|
Uncertainty over Copenhagen talks Prentice suggests financial crisis trumping environmental concerns; Obama administration looking at bilateral pacts with India, China a to break developed-developing country deadlock Gary Park For Petroleum News
Hopes for a global climate-change agreement are wilting in the buildup to December’s United Nations-sponsored talks in Copenhagen, with the Canadian government suggesting that the financial crisis is trumping environmental concerns.
Environment Minister Jim Prentice said Oct. 14 he is far from sure an agreement will be reached in Denmark, not least because of the differences emerging between the United States and the European Union.
The Obama administration is also turning its energies to alternative bilateral pacts with India and China, with the intention of breathing fresh life into the deadlock between developing and economically advanced countries.
In a candid assessment, Prentice said “increasingly people are being realistic” about the chances for a full and complete agreement.
“There’s probably too much work to be done in that time that is left,” he said.
Prentice said it is likely that Copenhagen will achieve nothing more than “some agreed principles.”
Whatever happens on the global stage, Prentice said Canada intends to roll out its own plans for reducing greenhouse gas emissions by 20 percent from 2006 levels by 2020.
If that happens, each Canadian province will have to carry its share of the load, which could involve more ambitious federal targets than Alberta is currently willing to introduce on its own, he suggested.
But Prentice said the road to Copenhagen has encountered the compelling argument that reducing poverty is a greater priority for less-wealthy countries than reducing GHGs.
Some expect greater certainty Despite Prentice’s less than optimistic forecast for Copenhagen, there are petroleum industry leaders who expect greater certainty on issues such as cap-and-trade systems and carbon capture and storage.
Peter Voser, the chief executive officer of Royal Dutch Shell, told a Calgary conference that society “needs real progress on climate policy frameworks that put a price on emissions and promote CCS and other clean energy technologies.”
A spokesman for Environment Canada said the Canadian government remains committed to tabling a “full suite of specific policies (prior to the Denmark summit) covering all major sources of Canadian greenhouse gas emissions.”
He conceded that federal plan will involve major revisions to the Canadian strategy released 18 months ago to cut GHGs by 20 percent by 2020 and 60 percent by 2050.
“The economic downturn and the renewed engagement by the new U.S. administration has required that we fine tune our approach to tackling climate change,” he said.
The spokesman said there has been progress in talks between U.S. and Canadian officials seeking to harmonize climate change policies to advance “our respective environmental and energy objectives.”
Voser said Shell endorses a cap and trade system that is at the core of the American Clean Energy and Security Act passed narrowly in June by the U.S. House of Representatives, viewing that as the lowest-cost means of reducing carbon dioxide emissions.
If that bill is adopted by the Senate, now seen as unlikely before 2010, the U.S. would be committed to lowering GHG emissions by 17 percent from the 2005 level by 2020 and 83 percent by 2050.
Alberta government hasn’t wavered The Alberta government has never wavered from its position that it will not support any national approach that erodes investment in the province’s energy projects, notably the oil sands — something Prime Minister Stephen Harper put high on his list when he agreed to work with President Barack Obama on a joint climate change pact.
Harper reinforced that line after a meeting with Obama in mid-September when he reminded “all our American friends that Canada is by far the largest supplier of energy to the United States.”
“And we are determined to be a continental partner in dealing with the very linked problems of climate change and energy security.”
However, the two leaders made no specific reference to the oil sands.
In a symbolic gesture, David Jacobson, the new U.S. ambassador to Canada, visited the oil sands on Oct. 14 in what was billed as an effort to help the Obama administration draft a policy on major sources of energy supply for the U.S.
He said officials in both countries recognize there must be a balance between the need for energy security and protecting the environment.
“I’ve learned a lot about the tremendous strides that have been taken over the last several years with respect to improving the environmental record in treating the oil sands,” Jacobson told reporters in Calgary.
He echoed the suggestion by Prentice that a deal in Copenhagen is a long shot, noting that the U.S. health care debate has eclipsed work on energy legislation in Congress, meaning the chances of major energy policy decisions before the international conference are slim.
| 