Very large companies, circular arguments, and carbon footprints
The Colossally Irrational Report for May that may have you going in circles.
My Scottish/Irish ancestors arrived on the east coast of so-called “Canada” in the late 1700’s or early 1800’s and were part of several waves of genocidal colonization of the Indigenous people who were already here. We arrived uninvited on the traditional unceded territory of the Wəlastəkewiyik (Maliseet) whose ancestors along with the Mi’Kmaq / Mi’kmaw and Passamaquoddy / Peskotomuhkati Tribes / Nations signed Peace and Friendship Treaties with the British Crown in the 1700s. I like to start every new post by explaining my family’s history and keeping this foremost in my mind (and my writing) at all times. I know I have benefited as a result of colonization, and I find the history deeply troubling. It is what motivates me to understand the true history and advocate for real reconciliation. As a child in the 1970’s, I moved west with my family and am grateful to be writing this newsletter now in Moh’kinsstis, and the traditional Treaty 7 territory of the Blackfoot confederacy: Siksika, Kainai, Piikani, as well as the Îyâxe Nakoda and Tsuut’ina nations. This territory is also home to the Métis Nation of Alberta, Region 3 within the historical Northwest Métis homeland.I recognize that the land I now work and live on was stolen from these nations (truth) and I support giving the land back as an act of reconciliation.
If you blinked, you may have missed the media coverage of a $2 billion fossil gas pipeline newly proposed for Alberta. Most media outlets just picked up the Canadian Press story when it was announced on May 8.
This is surprising given that the new pipeline, although only 200 km, will carry about one billion cubic feet per day of additional fossil gas.
The pipeline, dubbed the “Yellowhead Mainline,” seems to be an example of how we’re quietly mainstreaming the continued expansion of fossil fuels. In this case, it seems to be because it’s supplying fuel to a fancy net-zero petrochemical plant.
Dow Chemical’s so-called “Path2Zero” is under construction now and guess what, it requires a lot of natural gas for the next few decades. So much natural gas that a whole new pipeline has to be built.
Interesting how the Alberta government didn’t have an announcement about this. The province is heavily invested ($1.8 billion) in Dow’s nearly $9 billion ethylene cracker and derivatives facility outside of Edmonton.
The idea of the petrochemical plant expansion is to triple the amount of plastic polyethylene pellets being produced. That’s two million tonnes per year more than what is being spewed out now.
Wait, aren’t we trying to produce less plastic? I guess…not?
Whatever you do, don’t blame the Intergovernmental Negotiating Committee on Plastic Pollution who held negotiations in Ottawa recently. They gave more access to the plastics industry than to journalists but hey, that’s the new normal.
The net-zero promise will be accomplished by using “circular” hydrogen. It’s a process where the ethylene cracker’s by-product can be converted to hydrogen, while stripping out the carbon. That hydrogen is then re-used to fuel the cracker, which is why it is considered “circular.”
Dow hopes to reach net-zero by 2050. Until then (and beyond?), it will apparently need a lot of fossil gas. How much is not clear from their website.
Thank goodness that by using an existing carbon capture and sequestration site, the company qualifies for another $400 million from the federal government.
Although more expensive to run a hydrogen cracker, the CO2 produced by this cracking process allows the company to recover some of its costs. Phew, I was worried about those petrochemical revenues!
More plastic, requiring more fossil gas, and this is good?
Dow will be able to make three times more plastic and market its plastic products as low-carbon or carbon-neutral to others who turn around and make other things with the plastic.
Those customers can then also label their plastic products as more climate-friendly. So everybody wins? Or we all lose? I can’t quite decide because we’re producing more plastic and need more fossil gas as fuel. It’s all so confusing.
What’s also interesting is that Dow’s net-zero efforts are only focused on scope 1 (direct) and scope 2 (indirect or fuel source) emissions. The scope 3 emissions - or all other indirect sources of greenhouse gases including that of their customers - aren’t something they include in their emissions reduction calculations.
So they get the benefit of their customers desire for “greener” product labelling, but don’t have to be responsible for calculating their customers’ carbon footprint into their net-zero or carbon-neutral claims.
We see now how this works. We keep adding more fossil fuels with the promise of future emission reductions.
Never mind that the reductions at the end of the day however, are small - only 20% less for Dow globally.
There’s more and it’s a big deal, according to an executive
Further down in the Canadian Press story we find out about other plans for the fossil gas pipeline. The story goes on to explain how the pipeline company, Canadian Utilities, has identified more than $20 billion of “proposed industrial expansion projects and emissions-reduction projects by its customers in Alberta.”
The company is owned by Atco Energy Systems, whose chief operating officer gleefully proclaimed to the Canadian Press that “very large companies are making very large investments” to lower their carbon footprint.
No, sir. I beg to differ. They are spending money to make even more money. And whether they are lowering their carbon footprint seems questionable when you have to bring in more fossil gas to supply their projects.
Even further down the story, the excited Atco executive (perhaps contemplating his next bonus) lets us know that some of the fossil gas will “eventually find its way to residential homeowners” who are flocking to the province.
Billions of cubic feet per day of fossil gas “finding its way” with a little help from some “very large” companies. It all sounds so innocent, doesn’t it?
Um, shouldn’t we be trying to reduce our dependence on fossil gas, instead of adding more to the mix?
When will this madness end, you may ask - no answer is forthcoming
The seemingly earnest executive also explains that increased population growth across the province is driving fossil gas demand. But shouldn’t new homes be built to use renewable sources of energy?
What is the Alberta government’s climate plan for housing anyway? I thought I’d check the website.
There’s not much in Alberta’s Emissions Reduction and Energy Development plan about residential housing. The one mention is as vague and noncommittal as you would expect: “Assess clean technology, low-carbon building materials and innovation opportunities for residential, commercial and industrial buildings.”
It shouldn’t be surprising, given the Alberta government’s record on renewable energy. The main thing being captured in this province is the United Conservative Party which seems to be firmly frozen in place by the fossil fuel industry.
Further reading of the emissions reduction plan reveals it is endorsed by none other than: 1) The president of Pathways Alliance, 2) Jack Mintz of the UofC’s School of Public Policy, 3) Gary Mar, former conservative cabinet minister, 4) An executive at Cenovus (double dipping into the fossil lobby pool, and 5) The appointed CEO of a provincial crown corporation.
Some really heartwarming testimonials follow the details of the plan (my emphasis in bold below):
“Alberta's Emissions Reduction and Energy Development plan provides a breathtaking list of actions to reduce emissions in the coming years.”
Jack Mintz
With this calibre of folks officially blessing the plan, we can all sleep better.
*************
Heavy-hearted
Since October 7, 2023 I have struggled to see the beauty day-to-day that I used to photograph so frequently. The ongoing genocide in Gaza has altered something for me. I’m having a lot of trouble picking up my camera and taking photos these last six months. I’m trying to get back to it, but I don’t have the same enthusiasm. Hoping to get there eventually.
Here’s one photo from May 16 at sunset. I find myself taking photos of familiar scenes with a different, heavier perspective.