Climate: LNG in B.C. vs Alberta tarsands

Status
Not open for further replies.
Any idea if when they calculate the number for agriculture they factor in energy . For example heating barns, running farm equipment, mining potash for feetilizer etc? In the key accompanying the chart it provides a very narrow definition!

OK I found more info here in part 1
http://unfccc.int/files/national_re...ssions/application/zip/can-2014-nir-11apr.zip

Here is the bit we are interested in and for Canada as a whole.
Agriculture (CRF Sector 4)
6.1. Overview
Emission sources from the Agriculture Sector include enteric
fermentation (CH4) and manure management (N2O and CH4)
categories from animal production and the agricultural soils
(N2O) and field burning of crop residues (CH4 and N2O) categories
that occur during crop production. Carbon dioxide emissions
from, and removals by, agricultural lands are reported in the Land
Use, Land-use Change and Forestry (LULUCF) Sector under the
Cropland category (see Chapter 7).
The largest sectors in Canadian agriculture are beef cattle (non
dairy), swine, and cereal and oil seed production. There is also
a large poultry industry and a large dairy industry. Sheep are
raised, but production is highly localized and small compared
to the beef, swine, dairy and poultry industries. Other animals
are produced for commercial purposes, namely buffalo,1 llamas,
alpacas, horses and goats, but production is small.
Canadian agriculture is highly regionalized due to historic and
climatic influences. Approximately 75% of beef cattle and more
than 90% of wheat, barley and canola are produced on the
Prairies in a semi-arid to subhumid ecozone. On the other hand,
approximately 75% of dairy cattle, 60% of swine and poultry, 95%
of corn and 90% of soybeans are produced on the humid mixedwood
plains ecozone in Eastern Canada.
In 1990 there were 10.5 million non-dairy cattle in Canada, 1.4
million dairy cattle, 10 million swine and 100 million poultry.
Beef cattle and swine populations peaked in 2005 at 15 million
head each but have since decreased to 12 and 13 million head,
respectively. Since 1990, poultry populations have increased to
140 million. Dairy cattle populations have decreased steadily
since 1990 to less than 1 million head in 2012.
Since 1990, cropping practices have changed in Canada, with
increasing canola production from 3 Mt to 14 Mt, corn production
from 7 Mt to 13 Mt, and soybean production from 1.3 Mt
to 5 Mt, and decreasing wheat production from 32 Mt to 25 Mt.
Synthetic nitrogen consumption has increased from 1.2 Mt N in
1990 to 2.3 Mt N in 2012, while the area under summerfallow has
decreased by 5.4 million hectares (Mha) and the regions using
conservation tillage have increased by 12.9 Mha.
As a result of those changes, total greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions
from the Canadian Agriculture Sector have increased from
47 Mt CO2 eq in 1990, to 56 Mt CO2 eq in 2012 (Table 6–1). This
difference represents an increase of 19% from 1990, mainly due
to higher populations of beef cattle and swine (13% and 25%
increases, respectively), as well as an increase in the use of synthetic
nitrogen fertilizers (93%).
Emissions of CH4 from livestock accounted for 19 Mt CO2 eq in
1990 and 20 Mt CO2 eq in 2012, and mean estimates lie within an
uncertainty range of -16 to +20%. Over the time series of 1990
to 2012, mean CH4 emissions are estimated to have increased by
1.6 Mt CO2 eq, a 9% increase. The observed increase in emissions
falls within an uncertainty range of 4% to 12%. Emissions of N2O
from agricultural soils and livestock accounted for 28 Mt CO2 eq
in 1990 and 35 Mt CO2 eq in 2012; mean estimates lie within an
uncertainty range of -36 to +52%. Over the time series, mean N2O
emissions increased by 7.1 Mt CO2 eq, an increase of 25%.
Emissions from the Agriculture Sector peaked in 2005 and, until
2008, there were no significant changes in total emissions, as
increases in emissions due to increased use of nitrogen fertilizer
and crop residue decomposition were offset by reductions in
emissions from animal production as major livestock populations
decreased (Enteric Fermentation and Manure Management, Table
6-1). Since 2008, fertilizer emissions have continued to increase.
Livestock populations decreased from 2005 to 2011, but did not
continue this decline in 2012; crop production and the resulting
crop residual emissions in 2012 were lower than their peak in
2008, but increased slightly relative to 2011. As a result of these
short-term changes, total agricultural emissions were lower in
2012 than peak levels in 2005–2008, by less than 3 Mt CO2 eq.
Recalculations were 1.7% in this submission, with an increase
in emissions of less than 0.2 Mt CO2 eq for 1990 and a decrease
of -0.9 Mt CO2 eq in 2011, reducing the emission trend reported
in the 2013 NIR by 2%, from 15% to 13%. Recalculation resulted
from a number of changes in activity data based on the 2011
Census of Agriculture, due to revisions to animal population
estimates by Statistics Canada and revisions to crop areas by Agriculture
and Agri-Food Canada (AAFC), as well as an improvement
to ecodistrict-level climate data (Table 6–2).
Emissions from biological nitrogen fixation by the legume-rhizobium
association are reported as not occurring. This decision
is supported by Rochette and Janzen (2005), who concluded
that there is no evidence that measurable amounts of N2O are
produced during the nitrogen fixation process. Rice is not produced
in Canada and is not a source of CH4 emissions. Prescribed
burning of savannas is not practised in Canada. Finally, emissions
of GHG from on-farm fuel combustion are included in the Energy
Sector (Chapter 3).

