Vol.11 Number 5		Devember 2001/January 2002
Index & Home Page		Search this site
Environmental News from Georgia Strait in British Columbia, Canada and from the World

---

Go to: Watershed Sentinel home page    Go to: Reach For Unbleached! home page

Wait for this document to finish loading, before using the following links

Vol.11 Number 5 - Devember 2001/January 2002

Sustainability, says the Union of Concerned Scientists, means leaving something for our children: "The words a mouthful, but the concepts a no-brainer. Just like us, future generations will need food, water, energy, air and land, not to mention some wildness somewhere. This means we cant behave like guests at the mad hatters tea party, polishing off one plate and moving on to the next. " [No-brainer: in modern jargon, a concept that takes limited brain power to understand - ed.]

The problems are immense, from groundwater pollution to climate change, soil and habitat destruction, and the re-design problems are acute, but the scientists say there are ways to repair the earth. "For instance, switching from fossil fuels to renewable energy will slow climate change. Reserving antibiotics for therapeutic, rather than economic, uses will protect our storehouse of medicines. Sustainable methods of agriculture, like crop rotation, will help to keep the environment clean ... These solutions aren't sacrifices. They're what it takes to keep the planet going. We should take these steps, for the same reasons we preserve our health or maintain our homes. Anything less would be irresponsible, if not to ourselves, then to generations to come."

But what are the changes we need to make, and how? The change in how we live has to start where we live. Norberto Rodriguez dela Vega wrestles with the building blocks and methods of moving to sustainability through community planning, a process within the reach of all citizens.

I Dream of Pueblo Verde, and a Road Map to Get There from Here
Three Third World Communities Lead the Way to Sustainability

Power, how we get and how we use it, is a major part of the sustainability puzzle, as the events of the last two months have proven once again, and Don Malcolm discusses in our editoriL, "Oil and War." There's a lot more to be said on that sad matter, but we move instead to Vancouver Islands search for energy, from green power such as wave generation, to coal bed methane drilling with its potential groundwater problems. The Georgia Strait Crossing natural gas pipeline takes another drubbing as Tom Hackney addresses BC's energy policy review. We provide a review of the impact of natural gas on marine life, and look at the potential of making electricity from manure. Talk about crisis and opportunity!

Quotes to Savour
Coal Bed Methane
New Power Emerges from the Waves
Life in the Sea Doesn't Like Gas
Biogas Opportunities
Learning from Plants
Extension on Sour Gas Pollution
Air Index is Off the Wall
Caving in on Zero Emissions
St. Lawrence Oil and Gas Moratorium
Energy Confusion in BC's New Era

Its probably hard to see a bright future right now, for the thousands of unemployed British Columbians this holiday season, from the public service to the forest industry. Once again its a dark time in forest communities, as mill after mill closes due to the softwood lumber dispute with the US over subsidies. But as the government follows the corporate chorus, chanting "It is not subsidized, It is Not Subsidized, It is NOT Subsidized, It is NOT....," forest analyst Ralph Keller clings to a clear vision of a solution to the mess in the woods: Reform the forest tenure and redistribute the timber in woodlots around forest communities, allowing a diverse, and resilient, economic base to flourish. Meanwhile, another longtime student of the industry explains where $2.5 billion in "stumpage" payments for the public forest was spent, and explodes the myth that "enhanced silviculture" actually works to grow better trees faster.

Yes, A Magic Bullet for Forest Woes
Central Coast Truce Disturbed by New Process
'Forest Renewal' BC Scrapped
Innovative Forestry Agreements, An Affront to Common Sense

Also Inside

Recycling: Include Milk!
Water Runs Through Friends of Cortes 2001 AGM
Better Left Said by The EcoCurmudgeon

The United States imports 700,000 barrels of oil each day from Iraq while at the same time enforcing a trade embargo on that country. Innocent children go to bed hungry because that oil rich country has been shut out of reciprocity in the market place, a leftover legacy from President George Bush's Gulf War a decade ago.

An editorial in the Seattle Post-Intelligencer, Nov.18, 2001, opens with: "There is a direct, inescapable connection between our war on terrorism and our nation's dependence on the internal combustion engine."

In both the US and Canada, our governments should have taken steps long ago to lessen our dependence on oil. Both have all but backed away from the Kyoto Protocol in spite of scientific evidence that we must reduce carbon fuel emissions in order to combat global warming.

Automobile manufacturers are allowed to build ridiculously overpowered vehicles with no regard to fuel consumption. Highway speed limits creep upward. Fuel-thirsty four wheel drive toys crowd our paved highways, their drivers drunk on imagined personal power. Solar and wind power development receives almost no financial support from governments while oil based energy is heavily subsidized.

The US and, by our close relationship, Canada, are playing political games in the middle east, propping up oppressive regimes, in order to protect North America's oil supply. We make enemies that way.

There are alternatives. There are hybrid engines that run on either electricity or fossil fuel. There is a hydrogen fuel cell engine already operational. Public transportation could be made more user friendly, more frequent. Free public transportation in cities would cost far less than what it now costs to build and maintain our ever expanding road system to accommodate more and more private cars.

It seems our market system does not plan ahead but rather survives by reacting to and capitalizing on emergencies, like a cougar finding an injured fawn.

Are we not now facing an emergency?

