Ottawa spends $155.9M to help oil industry go green
Ottawa will spend $155.9 million to make Alberta's oil and energy industry more environmentally friendly, Prime Minister Stephen Harper announced Thursday.Most of the money will be spent studying ways to capture carbon dioxide emitted from the province's oilsands and store it underground, instead of releasing the polluting gas into the atmosphere.
A federal-provincial task force will be set up to study the technology, Harper said.
"Most exciting of all, if we can perfect this technology, we can use it not only to curb Canada's contribution to greenhouse gas production, but we could also export it around the world," Harper said, while making his announcement in Edmonton.
The money will also support a project in Edmonton designed to convert municipal waste into electricity. Efforts to design a coal-fired electricity plant that releases almost no emissions will also be funded.
Harper, flanked by Alberta Premier Ed Stelmach, reassured the oil industry that new technology will not harm business.
"All Canadians are looking for a balance between economic growth and environmental protection," Harper said. "Finding that balance is the fundamental challenge of our time."
Sierra Club Criticizes Funding
Some environmentalists were critical of Thursday's announcement. The Sierra Club said the government should be working to cut carbon dioxide emissions altogether, rather than encouraging a continued dependence on oil.
"Canadian and Albertan taxpayers should not be footing the bill for this industry to clean up its act," Lindsay Telfer, a Sierra Club director, said in a news release.
"If the government is serious about reducing emissions, it should eliminate all subsidies and develop a solid plan for putting absolute reduction targets on industry."
Harper's announcement came on the day the Alberta government introduced legislation requiring about 100 high-polluting companies to reduce their emissions output starting July 1.
Greenhouse gas emissions in Alberta have increased by 40 per cent since 1990, largely because of the oil industry.
In addition the Sierra Club's objections I have a few of my own.
Darrell and I were spit balling (no comments from the peanut gallery, please) the other night about some of the things that both the provincial and federal governments can do to make Canada greener and set an example for the world. I remember a time when Canada was a trendsetter in the world. Today it seems, Canada is years, if not decades behind the leading countries.
- Why can't Canada mandate that any and all government buildings if not, the entire country refrain from using incandescent light bulbs?
- Why don't all government buildings & schools have comprehensive recycling programmes that are above and beyond the rest of the country? Shouldn't our elected and appointed officials be setting an example for the rest of the country?
- Why are government issued cars not fuel efficient or hybrids?
- Why are parking enforcement officers driving full size cars? All they really need is a smart car with a bike rack.
- Here in Toronto, Why do I only see garbage and newspaper receptacles at the TTC (Toronto Transit Commission)? Where's the recycling?
- Why don't gas stations have recycling facilities especially with all the products sold in plastic containers such as windshield wiper fluid, anti-freeze and oil to name a few. Also, on a road trip, most people empty their trash and recycling at gas stations. All those water bottles, pop cans and fast food wrappers end up in the trash, not the recycling.
Thanks to Darrell for the brainstorming.
2 comments:
Two comments:
1. Most office buildings use fluorescent tube lighting, which is less consuming than incandescent, I believe.
2. Most TTC stations I've been in have recycling bins in open containers. But, these are always poorly sorted with free newspapers stuffed in every receptacle. I've never understood why the glass, cans, and newspaper bins are all of equal size when a scrunched up paper takes up the space of a case of pop in these things.
There's also a move by transit systems to provide fewer areas where terrorists can deposit "suspicious materials", hence we may see fewer garbage cans too. I know, it makes absolutely no sense since now the terrorists can simply leave their bombs under the piles of Metros that will accumulate on the platforms and in the trains.
1. I believe you are correct. But most? I don't know it just feels like more could be done.
2. If there are indeed comprehensive recycling facilities in the TTC, then I stand corrected. I will have to keep a keener eye out the next time I'm at the station.
I don't know, this whole idea of cutting down recycling & trash receptacles as a part of a safety precaution seems laughable. We've reached the point where explosives can be concealed as Gatorade. If someone really wants to blow up the Bay subway station, with the current security measures, it just doesn't seem as though there is much we can do about it. It's just another example where perceived security is confused for actual security.
Post a Comment