Archive for the ‘Greenhouse gas emissions’ Category
Posted on February 27th, 2010 by by Steve Aplin
Readers should note that I have reversed my position on whether nuclear energy projects should be eligible under the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM). The CDM was established by the United Nations under the Kyoto Treaty, and allows greenhouse gas (GHG) emission reduction projects in developing countries to earn emission reduction credits that industrialized countries can buy […]
No Comments Permalink
Posted on February 10th, 2010 by by Steve Aplin
At first glance, the Samsung wind deal appears a viable and “green” way to replace Ontario’s coal-fired power plants. Wind is free, and comes with no pollution. Why would anyone object to that? They would object because wind actually comes with lots of pollution. Wind provides intermittent power; coal provides on-demand power. For wind […]
3 Comments Permalink
Posted on January 14th, 2010 by by Steve Aplin
Over the last couple days I have participated in a very interesting discussion on the relevance of proliferation concerns to the renaissance in civilian nuclear energy. This closely preceded the announcement, a few minutes ago, by the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists that the hands of its famous “Doomsday Clock” have been reset from 5 to 6 […]
No Comments Permalink
Posted on January 7th, 2010 by by Steve Aplin
There is no way a North American cap and trade system will emerge in the near future. That prospect died when the U.S. president showed at the Copenhagen climate conference that he can’t, and won’t, pursue the environmental policies the green lobby demands. Probably just as well. The continental price of natural gas, the most […]
No Comments Permalink
Posted on December 19th, 2009 by by Steve Aplin
If renewable energy really were capable of reducing greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions on a large scale and creating the “millions of green jobs” their proponents claim, there would be no need, from the U.S. point of view, for a comprehensive international climate agreement. The U.S. could simply proceed with creating the millions of green jobs […]
1 Comment Permalink
Posted on December 14th, 2009 by by Steve Aplin
The Obama administration last week quietly acquired a potential climate policy super-tool. The EPA announced its “endangerment finding” that a certain mix of greenhouse gases (GHGs) from new motor vehicles “threatens public health and welfare.” This gives the executive branch the ability to regulate GHGs directly, without waiting for congress to develop legislation. Suddenly, the […]
No Comments Permalink
Posted on November 26th, 2009 by by Steve Aplin
Al Gore has been on an oilsands kick lately, telling anyone who’ll listen that gasoline made from Alberta oilsands bitumen makes a Toyota Prius as emission-intensive as a Hummer. He may be right: oilsands operations pump over 50 million tons of CO2 into the air every year. Most of this CO2 comes from burning and reforming natural […]
No Comments Permalink
Posted on November 24th, 2009 by by Steve Aplin
The Canadian hydrogen-highway industry is at a crossroads. Compared with the rest in the world Canada is a fading champion in the hydrogen arena. Though the famous Ballard Power started here in Canada, the public funding that kept the venture alive and in the headlines has all but dried up. But there’s still hope for a […]
1 Comment Permalink
Posted on September 16th, 2009 by by Steve Aplin
Canada takes a lot of flak for not getting its environmental act together, but you should take this criticism with a grain of salt. It’s either political, which is fair and understandable: Canada is a democracy and opposition parties are supposed to attack the government. Or it’s ideological, which is where it just conflicts with […]
No Comments Permalink
Posted on September 1st, 2009 by by Steve Aplin
Can the proposed U.S. climate change legislation actually reduce carbon emissions? Not according to utility industry advocates worried about certain provisions in the American Clean Energy and Security Act (a.k.a. Waxman-Markey), which narrowly passed the House of Representatives in June. The concern is that carbon offsets—financial instruments each representing one tonne of carbon dioxide (CO2) […]
1 Comment Permalink