"Seventy years is longer than the time between the Wright Brothers at Kitty Hawk and Neil Armstrong walking on the Moon. It is an inappropriate interval for cleaning up the discharge of raw sewage into coastal water." Excerpted from an e-mail by John Jordan, manager of environmental services for the Vancouver Port Authority, quoted in Vancouver Sun, October 26, 2001

"BC's forest industry, unfortunately, is about as diverse as a parking lot." by Cheri Burda, explaining that diversity is the key to survival, in nature and in the marketplace, Vancouver Sun, November 21, 2001

BC's forest industry has been in steady decline for two decades, with the US/Canada Softwood Lumber "Disagreement" being the latest blow. The economies of many rural forest dependent communities were collapsing well before the expiration of the Softwood Lumber deal. Towns like Sayward, Tahsis, and Youbou, once thriving forest sector towns, may soon be little more than points on a map.

What's ironic is that these towns are located in the middle of productive forest farms and, worse, some had profitable sawmills shut down. In the last decade alone, more than 14 saw and pulp mills have been shut down, throwing thousands out of work and devastating BC's rural economy. While many corporations are down sizing milling infrastructure, raw log exports have increased. Ironically, BC's Annual Allowable Cut has, until the most recent imposition of US countervailing duties, remained relatively high.

There are many complex reasons for the decline of the forest industry in BC: Changing global markets, loss of high quality softwoods (Old Growth), and a noteworthy change in the corporate psyche to one of utter disregard for anything (or anybody) but maximizing profits.

At the heart of BC's difficulties is a government-sanctioned forest land tenure system. Nowhere in the developed world is so much of the forest land base controlled by so few. Furthermore, these forest lands are virtually all public. This concentrated corporate control of public land is without parallel anywhere. The American claim that our forest industry is not free market based is probably true. BC corporate tenure holders horde their timber quota, selling only uncommitted surpluses to small local mills.

Timber value can be difficult to determine because the vast majority of logs cut are used internally by corporations and seldom make it to the public auction block. Stumpage, paid to the government for cutting rights is often under valued. Some forestry officials claim the only way they are able to set stumpage rates is through the value of exported raw logs. In effect, we do not have free and open log markets in BC, which leaves the survival of local, untenured manufacturing facilities at the whim of the forestry giants.

The problem with BC forest economics may not be the result of free market conditions or capitalism, but the lack thereof. When we examine the successful forest economies of other countries, like Germany or Sweden, we see that control of the forest resource is highly decentralized and controlled by many small woodlots. In the European Union there are over 1 million licensed small woodlot operators who, independently or cooperatively, direct their timber to saw mills and other specialty manufactures at fair market values.

A major revitalization of our provincial forest economy could be accomplished by a simple stroke of a pen--reform forest land tenure. To a certain extent, the government has recognized the importance of small scale forestry by creating the BC Woodlot tenure. There are presently 800 family owned and operated woodlots throughout BC and they are, by all accounts, exemplary models of forest management.

These tenures, from 200-500 Hectares in size, are coveted by their owners and the pride of the BC Forest Service but represent only a tiny fraction of BC's managed forests. They are the antithesis of the Tree Farm Licence industrial model.

Woodlot owners nearly always live in the communities most affected by their operations and are accountable for their activities. They hire local loggers and contractors and logs are sold to local manufacturers at fair market value. According to the BC Woodlot Association, not only do woodlot owners employ locals, they hire 3 loggers per thousand cubic metres cut--this compared with the Tree Farm Licence Industrial model which provides only 2/3 of a job per thousand cubic metres cut. Woodlot operators also hire more outside help, like mechanics, foresters, and accountants, than do corporate Tree Farm Licence holders. How can this be? Simple economics. Big corporations put the value of a tree into expensive helicopters, office towers, high priced executives, and shareholders. The woodlot operator puts the tree's value into his home, his employees, his contractors, and his community.

And there are other significant attributes of woodlot tenure. They completely embrace free market principles by maximizing timber value. Woodlot style tenure offers the kind of transparency demanded by the US forest sector representatives in softwood lumber negotiations.

Furthermore, woodlot operators provide a steady supply of timber for the open market, a reliable wood supply which will, over time, encourage more value added industry to locate in smaller forest communities. This system is virtually identical to European economic forestry models in terms of employment rates in the woods, and in the mills.

Finally, increasing the availability of free market wood will encourage entrepreneurs to maximize local and export market potential, and efficient utilization of wood. Along with all this comes greater community stability, greater employment levels, and increased tax revenues for provincial coffers.

I have a dream of a sustainable and diverse economy for BC. Imagine taking a place like Sayward and dropping 300 woodlots around that town. Imagine 900 full time year round employed forest workers and add another 300 professionals, foresters, accountants, mechanics, and so on. Imagine forest product manufacturing facilities locating there because of the availability of reliable free market wood.

Imagine then an equally strong tourism sector in that town based on a beautiful and unmarred environment. Imagine its waters full of wild salmon and a healthy fishery. Imagine a thriving shellfish industry and seafood processing facilities.

Imagine a place so beautiful, so diverse, so economically and culturally vibrant that all kinds of professionals want to live there along with a retirement community. This could and would be a reality but for the corporate control of our forest lands.

Most of the coal mines on Vancouver Island closed long ago. A few working remnants of that robust past linger on, such as Quinsam Coal in Strathcona Park, but Vancouver Island's coal industry had said farewell to its glory days. Now the ghost of that dangerous and grimy past, when the Royal Navy fuelled up in Nanaimo, and Ginger Goodwin lost his life in a union organizing drive, is surfacing. The implications of coal bed methane gas extraction for an island just beginning a new life in the post-resource extraction era are startling.

Coal bed methane (CBM) is the natural gas trapped under pressure with water in seams of coal. It is currently supplying 8% of US gas requirements. It can be extracted and after collection from several sites to build volume, fed almost directly into natural gas pipelines. The production of many wells is required to develop an economical operation.

Unlike natural gas, CBM is generally "sweet gas" with little or no hydrogen sulphide, benzene or other impurities, except carbon dioxide and water. It burns cleaner than natural gas. This methane is the same clean-burning greenhouse gas that can be produced by "biodigesting" manure and organic wastes.

