Greenhouse Gas Reduction Plan
|
Submitted by Dharma on Fri, 15/06/2007 - 4:35pm.
|
|
 Joined: 24-04-2007 |
This week's Free Press (June 13) has a front page item on Fernie's new Greenhouse Gas Emission Reduction Plan. The story is a little short on specifics such as how any greenhouse gas reductions would be measured against current emission levels. Can we actually measure Fernie's per capita reduction in carbon emissions? The story also mentioned Wildsight's Climate Solutions for the Kootenays Program. I checked their website to see if they had any more information and there's no such program listed. Reducing electrical power consumption is one of the ways suggested in the story to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. But doesn't most electrical power in BC come from hydroelectric plants? How much greenhouse gas does a hydro dam produce. I'm all for reducing greenhouse gas emissions, but is this program just window dressing or will it have a real substantial impact. Should I feel good about the greenhouse gas I save by riding my bike while I sit at the railway crossing watching carload after carload of coal going by? Does BC have any responsibility for the eventual carbon emitted from our coal in far off countries? How many carloads will be offset by our Greenhouse Gas Emission Reduction Plan? My question for discussion is this: are we targeting the right things by switching to compact fluorescent bulbs and recycling our toilet paper tubes and junk mail? Is that a significant first step or a drop in the ocean? What else should we be doing that would have a real impact and how many of us are willing to do it? I'd like to hear what other people have to say about this program. |
Joined: 06-03-2007
You are right about hydro electric. Hydro dams produce nil for greenhouse gas. But you need to look at he big picture, a hydro dam produces mega power, way more than we consume in BC. All the excess power goes into a grid. The more power going into that grid from sources like hydro dams (clean producers), less needs to be produced by coal fired plants (polluters).
As for coal coming out of the Elk Valley, most of it is coking coal used for steel production, not for coal fired electric plants. If that coal wasn't rolling by you probably wouldn't have a bike to sit on.
Joined: 12-04-2007
[quote=dharma]Reducing electrical power consumption is one of the ways suggested in the story to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. But doesn't most electrical power in BC come from hydroelectric plants?
[/quote]
Most, but not all - IIRC BC has even had to "import" electricity from coal fired plants in Alberta on occasion. Besides, if BC has surplus hydro power it will go into the grid which means that less coal fired power will be needed elsewhere.
[quote=dharma]
How much greenhouse gas does a hydro dam produce.
[/quote]
Some, mostly from destruction of vegetation when the reservoir is filled. Long term the vegetation in the area of the reservoir that previously was acting to reduce C02 is gone. Reference: http://www.newscientist.com/article.ns?id=dn7046
So while hydro is a relatively green way to produce power, there is no free lunch.
[quote=dharma]
I'm all for reducing greenhouse gas emissions, but is this program just window dressing or will it have a real substantial impact. Should I feel good about the greenhouse gas I save by riding my bike while I sit at the railway crossing watching carload after carload of coal going by?
[/quote]
Every little bit helps. While your own actions don't have a significant impact on their own, if everyone made a few changes the difference could be substantial.
If nothing else, you get some exercise and fun riding a bike.
[quote=dharma]
Does BC have any responsibility for the eventual carbon emitted from our coal in far off countries? How many carloads will be offset by our Greenhouse Gas Emission Reduction Plan?
[/quote]
Good question. It will take some serious international cooperation to get significant GHG reductions, which will be hard now that China and India want what we've got.
[quote=dharma]
My question for discussion is this: are we targeting the right things by switching to compact fluorescent bulbs and recycling our toilet paper tubes and junk mail? Is that a significant first step or a drop in the ocean? What else should we be doing that would have a real impact and how many of us are willing to do it? I'd like to hear what other people have to say about this program.
[/quote]
Conservation is probably the biggest thing we can do - for example, turning off an unneeded light is even better than switching to a CFL bulb.
Joined: 06-07-2006
The way I see it, any kind of recycling is good because it reduces landfill - and we all know how short we are on space for landfill sites in our little valley. There are some though who don't believe in recycling, because of the energy required to sort, clean, ship, re manufacture and resell the recycled products. In that vein, I don't recycle my glass jars - shock horror - because I would have to DRIVE the products to the recycling plant and I don't have enough to make it worth burning that much fossil fuel to get them there. (I don't throw many out though, as I use them for preserves and storage). Everything else I recycle where possible, and not just stuff that goes in the blue bags or back to the liquor store.
You have to do what you believe in and I believe every little helps. For example - 5000 people living in Fernie. If everyone drinks an average of 1 litre of milk per week, that's 5000 milk cartons to dispose of weekly, or 260'000 cartons per year. That's over one million cartons in just four years. I can't even begin to imagine what that would look like in a landfill site, but sent to recycling it can be reused.
Just please remember to rinse them out before you bag them, or they will just end up going to the dump anyway!