Environmental Fundamentals of Alternatives
Presentation for CEA/NRCan Workshop:Diversifying the Mix - Alternatives to Conventional Generating Technology
November 25, 2002
Andrew Pape-Salmon, PEng, MRM [email protected]://www.pembina.org
November 2002, Environmental Fundamentals
Pembina Institute Pembina Institute
Policy research and analysis Confidential consulting servicesPublic interest advocacy and interventionPublic and school education
Sustainable Energy ProgramAims to shift Canadian energy policy to support a
significant expansion of sustainable energy (energy efficiency & low-impact renewable energy)
Advocates fiscal and legislative reforms which provide market recognition for the social and environmental benefits of sustainable energy
November 2002, Environmental Fundamentals
Environmental Issues for Canadian Energy Supplies
Climate Change Ground level ozone Acid deposition Reduction of biodiversity Watershed and fish impact Land-use – human and wildlife issues Toxic waste buildup Resource depletion Other social impacts Life-cycle evaluation is critical
November 2002, Environmental Fundamentals
Greenhouse Gases
Includes CO2, N2O, CH4, SF6, PFCs, HFCs, others Known link to global climate change Potential impacts: Climate Change
Sea level rise Increased intensity of weather events (rain, snow, wind) Increased forest fire events Arctic melt Reduced biodiversity Tropical diseases moving north
Significant impacts on people, society, economy, biodiversity
November 2002, Environmental Fundamentals
Greenhouse Gases
November 2002, Environmental Fundamentals
November 2002, Environmental Fundamentals
Greenhouse Gases
Kyoto Protocol: Canada committed to a 6% reduction below 1990 levels: to 571 Mt
Required reductions of about 29% or 238 Mt below expected levels of 809 Mt
Climate Change Plan for Canada sets out several concrete measures to reduce emissions
Immense opportunity for zero- or low-emission energy resources, energy efficiency and conservation
November 2002, Environmental Fundamentals
Environmental Assessment
Need to compare energy options on their site-specific environmental performance rather than arbitrary scale criteria or other generalizations
Indirect and direct impacts; varies by geography Life Cycle Value Assessment:
multi-disciplinary, systems-based business analysis and decision-making process
considers the full life cycle of a projectenhances the design-for-sustainabilityPembina Institute service to
the private and public sectors
November 2002, Environmental Fundamentals
Environmental Assessment
Graph 1. Greenhouse Gases
GASAIS
WIND
0
500
1000
1500
System
kg C
O2
eq./
1000
kW
h
12 kg
1092 kg786 kg
HDPE Copper Aluminum Fibreglass Steel Paint Concrete Location Nacelle 50 1,000 1,600 750.00 16,350 - - Denmark Blades/Hub - - 250 5,750.000 2,500 - - Denmark Paint and Tower Parts
- - - - 37,000 250 - Denmark
Foundation - - - - 4,735 - 43,230 Alberta, Canada
Transformer - - - - 3,279 - - Oregon, U.S.
November 2002, Environmental Fundamentals
Environmental Assessment
Ground level ozone: 0.03kg/MWh Acid deposition: 0.03kg SOx/MWh Reduction of biodiversity: minimal Watershed and fish impact: negligible Land-use: 1% footprint Toxic waste buildup: none Resource depletion: renewable Other social impacts: visual impact,
enhancement of agricultural income All categories: indirect displacement of more
impacting energy resources
November 2002, Environmental Fundamentals
Environmental Benefits
100MW Wind Farm 300 GWh/yr, Energy for 30,000 homes Permanent GHG Emissions Reductions:
150-300 kilotonnes per year Reductions equivalent to taking up to 100,000
small motor vehicles off the road Reduced smog, acid deposition,
particulate matter, mercury, other heavy metals
No impact on watersheds Reduced toxic waste Non-depleteable resource
November 2002, Environmental Fundamentals
Environmental Certification
Aims to establish a transparent standard for labeling energy products which protect the environment
Canadian standards:Environmental Choice Program “EcoLogo”
for Renewable Low-Impact ElectricityBC Hydro “Green Criteria”Low-Impact Hydropower Institute guidelines being
adapted to Canadian context
Ownership of environmental attributes under debate
November 2002, Environmental Fundamentals
Drivers for Certification
Green Power MarketingConsumers pay a price premium for electricity that
demonstrates superior environmental performanceHighest quality product required
Portfolio StandardsLegislated or voluntary targets for renewable
energy to support environmental and social objectives
Cost competitive products which satisfy jurisdictional objectives for environmental performance
E.g., BC Hydro 10% commitment
November 2002, Environmental Fundamentals
Drivers for Certification
Environmental Regulations Investments in green power driven by greenhouse
gas or local emission standards (e.g., Kyoto Protocol, Ontario emissions trading system)
Products which demonstrate a net improvement in environmental quality
Debate: Role of Eco-Logo GuidelinesDifferent stakeholders have presented different
cases for the role of the eco-logoNeed to clearly identify social
purpose for certification
November 2002, Environmental Fundamentals
“Shades of Green” Proposal
Bright green resourceBest overall environmental performanceSuitable for green power marketing purposesBundling many environmental attributes
Forest green resourceDemonstrate broad environmental benefits Suitable for portfolio standards for renewable energy
Olive green resourceResource which demonstrate net reductions in GHGsSuitable for meeting emission regulations
Must clearly communicate differences to consumers
November 2002, Environmental Fundamentals
Differentiation
Goal is to clearly differentiate resources based on their social purpose – to meet emission regulations, contribute toward resource acquisition goals, or to market to consumers as a premium product
November 2002, Environmental Fundamentals
Summary
Several critical environmental issues facing Canadian energy sector
Kyoto ratification could create an immense opportunity for alternative energy
Evaluation of environmental attributes should be done on a life-cycle basis
Certification of environmental performance should be driven by specific social purposes