The US Geological Survey says the US holds about 100 trillion cubic feet (Tcf) of CBM economically recoverable with current technology, enough for 5 years' supply to the US.

The BC Ministry of Energy & Mines estimates that BC holds 90 to 250 trillion cubic feet of available coal bed methane. The ministry comments rosily that if only 20% is extractable, "the marketable volume of 18-50 Tcf is equivalent to 25 to 75 years of gas supply at current production rates."

In a similar vein, estimates for CBM in the coalfields of Vancouver Island are close to 1 Tcf, which, if 20% was extracted, would "be enough energy for every gas customer on Vancouver Island for about 25 years." Other areas of BC with high CBM potential are the Peace River, the Elk River area of the East Kootenays, Hat Creek and Telkwa.

In BC, the Crown owns the rights to oil and gas, including coal bed methane, even on private property, except in the areas of old land grants such as Vancouver Island and the Fraser Valley. In those areas, the companies must negotiate with private land owners for the drilling rights but the wells still require regulatory approval.

Three companies are reportedly lined up to cash in on the Island's ghost gas reserves. Priority Ventures, which has tested sites near Courtenay, says it has arranged gas rights for 7000 acres from the landowners, and has applications pending to the Oil and Gas Commission for production wells in the Dove Creek area, near Courtenay. The company claims to be projecting a half billion dollar a year industry, with hundreds of wells from Courtenay to Nanaimo, on the east side of Vancouver Island.

How will they do it?

To get the gas out, it is necessary to force open the fractures in the coal seam, by pumping down a nitrogen-based foam or sand, and then relieve the pressure by extracting water, so that the methane, mixed with water, flows up to the wellhead. The ministry comments that "effective de-watering may take anywhere from several months to several years," after which the methane flows out until the seam is exhausted and the wellhead is sealed with cement.

The amount of water varies according to the coal seam, but it is substantial. In Wyoming, the environmental council calculates that just 82 wells are dumping almost one and a half million gallons of water a day, enough to fill a football field ten feet deep in 57 hours. The implications for surface and groundwater are startling.

The Ministry notes that the water from CBM wells is usually of good quality but is "formation" water from a deeper depth than drinking water wells. The well shafts are sealed with cement around the pipe so that the deeper water does not get into groundwater, at this stage.

Disposal of water from CBM wells in the US has been by one of three methods:

• Use for irrigation, or to dilute industrial effluents,
• Surface discharge, where it is allowed to flow into natural waterways or dumped on the ground and left to seep away into the aquifer, or
• If the water is not suitable for release, re-injection into deep wells.

In the Powder River Basin of Wyoming, or rather in the dislocated electrons of the Internet, two versions of CBM extraction impacts duel for credibility. The area is in the midst of a methane boom, with the number of CBM wells growing from 227 in 1997 to 2,469 as of March 2000. The Powder River Information Council, an industry association, claims that coalbed methane water is a "much-needed resource" in times of drought for local ranchers (www.cbmwyo.org) although the Council gives a nod to the problem of Sodium Adsorption Ratio, explaining that not all the CBM water is too high in Sodium Adsorption.

To say the Powder River Basin Resource Council, on the other hand, views the situation with alarm would be an understatement. Their website (www.powderriverbasin.org) says that, at the huge scale planned for their area (up to 120,000 wells producing 12 and a half million million cubic feet of methane - comparable to the projections for Vancouver Island), detrimental effects are evident:

"Water must be pumped from the targeted coal seam at rates up to 100 gallons a minute, for as long as the first two years of a well's operation. Discharge of this water is already causing extensive erosion and in some cases irreversible soil damage from high salt and sodium in the discharge water. Each coalbed methane well produces an average of 20 tons of salt per year."

With claims that wells have been contaminated or dried up and soils have been irreversibly damaged, the council has appealed and stopped discharges into the Powder River and Tongue River drainage, fighting for deep well injection as a disposal method.

On Vancouver Island, permits are required for the discharge of any industrial waste, including the water, for each well. However, the previous government changed the procedure so that these waste permits will be issued by the Oil and Gas Commission, which also licenses the wells, instead of the Ministry of Water, Land, and Air Protection. That ministry, with its environmental expertise, will do the technical studies on waste discharges, but the Oil and Gas Commission says suitable water disposal will be decided on a site by site basis. The permits will be appealable.

A note of caution was sounded in the late 90's from Las Animas County, Colorado, where 24 million gallons of water from over 100 wells is dumped on the land every month. Landowners don't own mineral rights, and must allow the wells, and they fear drinking water aquifer contamination. They sued under the US federal Clean Water Act and the state environment department suddenly discovered that the waste water is toxic to micro-organisms.

British Columbians will have no such recourse once the action starts. We had better get it right the first time. Watch the paper for those notices.

* Selected Sources

"Coal Bed Methane in British Columbia," BC Ministry of Energy and Mines, at http://www.gov.bc.ca/em/

"Coal-Bed Methane: Potential and Concerns," USGS Fact Sheet FS-123-00, October 2000

"Look Out Below," Westworld, November 1998

"Water co-produced with coalbed methane in the Powder River Basin, Wyoming: preliminary compositional data," USGS Open File, Report 00-372.

Along with a couple of hundred people, I attended a packed presentation on wave energy organized by BC Hydro in Victoria at the end of October.

BC Hydro is committed to produce 20 megawatts (MW) of demonstration project green energy on Vancouver Island, including 4 MW of wave energy. The world's shorelines have twice as much energy potential as the world's energy demand, but wave and tidal energy are very new.

