Green Olympic Lights

So, with the Olympics around the corner, I was thinking that until then and now I would try to focus on having “green Olympics” themed news– basically news about green steps the Olympics are taking (after pledging of course to be the greenest Olympics yet).

Since things are still ramping up, I thought I’d post about the Olympic Rings at Coal Harbour. Have you seen these things? Not only are they bright but they’re incredibly energy efficient (just like the ones at YVR!); check out this article from the Vancouver Sun:

VANCOUVER – A set of 14-metre tall Olympic Rings floating in Coal Harbour that will shine throughout the Games were lit today by Premier Gordon Campbell to mark the start of the 100-day countdown to the opening ceremonies of the 2010 Olympic Winter Games.

“The Olympic Rings are one of the iconic symbols of these Games and this inner harbour showpiece will be a visual focal point for billions of people watching 2010 Olympic and Paralympic Games worldwide and for visitors and residents to our province during the Games,” Campbell said in a press release.

“When Canadian athletes win medals, these rings will put on a programmable light show that will spread the excitement of their success across the city, throughout British Columbia and across Canada. These rings were also designed and built by B.C. firms and showcase the kind of green-technology innovation taking place in our province.”

The rings have thousands of individual LED lights that can be programmed for complex light show displays and will be visible from around the harbour, the premier’s office said. They measure 13.7 metres (45 feet) high by 29.3 metres (96 feet) wide. As part of B.C.’s commitment to a green games the lights in the display use energy efficient bulbs that consume approximately eight per cent of the electricity of equivalent incandescent bulbs.

“As we kick off the 100-day countdown to the 2010 Games and as we celebrate the first days of the Olympic Torch Relay, the excitement is building in every corner of the province,” Campbell said.

“This is a once-in-a-lifetime experience for our communities, our province and our nation, and we will all share in the pride when those Olympic Rings light up in celebration of Canada’s first medal of the 2010 Games.”

There are now two sets of LED Olympic rings in the lower mainland. The other is near Vancouver International Airport.

The inner harbour rings are moored at Brockton Point and will be moved for lightshow events.

Now, these are innovative for a number of reasons. Number one is obviously the efficiency; these things are incredibly bright and very energy efficient.

What I feel is even more innovative however is the simplicity. These things can be programmed for very complex light shows. They’re bright, they’re in a high visibility location, and they’ll reflect off the water beautifully. In short, they’re a brilliant marketing move. They’ll catch your attention at minimal energy and financial cost to VANOC. Sure, it’s not huge, but it’s definitely innovative.

Win with Sightline

Hi folks,

It’s been a long while. There’s been lots going on but I’ve been incredibly busy so I’m sorry for the lack of posts. Consider this the beginning of me resuming regular posting!

I’d like to draw everyone’s attention to my favourite e-mail subscription (again), and that is Sightline Daily.

These folks wake up at the crack of 5, read upwards of 40 newspapers from around the Northwest, and send out the best top ten articles on sustainability and e-mail them out.

I strongly encourage you to sign up. Anyone who signs up between now and October 28 will be entered to win a two night stay to Seattle including hotel costs, meals out, and activities.

Sign up here:
http://www.sightline.org/Sweepstakes/sign-up-sightline-sweepstakes

BC Budget Update – September 2009

So, the BC Government released its Budget Update today and things are not looking as great as earlier anticipated. Revenues are drastically down and the deficit is projected to be at $2.8 billion instead of the earlier estimate of just under $500 million. You can read more here.

Needless to say, cuts have to be made and the Ministry of the Environment is having its budget reduced by about $25 million.

All in all, that’s not too bad.

You have to realise of course that unlike most other ministries, the Ministry of the Environment has a very different mandate – that mandate being to ‘lead and inspire British Columbians to achieve environmental sustainability”

That being said, its goals can be accomplished through “grassroots” legislation (such as initiatives that require the public to do something), and through policy changes of other ministries (such as the Ministry of Energy changing a policy, for example). A slight reduction in funding does not affect the Ministry of the Environment quite as badly as it would affect the Ministry of Health, for example.

You can read more about the budget here, at the government’s website.

So to summarize – the funding cut isn’t great, but it isn’t necessarily bad, either.

Throne Speech

Hi everyone,

Sorry for the delay in posting but I’ve been rather busy and the news has been rather slow aside from the HST brouhaha. Expect things to pick up over the next couple weeks.

I would like to quickly draw your attention to the government’s recent Throne Speech. While it promised most of what we saw going into the election (that is, strict fiscal management and a commitment to bringing the province out of a recession), confirmed the province’s commitment to the HST, and hinted at a much larger deficit, it also promised one thing that I was hoping it would:

The BC Utilities Commission will be forced to phase out Burrard Thermal in line with BC’s Climate Action Plan.

