmosphere along the way from extraction to burning. Do you have reason to believe anywhere near that much is lost? "Worse than coal" has set a very low bar for how not-bad methane needs to be. [1] https://www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/understanding-global-warming-potentials https://www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/understanding-global-warmin... [2] https://www.wolframalpha.com/input?i=molecular+weight+of+CO2+%2F+molecular+weight+of+methane https://www.wolframalpha.com/input?i=molecular+weight+of+CO2...
SketchySeaBeast 2y ago
Well, it's hard to get someone to hate their source of income.
- nightowl_games 2y ago
  As far as I understand it, the whole country is dependent on the tar sands, but the east still hates it.
  - SketchySeaBeast 2y ago
    Is really not. I don't think there are any numbers justifying narrative, and numbers presented in this thread prove it. The dependency is really just Albertan advertising.
  - speed_spread 2y ago
    Canada's economy is built on primary resource extraction and production in general but would have done fine without the tar sands. Most of the oil money leaves the country; the money that stays mainly fuels self-serving private agendas, pressuring other parts of the economy and stuffing politics. This could have been averted had a solution like Norway's state oil fund been adopted but would have been too socialist a measure for the empire to tolerate.
    - nightowl_games 2y ago
      Is this not the analogous fund? https://edmonton.ctvnews.ca/heritage-fund-reaches-all-time-high-value-of-22-1b-1.6857531 https://edmonton.ctvnews.ca/heritage-fund-reaches-all-time-h...
- bryanlarsen 2y ago
  Their current source of income. Alberta has more sun and more wind than any place else in Canada so renewables could be quite profitable to them in the future, but what government cares about anything further out than the next election? Alberta also used to be the only place in Canada where you could just build a solar power plant and hook it up to the grid with minimal red tape so had a massive advantage in terms of number of solar jobs. Also Alberta is next door to BC which has vast sources of hydro-electric power so it could easily trade solar & wind power to BC when the sun is shining and/or the wind is blowing in exchange for hydro power when it isn't.
snarf21 2y ago
“It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends on his not understanding it.” - Upton Sinclair

Now it's mostly natural gas, instead! With a good chunk of wind, but the current government seems to dislike "renewables"

by kalupa 2y ago

Now it's mostly natural gas, instead! With a good chunk of wind, but the current government seems to dislike "renewables"

dagmx 2y ago

Yep. The Alberta government has their head stuck in the sand (pun intended) around renewables as they existentially threaten their current economy. They have repeatedly shown that they’d rather double down than try and diversify. https://www.reuters.com/world/americas/canadas-alberta-set-ban-renewables-projects-prime-land-report-2024-02-28/ https://www.reuters.com/world/americas/canadas-alberta-set-b...

SketchySeaBeast 2y ago
To boost your point - that is literally what the Alberta government has been doing. They instituted a seven-month renewable's pause to "evaluate" them (evaluating renewables in 2023????), which introduced a lot of investor uncertainty[1]. When the pause was over they introduced rules around preventing wind turbines and solar from being developed in areas to prevent obstruction in "viewscapes"[2]. [1] https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgary/alberta-renewables-pause-moratorium-aeso-foip-1.7196943 https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgary/alberta-renewables-pa... [2] https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgary/alberta-viewscapes-buffer-zones-renewables-map-1.7145368 https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgary/alberta-viewscapes-bu...

xandrius 2y ago

Which is worse in terms of greenhouse emissions but it's something I guess. Instead of "natural gas", we should just switch to saying methane, which is what that generally is.

gpm 2y ago
No? Methane produces less than half the CO2 per kwh than coal. Which is still bad, but not worse or as bad. https://www.eia.gov/tools/faqs/faq.php?id=74&t=11 https://www.eia.gov/tools/faqs/faq.php?id=74&t=11
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
- silverquiet 2y ago
  Methane burned for electricity is better than coal no doubt. But methane that escapes into the atmosphere is way worse than CO2 in the nearish term. And not every extraction company is super thrilled about proper containment.
  - mminer237 2y ago
    A very small percent is not contained though, and even most vented is flared.
    - silverquiet 2y ago
      I am under the impression that methane levels in the atmosphere have spiked significantly in the last decade or two, and the origin is not really understood. Extraction could be one source, but if it's from another source, that could be more bad news as it would mean that some tipping point has possibly been triggered. I'm far from an expert on this though.
    - _aavaa_ 2y ago
      Most of the consciously vented is flared. However, the infrastructure leaks like mad and there have been no incentives incentive for the companies to fix it, it's a cheap invisible gas after all with almost all reporting being self reporting.
  - gpm 2y ago
    Released methane is 27-30 times worse than released CO2 per unit mass measured over the next 100 years of warming [1]. Burning methane releases 1 CO2 molecule per CH4 molecule (CH4 + 2O2 -> CO2 + 2H2O), or 2.743 it's mass in CO2 [2]. To make up the difference in CO2 you'd have to be losing ~5% of the methane to the atmosphere along the way from extraction to burning. Do you have reason to believe anywhere near that much is lost? "Worse than coal" has set a very low bar for how not-bad methane needs to be. [1] https://www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/understanding-global-warming-potentials https://www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/understanding-global-warmin... [2] https://www.wolframalpha.com/input?i=molecular+weight+of+CO2+%2F+molecular+weight+of+methane https://www.wolframalpha.com/input?i=molecular+weight+of+CO2...

SketchySeaBeast 2y ago

Well, it's hard to get someone to hate their source of income.

nightowl_games 2y ago
As far as I understand it, the whole country is dependent on the tar sands, but the east still hates it.
- SketchySeaBeast 2y ago
  Is really not. I don't think there are any numbers justifying narrative, and numbers presented in this thread prove it. The dependency is really just Albertan advertising.
- speed_spread 2y ago
  Canada's economy is built on primary resource extraction and production in general but would have done fine without the tar sands. Most of the oil money leaves the country; the money that stays mainly fuels self-serving private agendas, pressuring other parts of the economy and stuffing politics. This could have been averted had a solution like Norway's state oil fund been adopted but would have been too socialist a measure for the empire to tolerate.
  - nightowl_games 2y ago
    Is this not the analogous fund? https://edmonton.ctvnews.ca/heritage-fund-reaches-all-time-high-value-of-22-1b-1.6857531 https://edmonton.ctvnews.ca/heritage-fund-reaches-all-time-h...
bryanlarsen 2y ago
Their current source of income. Alberta has more sun and more wind than any place else in Canada so renewables could be quite profitable to them in the future, but what government cares about anything further out than the next election? Alberta also used to be the only place in Canada where you could just build a solar power plant and hook it up to the grid with minimal red tape so had a massive advantage in terms of number of solar jobs. Also Alberta is next door to BC which has vast sources of hydro-electric power so it could easily trade solar & wind power to BC when the sun is shining and/or the wind is blowing in exchange for hydro power when it isn't.

snarf21 2y ago

“It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends on his not understanding it.” - Upton Sinclair