BC Hydro is looking at two sites on the Island, Ucluelet and Winter Harbour. They will shortlist one or more of the technologies, and then work with them to develop a local application. Hydro has selected 4 international companies as front runners. They've all got pictures on their websites, which are fun to explore.

Wavegen http://www.wavegen.co.uk

This Scottish company has constructed a 500 KW shoreline system called the "Limpet" on Islay, off Scotland's west coast. A Scottish utility is buying the energy for 9 cents US/kwh. The Limpet involves an inclined concrete tube with an opening below the water level. The waves cause the water in the tube to oscillate, which compresses and decompresses the air to drive a Wells turbine. Future designs may produce electricity for 4 to 7 cents/kwh.

Energetech http://www.energetech.com.au

An Australian company is developing a shore-attached parabolic wall, where an oscillating water column drives a turbine. Each unit could produce 1-2 MW, at a depth of 5-10 metres. 3 km of coastline could generate 100 MW, with 50 to 100 units.

Ocean Power Delivery Ltd http://www.oceanpd.com

This company is developing an offshore wave energy converter called Pelamis - a long, articulated, floating "snake" whose joints gather energy through the pressure in hydraulic jacks. They have a 1/7th scale model, with a full-scale model scheduled for next year. They have a contract to install a pair of 375 kw prototype devices off Islay, Scotland, early in 2002 and to generate over 2.5 million kwh of electricity per year, enough for 150-200 homes.

AquaEnergy Group Ltd http://aquaenergygroup.com

From Washington State, Aqua-Energy bases their design on a floating buoy, attached to a long underwater hose or pump. As waves move the buoy up and down, the pump produces pressurized sea water, which runs a turbine. Tested in Sweden; no applications yet.

The question period covered issues of floating logs, fouling, marine sediment drift, cost, utility policy, and critiques of BC Hydro's 500 MW gas commitment versus the 20 MW green commitment. The installed prototypes will produce energy for around 15 cents Canadian per kilowatt hour (versus 4 - 6 cents for gas and wind), but BC Hydro stood firm behind their commitment to develop a pilot project. The presenters said that the original entry price for wind, now in full-scale economical production, was 30 cents; they estimated that wave energy prices too will fall to 4 to 6 cents as the market develops.

Who ever would have expected such a ground swell! In three months, BC's Southern Gulf Islands Recycling Coalition had submitted 19,270 signatures on its "Include Milk" petition to Joyce Murray, Minister of Water, Land and Air Protection. In June, the Coalition from Mayne, Pender, Galiano, Saturna and Saltspring Islands had decided once again to attempt to get containers for milk, and milk substitutes like soya and rice drinks, included under the Beverage Container Deposit Refund Regulation. Since the regulation came into force in October 1998, we recyclers have all been asked continually by our communities why milk was exempted. There was no acceptable explanation then, nor is there one today.

Background

In 1997, the British Columbia government announced the Beverage Container Stewardship Program Regulation, an expansion of the mandatory provincial beverage container deposit/refund program which had been established in 1970. The flagship programme included all ready-to-drink beverage containers except milk, milk substitutes and meal replacements. All designated containers were brought into the deposit system in the fall of 1998, except polycoat containers such as Tetrapac, (aseptic and gable-top), which were exempted until October 1, 1999.

The regulation had three outstanding features:

• It made brand owners fully responsible for managing and operating the system,
• It set a measurable goal of a recovery rate of 85% by October 2001, and
• It required containers to be either refilled or recycled--no landfilling or incineration. Glass, it is true, is often crushed for roadbed, but paper and plastics are successfully recycled.

The Capital Regional District attributes much of the 37% reduction since 1996 in glass, food and beverage containers in their waste stream to the expanded deposit system.

Milk containers were exempted from the regulation by decision of Cabinet following pressure from the Dairy Council of BC.

Recovery Rates

In the past three years, the three responsible stewardship organizations have achieved recovery rates of:

75% - Encorp Pacific (All non-alcoholic beverages)
85% - Liquor Distribution Branch
95% - Brewers Distributors Ltd

The failure of Encorp to reach the 85% target, despite an active education campaign, is partially explained by the addition of tetrapaks and other new single serve containers to the system over the past couple of years. Also Encorp, an agency set up by the manufacturers to manage their deposit/refund and recycling responsibilities, has made it clear that it is not a 'true-believer' in this system.

Plastic Milk Jugs and Paper Milk Cartons

Even though there is no deposit to encourage their return, the 'recovery rate' for recycling of plastic milk jugs is about 60%. This relatively high rate (for plastics) has been achieved without help from the dairy industry. It was reached because recycling groups have voluntarily collected milk jugs because there is a BC plastics recycling plant that is both anxious to receive this feed stock and willing to pay for it. Merlin Plastics in Richmond is one of the foremost plastics recycling facilities in Canada.

Taxpayers pay the cost of landfilling the other 40% of this most expensive type of 'garbage.' In 1999, approximately 1,600 tonnes of milk jugs were landfilled, based on a June 2000 Report on Rigid Plastic Containers, prepared for a government-sponsored multi-stakeholder steering committee. Rigid plastic containers (like milk jugs) cost almost twice as much to landfill as the next most expensive material at sites where recyclable materials are banned, such as Hartland Landfill (Capitol Regional District) and Burns Bog Landfill (Greater Vancouver Regional District).

The recovery rate remains about 1% for polycoat/gabletop containers, the cream and milk boxes. Norampac paper mill in Burnaby (formerly GreenCoast) has been recently re-engineered to recycle this material, together with tetrapac-style containers. Tetrapacs which contain juice are covered by the deposit law; tetrapacs which hold milk substitutes are not. Tetrapac recycling is, contrary to our expectations, extremely successful, recovering about 90% of the material in the three layers.