This is the best news we’ve had in awhile. Recently BC Hydro proposed it’s green energy plan and the BCUC shot it down, saying that we need to fire up Burrard Thermal back to its peak levels. That is to say the BC Utilities Commission wants Burrard Thermal to go back to the days of producing 7% of BC’s greenhouse gas emissions. Brilliant, I know. BC Hydro would have been forced to act on this.

However, since the government is forcing the BCUC to act on this, we can all rest easy knowing that our commitment to IPP and green energy production is going to remain true and on course and that Burrard Thermal will one day cease to operate (which is nothing but bad news for COPE 378, the union for employees of Burrard Thermal and one of the most outspoken critics of BC Hydro’s plan — read more here).

Minister Lekstrom on BC Utilities Commission decision

Not sure if you saw the Twitter post the other day but the BC Utilities Commission sided with fossil fuels and decided against BC Hydro’s bid to move to clean energy.

You see, 3/4 of our energy in BC is produced by fossil fuels (not electricity, but energy), so moving off of it ASAP is probably the most important thing we can do. But the BCUC has rejected BC Hydro’s bid because it will end up costing consumers more.

Not only this, but the BCUC wants to increase our reliance on the Burrard Thermal plant. This plant burns natural gas to spin turbines to create electricity. This monstrosity, in its full power heyday, produced 7% of BC’s GHG. Think about that.

Now, BC Hydro wants to wean off of it and the province actually wants to stop using it altogether. The BCUC, a public interest watchdog, wants to increase our reliance on it.

Yikes.

However, Minister of Energy, Mines, and Petroleum Resources Blair Lekstrom says that the province has “no plans on wavering from the position we’ve taken on our climate action plan and greenhouse gas reductions”.

And why would we? We have one of the best plans in the country and they want us to move in the opposite direction? Decreasing interest in green electricty – when the US is increasing their interest – is just downright stupid. We should just start buying IPP’s plane tickets to the States at this rate.

The BCUC, of course, is concerned about rising rates (which may go up with more expensive but green electricity). But we do have to make a decision here and these are the questions:

What’s more important, jobs or the environment?
What’s more important, the economy or the environment?
What’s more important, money or the environment?

The environment wins every single time. Yes, rates will go up. And I can see why COPE 378 union rep Lori Winstanley would be concerned about weaning ourselves off of Burrard Thermal.

You see, COPE 378 is the union for employees of Burrard Thermal. If we decide to stop using this ridiculously energy source, well, they’re out of jobs.

NDP MLA and energy critic John Horgan also thinks that shutting down Burrard Thermal is a bad idea.

It’s absolutely absurd to think that increasing output at Burrard Thermal is better for the environment. Absolutely, ridiculously absurd.

Minister Lekstrom deserves credit for being determined to sticking to BC’s Green Energy plan and BC Hydro deserves praise for wanting to move in the right direction.

Winstanley, COPE 378, and John Horgan should be ashamed of themselves.

Best small hydro project in the world

So, two BC IPP Projects are in the running for the Best Small Hydro Project 2009 award from the industry-leading International Water Power and Dam Construction Magazine. The two projects are the Run of river dam in McNair Creek and the Rutherford Creek project.

Both projects, in addition to having been completed on schedule at cost, improved local infrastructure, had a limited impact on the environment, feature innovative techniques and technologies, passed rigorous provincial and federal environmental assessments, and involved extensive consultation with locals and First Nations.

You can vote for either of the projects here.

Fires in Kelowna

Good news for residents of Kelowna – they’re letting some residents return. Highway 97 is now open and they’re letting some people through. Be sure to have your ID on hand because if you don’t live in one of the safer areas… you won’t be let back home.

My thoughts and prayers go out to those affected by these fires. Temperatures are expected to remain in the mid-30’s, so the dry spell will continue. I think we should also be incredibly grateful for the heroic men and women out on the front lines, fighting the blaze.

Reccomended reading : an evacuee’s tale about the Kelowna forest fires.

—

I’m working on a few projects over the next little while so updates may be somewhat sporadic. I will be posting on Twitter more often than here, so be sure to keep an eye out.

Canada “already wired” for PHEV & Burrard trial underway

Vancouver City Council recently passed legislation requiring developers to add 240 V outlets to 10% of all new parking stalls for Plug-in Hybrid Electric Vehicles – the first jurisdiction to do so.