lot's more on other producers of CO2 in this industry, but too much to post here...
 
This page has a nice chart on the totals.
http://www.ec.gc.ca/ges-ghg/default.asp?lang=En&n=3808457C-1&offset=2&toc=show
X-20140401115204599.jpg

As you can see Canada wide agriculture is still only 8%
Notice that wasted Gas is 9%
The most disturbing part is the trend we are seeing.
LNG will blow every accomplishment that we have made in one stroke.
It will be up to us pee-ons to double down and do more for these 1%'ers and our "Leaders"
We will be asked to do more (send money) to cut back our GHG while LNG is allowed to blow the budget without worries or costs.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/edmonton/leonardo-dicaprio-visits-alberta-s-oilsands-1.2744258
Leonardo DiCaprio visits Alberta's oilsands
The Oscar-nominated actor is working on an environmental documentary
CBC News Posted: Aug 22, 2014 12:41 PM MT Last Updated: Aug 22, 2014 12:41 PM MT


Leonardo DiCaprio is doing research for an environmental documentary. (Suzanne Plunkett/Reuters)

DiCaprio is in Fort McMurray for a few days to tour the oilsands for an environmental documentary he is working on, a source who did not want to be named told CBC News.

The source said DiCaprio wanted to see the oil sands first-hand and learn more about their impact.

The Oscar-nominated star of The Wolf of Wall Street has a long history of environmental activism.

He currently serves on the board of the World Wildlife Fund and Natural Resources Defence Council and started his own environmental charity foundation in 1998. He also lent his voice to a documentary called Carbon, which was released online Wednesday.

Actor Robert Redford, posing here at the 2013 Cannes Film Festival, put out a new video, blasting Alberta's
1 of 7
DiCaprio isn't the first high-profile visitor to check out the oilsands development in Fort McMurray.

Archbishop Desmond Tutu, who won the Nobel Peace Prize for his role in the fight against apartheid, met with First Nations representatives in Fort McMurray in May.

Neil Young has been an outspoken opponent to the oilsands, and has raised money for a First Nation fighting expansion in northern Alberta. James Cameron also toured in the oilsands in 2010, saying they need more regulation.

With files from the Canadian Press
 
None of them have to worry about where the next paycheck is coming from. Just sayin'.
 
None of them have to worry about where the next paycheck is coming from. Just sayin'.


Until this world and in particular North America stops it's ever growing appetite for fossil fuels neither will any of us boys out here have to worry about it either lol..

It's all good,, sooner or later the wheels fall off of band wagons..
 
Northern Gateway - dead in the water.
Kinder Morgan - dead in the water
Keystone XL - dead in the water.
Energy East Pipeline - ????????

Funny how that's working out for them.
Yes it's all good how the wheels are falling off that bandwagon.
 