Beverage Container Management Board and the Dairy Council

The Beverage Container Management Board was established in 1997 to advise the Minister on the Regulation and the Stewardship Plans submitted by the three beverage agencies. In 1999, it was reconstituted to monitor the programme. Over the past year, the Dairy Council of BC, which is not a member of the Board, has volunteered to report on its plans to increase the recovery of its containers.

In October, the Dairy Council began a year-long study in the communities of Abbotsford and Mission to find ways of most effectively recovering their used beverage containers through the existing municipal infrastructures, instead of by taking full responsibility as other producers have done. This 'multi-material' approach is intended to demonstrate that a 50-50 division of responsibility and cost between industry and municipalities is to the mutual benefit of both. It is no surprise that the co-sponsors of this 'study' are Corporations Supporting Recycling and Encorp Pacific.

Multi-Material Working Group (formerly ProBC)

This industry group appeared a year ago. Corporations Supporting Recycling is the principal organization promoting the Waste Diversion Organization Bill 90 currently being fought out in Ontario. This bill would make those manufacturers which use recyclable packaging responsible for no more than 50% of the cost of handling their waste, while those manufacturers that do not use recyclable materials would be rewarded by paying nothing! The Canadian Manufacturers and Exporters Association are strongly opposed to this perverse bill. Encorp is the administrative arm of the Multi-Material Working Group in BC.

Their objective is to reduce the cost to industry for managing its own waste to a maximum of 50%, with municipalities--ie, taxpayers--picking up the rest. They claim that 'consumers and taxpayers are one and the same,' an argument we absolutely reject. There is every reason to believe that we will hear more of them in the near future.

Full Extended Producer Responsibility

The principle which recyclers in British Columbia have advocated for many years is full product stewardship by manufacturers for the management of their 'waste' in an environmentally sound manner. It is the application of this Polluter Pays Principle that has made British Columbia the acknowledged leader in the stewardship field in North America.

The "Include Milk" Campaign

The campaign to 'Include Milk' is supported by the Bottle Depot Association, various non-profit recycling groups such as the Recycling Council of BC, and the Coast Waste Management Association. Vancouver's Society Promoting Environmental Conservation (SPEC) has endorsed our efforts.

The Union of BC Municipalities as well as several regional districts, support the campaign. The Capital Regional District, the Regional District of North Okanagan and the Central Coast Regional District cite:

• Increased diversion of High Density Polyethylene jugs and polycoat containers from landfills (the former are one of the most expensive materials to landfill);
• Reduced costs associated with municipal recycling and solid waste management programs;
• Increased feed stock of plastic and paper fibres for BC recycling industries; and
• Programming consistency for all ready-to-drink beverage containers sold in BC (a level playing field).

It's time for Minister Murray to save money for taxpayers and save the environment - Include Milk!

* For further information, contact: Ann Johnston, Ph/fax: (250)539-2888, email: ajohnston@gulfislands.com

Ann Johnston is the Coordinator of the Southern Gulf Islands Recycling Coalition, a former member of the Interim Beverage Container Management Board, 1997-1998 and the BC Plastic Steering Committee, 1999-2000, and currently sits on the Beverage Container Management Board for the BC Environmental Network

During drilling and extraction of gas deposits from the sea floor, releases of gas into the marine environment are inevitable. Gas is dumped into the sea mixed in with produced water, may leak from pipelines, tankers and underwater storage tanks, or may be released during catastrophic well blowouts, explosions and smaller accidental spills. Spills and blowouts occur due to drilling equipment failure, corrosion of pipelines, human error, earthquakes, ice, storms, shipping accidents etc. Pipeline failures are most commonly due to material or welding defects, but pipelines may also be hit by anchors or trawls, or affected by earthquakes or ground erosion. The environmental consequences of releases of natural gas into the sea are especially severe when they happen near shore, in shallow waters or in areas with slow water circulation.

Among the most dangerous situations are gas tanker accidents, which may trigger explosions when rapidly evaporating gas at the sea surface stimulates formation of gas clouds, which then can combust and explode, destroying every living thing in areas of up to 400 square km.

Toxic to Fish and Shellfish

Many people think that natural gas would just bubble up to the surface and quickly evaporate off but in fact a significant portion dissolves in the water and is highly toxic to marine life. The gas can rapidly penetrate the bodies of fish, doing direct damage to gills, skin, chemoreceptors and eyes, and filling up the gas bladder, making the fish unable to control its buoyancy.

At concentrations of 0.02 - 0.05 mg/l, gas will be sensed by fish and they will move away. If however, fish are exposed to concentrations above 1 mg/l they become excited within seconds of contact, then disoriented and unable to flee. Within 15 - 20 minutes fish exposed to such concentrations show signs of acute poisoning, and they die within 1-2 days of exposure. Shellfish are also killed by exposure to gas. Zooplankton and phytoplankton can tolerate higher concentrations of gas than fish or shellfish can (i.e. they die at 2 - 5 mg/l).

Accidental gas releases on a migratory route of fish such as salmon, either in the sea or from a pipeline close to a river, can block a spawning migration. A localized release can thus have a regional impact.

In the Gulf of Mexico, high concentrations of methane were found around offshore drilling rigs during a 1975 study by Sackett and Brooks. In the North Sea and in California, bottom ecosystems are disturbed and their species compositions altered where there is gas seepage. Biomass of living things declines and shellfish disappear.