—

Also, as you’re probably aware, the Burrard bridge trial is underway. They’ve turned the east sidewalk into a bike lane and have turned a lane on the west side into a bike-only lane, while pedestrians will have exclusive use of the East sidewalk. This is to remain in effect for six months as of today.

How it will work is anyone’s guess – will more cyclists use it? Will drivers get out of their cars, or will they take the Granville bridge, or will they sit in gridlock? Only time will tell, but it seems the one sure bet is cyclists will be safer.

Carbon tax revenue and costs didn’t balance

So the Ministry of Finance recently released facts on the carbon tax: it pulled in $306 million, vs. a projected $338 million.

My understanding of this is that the projections were based on either current carbon consumption or consumption based on past increases. That said, these projections were not based on the assumption that the carbon tax would lower consumption by a certain percent.

The reasoning for this is pretty clear. If I’m basing projected income, I base it on expected consumption. I should expect that consumption is going to increase (in the case of a carbon tax, a growing population would be cause for such an increase). I would base this projected increase on past results; ie if income picked up 10% last year, I should expect that increase to fall around 10% this year, barring any unexpected shortfalls (such as a recession).

So, if the government spends more money on the carbon tax than they take in, what can we take that to mean? Obviously, if the carbon tax charges $10 ($15 now, but $10 from July 08-09) per tonne of emissions and the income is less than government predictions, then less carbon was consumed than the government expected.

Despite predictions from various naysayers, the carbon tax is not a money grab. Were it a money grab, it would have been the other way around – we would have paid more and given less.

As it stands, while this was a bit of a hiccup, it is definitely good news that not only did BC record a record surplus, but carbon consumption was actually lower than expected.

There is of course a bit of a glitch, and that would be that natural gas revenues increased to $70 million . But that isn’t too hard to understand.

The Ministry of Finance lists the tax on Natural Gas as being 2.85 cents per cubic metre. This number is based on the carbon pricing as being $15 per tonne of carbon dioxide (this 2009 numbers — 2008 numbers would be 1.89 cents per cubic metre, or $10 per tonne of carbon dioxide). Natural gas is cheaper to burn than most other fuels because it is better for the environment.

The end result of all of this?

Revenues for one of the cheapest fuels for heating increased despite a recession, and emissions were lower than expected. Of that extra $32 million, business received $11.52 million of the benefits, while individuals received $20.48 million of the benefits.

Tax grab? Evidence would suggest otherwise.

Plutonic Power rated one of the top 50 most socially responsible corporations; “Gas tax” unpopular

Macleans published a great article awhile ago about socially responsible corporations doing business in Canada. They rated the top 50, and among them was Plutonic Power, one of the main Independent Power Producers in British Columbia. Here’s a PDF scan of that article.

Plutonic Power Corp.
• Currently developing several sustainable, low-impact hydroelectric projects, with a focus on southwest coastal B.C.
• Has developed and adopted “10 Guiding Principles for Sustainable Relationships between Plutonic Power and First Nations.”
• Engages local community members before beginning a project and chooses locations with minimal environmental, recreational and visual impacts.

This is obviously a great endorsement from a national magazine for Plutonic Power. It’s also evidence that independent power production can be achieved in an environmentally friendly and socially responsible way. Plutonic Power is one of the new “green collar companies” that we’re beginning to see emerge and it certainly is refreshing. Congratulations to Plutonic Power!

—

By the way, everyone’s favourite detractor Bill Tieleman is still fighting his “Axe the BC Gas Tax” campaign with a recent article called BC Liberal gas tax still hated. His last few articles on the carbon tax have been focused on its unpopularity (e.g. BC Liberal gas tax goes up 50% on Canada Day! and New polling shows British Columbian [sic] hate BC Liberal carbon tax — this last one is my favourite because it’s one of the few times Tieleman uses “carbon tax” instead of the disingenuous “gas tax”). Of course Tieleman glosses over how all parties now support a carbon tax, how numerous former NDP supporters attacked the NDP for their Axe the Tax campaign, and how the tax is fair and effective.

But that’s what Tieleman does, I guess. As the leader of the Axe the BC Gas Tax campaign, I suppose he has to stick to his guns until the bitter end.

He can’t prove the gas tax is unfair because it isn’t and he can’t prove the gas tax is ineffective because it isn’t – he can claim that all he wants but he can never prove it. So he seems to want to stick to something he can prove and that is that the tax is and was unpopular. It cost the Liberals votes but regardless it was the right thing to do.

So let’s sum up Tieleman’s argument: the BC NDP did what was politically smart, even if it was environmentally and socially reprehensible.

Sounds about right.