The blog post I read was by Ken Chapman on CCS in Alberta. The feeling I got from Mr. Parker’s comment is that he doesn’t support CCS development, nor biofuel development, and I would like to know if this is also the position that the Green Party takes.

I’d like to mention that I am sympathetic to the views of the Green Party, and the need to have fundamental change in the way society and governance works in order to achieve sustainability, and I can see how from a Canadian perspective, where there are lots of opportunities to live more sustainably using energy efficiency, public transit, etc. as a means to reduce GHG emissions.

However, after living in China for 4.5 years, and working in the environment and energy policy sphere here, I see that Canada (and other developed countries) is a special case in this regard. In fact, countries like China and India and other developing countries already use huge amounts of public transit in their cities, and working on energy efficiency like crazy (for the vast majority of people here, life is “low carbon”). However, they still feel that their citizens have the right to live a high-quality, modern lifestyle as we all do in Canada. And who are we to disagree?

The fact of the matter is that countries like China are increasing their dependence on fossil fuels at rates completely unimaginable in Canada. Indeed, as recently highlighted by McKinsey’s “China’s Green Revolution” report, even with a continuation of China’s current energy efficiency improvement efforts and a 4.8% annual growth rate of carbon efficiency, China’s green house gas emissions in 2030 will be more than double 2005 levels (14.5 Gt per year of CO2e in 2030 vs. 6.8 Gt per year in 2005)  (Thanks to China Environmental Law Blog for pointing that out) .

In order to accomplish economic growth, China needs to increase its energy security, and as we all know, that means development of its vast coal resources and available biofuel resources. China doesn’t trust international oil markets, and other renewable energies simply cannot keep up with its growth. Since coal is basically unavoidable in this situation, development of IGCC and CCS power generation/carbon management technologies is also unavoidable and necessary. CCS systems attached to Coal-to-Liquid (CTL) are also completely necessary as China aggressively develops this fuel chain in order to decrease its dependence on foreign oil.

The second problem is that China sees climate change as a problem created by developed countries, including Canada, and a problem that needs to be solved, in large measure, by developed countries. It is therefore insisting that technology developed in developed countries be transferred to China for free or at preferential rates.

So, we have a problem. China insists that it needs technology. Developed countries are going to send it. Does Canada want to benefit from the development of that technology or not?

The only way Canada will benefit is to encourage scientists, engineers, and industry to engage in these climate-change marginal, but completely necessary technologies, whether it is through government spending, or whatever other support government can give. The fact is that, if developed properly, these technologies are better than simply burning coal and releasing emissions into the air.

I encourage the Green Party, and all of Canada’s political parties, to take a global view to its domestic policies. Climate change is a global problem, and it cannot be solved domestically in Canada without cooperating abroad. We don’t have the population or the strength to do so. The only way we can help solve this problem is to make ourselves known, and to contribute to the development of technologies that developing countries need, whether we in Canada need them or not.

In my last post, Stephen Harper was trying to persuade European countries to put more pressure on China and India. Well, seems that Japan has figured out a better way to pique China’s interests that may have Stephen Harper realizing he’s just spewed a lot (more!) of hot air.

The Blog, China Environmental Law, noted last week that China and Japan were cozying up based on a relationship where Japan could start transferring technology and capital to China for the purposes of dealing with CO2 emissions. He quoted Xie Zhenhua, vice chairman of China’s National Development and Reform Commission, who said,

““Technology and finance should be taken up in discussions”

Similar positions have been taken by China in documents on climate change, for example, in iCET’s soon-to-be published Background and Strategy on Low-Carbon Fuel Standards for China report, where China’s Developemnt and Reform Commission notes that China has in fact been promised technology and capital by western countries in order to deal with climate change, and this will be central in future negotiations on climate change.

The Prime Minister, on the other hand, is content to try to use his (in comparison to China) small-time weight to bully China into cutting emissions.  Frankly, it’s just not going to work.  China has hundreds of millions of people still earning less than $2 a day, who need jobs to survive.  Paying big bucks for proprietary technology from the west, or for R&D in new products in China isn’t high on the priority list.

If Prime Minister Harper and his cabinet are truly interested in China cutting its emissions, they had better start, like Japan, at stepping up to the plate and making sure technology and capital for decreasting GHG emissions makes its way to China.  It is politically unpalatable, but in terms of practical solutions, it might just be what we need.

Or how about like I posted before, getting Chinese engineers and labourers in Canada constructing Canada’s GHG emissions reduction infrastructure – i.e. CCS pipelines in Alberta?  Canada gets the cheap labour, China gets free access to technology and upgrades it’s labour skills.

I dare ya, PM Harper!

1. Doesn’t understand the bredth of policy development going on in China right now – is this reflecting on the work of the Canadian embassy in China?  Why can’t he be better informed…unless he’s doing this solely for political reasons.

2.  China and Canada actually have a lot in common, especially dirty energy (especially in Alberta).  China does use a higher proportion of coal to power its electricity economy but…

Anyway, both are interested in Carbon Capture and Storage technology.  Alberta has a long-term plan to develop this - at the same time, Alberta has a huge labour shortage.  China also has long-term interests in developing CCS.  Working together would certainly benefit both parties in so many different ways.  So, why doesn’t Canada invite Chinese companies to come to Alberta, with Chinese labourers, to build massive tracts of the Albertan CCS system?

There are certain benefits and drawbacks to this:

1. Political image in Canada: Chinese are taking our jobs – there is already a huge job shortage.  Chinese workers would be coming to fill surplus demand (how to allow people to see this).

2. Chinese stealing technology:  China has been “promised” capital and technology transfer in the Kyoto process to help them leapfrog old, dirty technologies.  What better way to fulfill that promise, and in the meantime, allow China experience in building technology that could eventually directly reduce their GHG emissions?

3.  Speed of implementation in Alberta:  If Alberta were to use Chinese labour to do this work, it would be done faster and cheaper.  There’s no question about that.  And the quality would be as good.  I know there are lots of political issues surrounding this.  But if our interest is actually in reducing GHG emissions, why would we so vehmently discount this possibility?

Well, it’s just an idea for now.  And what’s wrong with an idea?