Some fish, such as flounders, are more sensitive to gas than other species. Juveniles are more sensitive than older fish. Fish also become more sensitive if repeatedly exposed to low concentrations of gas. Fish are more vulnerable when water temperatures are high or when oxygen concentrations are low (as in an eutrophic estuary in summer). Under conditions of cold temperature and high pressure, gas may react with water to form hydrates. These can be trapped and accumulate under ice in winter and be converted to methane as water temperature rises in spring, with serious environmental consequences. If the gas is "sour," or contains sulfides, it is much more highly toxic to marine life.

Air Pollution from Flaring

Flaring or burning off of natural gas at drilling sites causes air pollution. Pollutants are commonly removed from the air by precipitation and deposited in the sea around the well. Impacts of this pollution have not been well studied.

Rigs as Fish Aggregating Devices

Petroleum developers often point to the Gulf of Mexico and say that rigs there are good for the fishery because catch rates have gone up. Indeed, rigs placed on sandy bottom where there is no other shelter act like artificial reefs. They attract fish and it is easy for sport fishers to catch them. Analysis of the situation shows that although rigs do act like fish aggregating devices, there is no increase in the abundance of the stock, it merely gets redistributed and easier to catch with hook and line. In the North Sea, where fishes are bottom species, there has been a negative relationship between the number of oil and gas rigs and fish catches.

The poultry and hog manure which is currently causing water pollution problems in the Fraser Valley would become a source of alternative energy, if BC Hydro or Canadian governments followed the lead of the US. In both Oregon and California, dairy farms are now encouraged to biodigest the manure and recover the methane gas, which would otherwise be released to the atmosphere. The methane is then burned in a six stroke engine similar to a car engine to generate energy, and fed into transformers. The electricity can be used for running the farm itself, or be fed into the grid. Ten cows can produce enough manure to power one Canadian or American home. As well as a small project near Salem, Portland General Electric is developing a large project in eastern Oregon which will collect manure from three dairies with a total of 20,000 cows. It is expected to generate enough power to supply nearly 2,500 homes.

Biodigesters have been used in India as part of rural development plans to produce cooking gas from farm and human waste for many years. Denmark began generating power from the anaerobic digestion of manure and agricultural waste nearly 20 years ago. Now the state of California is offering loans to dairy farms to put in the systems, loans which can be paid off in credits as the system generates power.

In the meantime, BC Hydro will partner with the Capital Regional District and BC Buildings Corporation to use methane gas from Victoria's Hartland landfill as an alternative electricity generating source. Currently the landfill gas is collected and "flared" to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.

* BC Hydro, California Diary Power Production Program, and the Oregonian, October 2001

Solar power could provide energy for more than 1 billion people, creating over 2 million jobs by 2020, and 26% of global energy needs by 2040, according to the European Photovoltaic Industry Association and Greenpeace in Berlin. The report Solar Generation shows that solar photovoltaics can make a major contribution to both a secure global electricity supply, and to prevention of dangerous climate change.

Greenpeace is calling on world governments to provide renewable energy to the world's poorest people in the next decade.

* Greenpeace, October 2001

After a multi-stakeholder consultation, the Alberta Government has extended the deadline for old sour gas plants to clean up to 2016. The aging plants were originally "grandfathered" to exceed hydrogen sulphide emission limits in 1988, because it was expected that they would shortly be retired. New technologies have managed to extend the working life of the plants, but strangely have been unable to clean up their emissions. The new exemptions do provide incentives for the plants to clean up earlier.

* Edmonton Journal, August 2001

Ever wondered how the air can be brown or blue with smog and yet the air monitors don't show very high numbers, and the air is rated as ok? In November, doctors and Toronto health officials told the Ontario government that its air quality index was clearly inadequate. The doctors found that 92% of people who died or were admitted to hospital with respiratory illnesses related to air quality did so while the air index said the quality was good. Ontario issued smog alert warnings for Toronto 30 days last summer. The doctors reason that the air is bad enough to cause harm for much of the rest of the year, especially due to fine particulate from automobiles and power plants, which is not appropriately measured.

* Globe & Mail, November 2001

After "negotiations" with the auto companies, New York, Massachusetts and Vermont will probably postpone any requirement for electric cars for another four years to 2007. This move would cut the market in half, with only California requiring the sale of such cars for 2% of the market by 2003.

* New York Times, November 2001

In a report on the Oceans Act tabled in November to the House of Commons, the federal fisheries committee urged the federal government to impose an oil and gas exploration moratorium in the southern Gulf of St. Lawrence off the west coast of Cape Breton. The committee expressed concerns about the effect of seismic testing on many species and the impact of long-term discharge of effluent from exploration.

* Halifax Chronicle Herald, November 2001

Are these two visions compatible? As you might guess, the second vision comes from BC's new Liberal government. In August, they struck an Energy Policy Task Force. Its purpose is to create a provincial energy policy to "guide all participants in the energy sector to where we are going and how best to get there."

The terms of reference for the Task Force include phrases like, "British Columbia has the potential to take advantage of this increased [energy] demand, but only if we are structurally and competitively sound in a North American energy market that is increasingly interconnected." It also says, "... foster energy development ... consistent with exemplary environmental practices."

Given the Liberals' attitude toward free enterprise (read, corporatism), we can assume they will work eagerly toward the first goal. Given the real difficulties (experienced by societies all over the world) of protecting the environment, they will need lots of help to ensure the second goal will not become just a slogan.

Some of the biggest environmental impacts come from energy. Northern gas exploration brings wells, pipelines and roads that fragment ecosystems and devastate the traditional hunting territories of First Nations inhabitants. Coal bed methane extraction in the western US lowers an already over-subscribed water resource and brings mineral-contaminated water to the surface. Air pollution from vehicle traffic is having measurable impacts on our health and longevity. And recently, the over-arching problem of global warming and climate change, driven by CO2 released from fossil fuels, threatens the long-term stability of our planet's ecosystems-as well as the societies and economies that depend on them.

So what do the Liberals think about energy? During the election campaign, they promised to speed oil and gas development and to encourage independent power production. They also promised to return Hydro rate regulation to the BC Utilities Commission; not to sell off Hydro (though its subsidiaries might be sold); and to shut down Hydro's Burrard Thermal power plant (without saying how its power output would be made up).

Since the election, the government spoke in favour of lifting the moratorium on off-shore oil and gas development; prevented the municipality of Delta from regulating electricity "cogeneration" proposals associated with greenhouse operations; supported ordering Hydro to buy power from these cogeneration facilities; spoke in favour of "clean coal" and coal bed methane developments in BC; supported independent power production for domestic use and export through the Hydro grid (while again promising to retain Hydro).

Through their energy proxy, BC Hydro, the government has: back-tracked on shutting down Burrard Thermal (Hydro will "re-power" it with new gas turbines); supported more private gas generation projects; said Hydro needs to split its power generation from its transmission arm, to conform to emerging international (read US) "common carrier" standards; avoided discussion of Hydro's proposed Port Alberni Generation Project gas power plant and the GSX pipeline that would fuel it. (Though against this, Hydro's new CEO, Larry Bell, has said industry should cut energy waste, and he is considering $45 million of investments in energy efficiency in buildings to conserve energy. On the consumer protection side, Bell has spoken against deregulating consumer rates.)

These generally expansionist energy measures are supported by cuts in the government's ability to govern on environmental issues. The old Ministry of Environment, Lands and Parks has been cut in two. Sustainable Resource Development has been oriented toward easing commercial access to resources. The remainder is now the unpronounceable and joke-inspiring WLAP (Water, Land and Air Protection). It has no funding for its Climate Change Business Plan or for public outreach programmes on climate change.

The general direction is already clear: expansion, with a bias toward profit. It is less clear what substantial decisions have been left to the Task Force. Their schedule (less than six months from announcement to submission of the final report to the Minister of Energy and Mines) is so tight, that they could not realistically consider the relevant issues, let alone consult the public.

Once more, it falls to the public to advocate their own interests in goals like healthy air in our communities, clean water, a reduction of greenhouse gases to reduce climate change, and the long-term sustainability of our way of life. So get your two cents worth in. It's your province and your future!

Port Alberni Generation Project

While the government pushes expansionist energy policies, BC Hydro is trying to proceed with the next steps in its energy policy: Port Alberni Generation Project (PAGP), a 265 megawatt gas-fired power plant, and the Georgia Strait Crossing (GSX) gas pipeline that would fuel it.

In October, the Port Alberni town council withdrew the rezoning bylaw that would have allowed PAGP to be built on Tebo Avenue. This reflects strong expressions of public opposition, largely concerned with air pollution, since gas plants emit large amounts of toxic fine particulate matter, PM2.5, as well as other emissions. In May, five consecutive re-zoning hearings on the Tebo site were filled with speakers from the public, until council finally got the message and postponed the hearings. [See 2nd Tidal Wave Hits Port Alberni, Watershed Sentinel, August/November 2001]

Although BC Hydro has not formally withdrawn their application for PAGP, its public relations people now say it is looking for Vancouver Island sites outside the Alberni Valley. But other locations could also be opposed. Richard Hughes, Cowichan Valley Regional District director for Cobble Hill, was quoted in the Cowichan Valley Citizen saying, "Gas is really a negative thing for the Island economy. It brings price fluctuations, destabilization and the Americanization of our energy components."

To complicate things, the provincial assessment of PAGP has been upgraded to a "second stage" review, a first for gas power plants in BC. This is a significantly more rigorous level of review and reflects strong public input on the project, including data and analysis on air pollution and greenhouse gases. But this may be moot if the loss of the Tebo site kills the present application.

Public Input: 50% and Counting.

We can make a difference. In 1999, when GSX was proposed and Island Cogeneration Project was being completed, BC Hydro expected speedy approval and offered no measures to address greenhouse gas emissions. In 2000, extensive public input persuaded the federal government to order the more rigorous Panel Review assessment for GSX, rather than a Comprehensive Study. By 2001, Hydro was undertaking to "offset" half of the greenhouse gas emissions from ICP and PAGP. This is a significant concession to public concerns (though offsets remain highly questionable).

1994 - The BC Hydro-sponsored Electricity Conservation Potential Review estimates BC could cut demand by 13,800 GWh/year, using marketable energy conservation measures. This is about twenty percent of BC's total electricity demand.

1995 - Hydro's Integrated Electricity Plan says BC could cut about 7,000 GWh/year through conservation.

1990s - Power Smart actually cuts demand by about 2,400 GWh/year.

2000 - Hydro's Integrated Electricity Plan has no specific plans for energy reductions through conservation. Hydro's Electric Load Forecast assumes there will be no net increase in conservation by residential customers.

Nov. 2001 - Hydro revives the Power Smart campaign with advertising, Internet evaluation tools, and power smart discount coupons for light bulbs, conserver shower heads and appliances, mailed out with consumer bills. It's still not clear how much electricity demand will be reduced by this.

In these sombre days of the Autumn of 2001, at the beginning of what some people like to call the First World War of the 21st Century, it is very difficult to think about a sustainable future. For many people in the world, there is no future at all.

I wonder if we should change priorities in the sustainability discussion, putting as priority one "sustainable peace." It seems that it is in our genes to conquer, and if victory requires the destruction of Nature, the annihilation of cultures, of other species, so be it. It is just part of the game.

I wonder if we will ever evolve from this terrible shameful condition of being the conqueror and ruler, to something better. I even wonder if we have the capability for this evolution. I wonder if we can even envision World Peace I, instead of World War III.

We need to transform ourselves. We need to metamorphose into some-thing else. We need to envision a new way of living, learn how to create a better life, not just a wealthier one.

We are not only in war amongst ourselves, but against nature. We are facing an overwhelming set of problems, from massive degradation of natural resources to overpopulation, starvation, huge gaps between the rich and the poor, and even racism.

Scientists have said for many years that we have to become sustainable. Sustainability is not an option. That's what the future will be. The question is only, at what price will we get there? Will we do it in a humane way or will it be with a lot of suffering? The earlier we understand and start doing things, in a proactive way, the easier it will be to get there.

Sustainability simply means leaving some kind of livable planet for our children. We are not talking about impossible things, but the basics: an adequate water supply, clean air, decent housing and sufficient food, a peaceful and safe place to live. The things that sustain life.

Why Don't We Get It?

Sustainability is a difficult concept for Canadians to understand. There are many reports saying that Canada is one of the worst countries in the world from the environmental viewpoint. One of the latest reports, "Canada vs. the OECD: An Environmental Comparison," by David Boyd, ranks Canada in 28th place out of 29 nations in the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD). By the way, the countries with the highest marks are Switzerland, Mexico, Turkey, Austria and Netherlands; the USA is number 29.

The first thing we must do in Canada is educate ourselves, to accept that we can not continue behaving in the same way, if not for us, for the sake of our children and grandchildren. We must change from being a wasteful, consumer-oriented society to living in a more prudent way. We must learn to envision a healthy future. We must awake and begin transforming ourselves, our behaviours, in a way that brings back hope to youth.

Community-based Social Marketing

Doug McKenzie-Mohr has written a book on Fostering Sustainable Behaviour, with strategies and tools to change our attitudes. He says: "While education and advertising can be effective in creating public awareness and in changing attitudes, numerous studies show that behaviour change rarely occurs as a result of simply providing information. Community-based social marketing is an attractive alternative to information-based campaigns. Community-based social marketing is based upon research in the social sciences that demonstrates that behaviour change is most effectively achieved through initiatives delivered at the community level which focus on removing barriers to an activity while simultaneously enhancing the activities benefits."

Two fundamental principles drive these plans: Think Globally but Act Locally and Think Long-term but Act Today. In other words, we should understand the environmental, social, and economic problems happening in the world, envision the impact of these issues in our own cities or towns, and then start putting together plans to avoid that future. In simpler terms, be Proactive, instead of Reactive.

I am Dreaming of a Pueblo Verde

I still have hope we will be able to outlast these very difficult times. Martin Luther King said "Tie your vision to the human desire for a better tomorrow. Call your vision a dream. It will be more meaningful, more simplistic, and more symbolic."

I want to share my dream of a place I will call Pueblo Verde. I will outline a plan for becoming a sustainable community. Imagine the following:

• All the electricity in Pueblo is generated using wind turbines. There is a car co-op program, with a fleet of small electric cars to go around the town, and a few larger cars, powered by hydrogen fuel cells, for non-local trips. Even the school bus is a Zero Emission Vehicle.
• Several co-ops for sustainable forestry, fishery, and farming provide local job opportunities with certified value-added products, made with zero-waste, and designed-for-environment principles in their manufacturing processes.
• The Official Community Plan includes all sorts of principles to promote a sustainable ecological community. All new development in Pueblo Verde is done in a smart way; new houses are super-efficient, smaller, and affordable, including rainwater and greywater treatment systems. The first "eco-village" pilot is under construction, including a large organic community garden.
• There is a Sustainability Education Centre to learn all these things, starting with the Earth Charter and including traditional knowledge from the First Nations community.

A comprehensive sustainability plan will address all the elements in this dream, covering the social, economical and ecological dimensions. It is not realistic to think we can build such a plan easily. A better approach is to divide it into manageable sections. Specific strategies can be proposed and specific actions can begin, so we can get some results.

The sustainability plan should be a means, not an end. A good Sustainable Community Plan should define:

• General Goals, that speak to the basic human, ecological and economic needs to be addressed. The goals envision what we want to happen.
• Objectives, both long-term and for a three to five-year time-frame. This is how we make the goals happen.
• Actions, these are the specific activities to achieve the objectives.
• Progress Indicators, that measure progress against the defined goals.

I have outlined the Sustainability Building Blocks diagram, showing the most important elements, including some practical actions for each block.

Five Key Components

At the foundation of Pueblo Verde there are five key components:

1. Education for Sustainable Behaviour
   
   We accept the need for changing our day-to-day activities, to live simpler, to buy less stuff we don't actually need, to buy efficient products and when possible, to buy services. Doug McKenzie-Mohr says, "Behaviour change is the cornerstone of sustainability. If we are to rapidly make the transition to a more sustainable future it is critical that community champions be provided with the information and tools necessary to deliver effective behaviour change programmes."
   
   Education is without a doubt the most important and difficult challenge to sustainability.
   
   
2. The Precautionary Principle
   
   The 1998 Wingspread Statement describes it as follows: "When an activity raises threats of harm to human health or the environment, precautionary measures should be taken even if some cause-and-effect relationships are not fully established scientifically." In simpler terms, "Look before you leap," or "Better safe than sorry."
   
   
3. Green Local Jobs
   
   All activities should focus on generating local jobs.
4. Green Taxes
   
   Shift taxes, from taxes on "goods," such as income and jobs, to taxes on "bads," things we want to discourage, such as air and water pollution, traffic, and carbon emissions.
   
   
5. Local and Proactive Actions
   
   Follow the axioms "Think Globally, Act Locally" and "Think Long-term, Act Now."