Well the demand is still there so the wheels are on the train now.

Northern Gateway - dead in the water.
Kinder Morgan - dead in the water
Keystone XL - dead in the water.
Energy East Pipeline - ????????

Funny how that's working out for them.
Yes it's all good how the wheels are falling off that bandwagon.
 
Northern Gateway - dead in the water.
Kinder Morgan - dead in the water
Keystone XL - dead in the water.
Energy East Pipeline - ????????

Funny how that's working out for them.
Yes it's all good how the wheels are falling off that bandwagon.

Oh grasshopper,,, we are so naive,, to the point of being humorous really lol..
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Oh grasshopper,,, we are so naive,, to the point of being humorous really lol..

Perhaps you could enlighten us naive folks on how these projects are going, because from my view they are going nowhere. Granted I'm not that up on the energy east project. Please supply a link if you have one as I'm open to reading.
 
Well w/o taking one side or another - I think many of the proposed pipelines are far from being pronounced d-e-a-d. Stalled, walking zombies - maybe - but not dead. I believe that the ONLY reason Enbridge will finally be done in - is due to court challenges by FNs. That process is just starting. Be a few years yet before the dust settles.
 
I could really careless about those projects,, I said it before I will say it again,, they will eventually go forth, it's just a matter of time. For us out here it's business as usual. Working on drilling up my companies 489 million drilling budget and they aren't a big producer just a medium sized producer. Just about all our producers are working on their multi million dollar drilling programs as well so yah it's all business as usual. Your province and the LNG are going full bore. One of the big players in FSJ (Progress Energy)is in the process of getting 25 drilling rigs fired up for the coming year..

So yah,, the pay checks keep coming and the work is piling up,, but hey,, keep reading the internet and what they are telling you,, ask old Neil Young I am sure he has a handle on it lol..

The day you all stop using it like its free we will stop drilling for it,, I promise until then it's business as usual.. Get it ??

So naive..
 
I could really careless about those projects,,

If that's true then why do you keep coming here?
Are you just looking for a fight?
 
Well w/o taking one side or another - I think many of the proposed pipelines are far from being pronounced d-e-a-d. Stalled, walking zombies - maybe - but not dead. I believe that the ONLY reason Enbridge will finally be done in - is due to court challenges by FNs. That process is just starting. Be a few years yet before the dust settles.
Not dead but dead in the water.
Kind of like a ship at the dock with a broken engine.
Not going anywhere any time soon.
 
If that's true then why do you keep coming here?
Are you just looking for a fight?

No not to pick a fight GLG but to try and enlighten and get some of you to see outside the little shells you live in.. To add a true perspective on what is really happening out there..

But again I will leave this section it just gets me to riled up,, lots of good people on here our worlds are just too far apart on some subjects.

Carry on my friend..
 
No not to pick a fight GLG but to try and enlighten and get some of you to see outside the little shells you live in..

.
I see you just needed to toss that little insult before you left....
my the high ground eludes you.
 
It's just a matter of time before the Alberta Government runs into a dead end resource sector. When that happens, they will try to diversify like BC had to in the 90s. The only difference? BC has assets other than oil. Lots. And countless other industries based on the beauty and bounty of BC. We will be fine. I guess many of us feel passionate about what we have in BC and are worried about what our neighbours might do to disrupt that balance.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
It's just a matter of time before the Alberta Government runs into a dead end resource sector. When that happens, they will try to diversify like BC had to in the 90s. The only difference? BC has assets other than oil. Lots. And countless other industries based on the beauty and bounty of BC. We will be fine. I guess many of us feel passionate about what we have in BC and are worried about what our neighbours might do to disrupt that balance.

But Alberta is a big part of what BC has diversified into,, actually the biggest part and some of you are trying to stop that. Mining is the other, and well you are trying to stop that, power generation, well your trying to stop that, your aquaculture, trying to stop that !!

If our governments listened to and stopped everything the people wanted to stop there would be 0 industry in this country 0. This is why the government will eventually step in on most of these cases and do what is best for the country as a whole.
 
But Alberta is a big part of what BC has diversified into,, actually the biggest part and some of you are trying to stop that. Mining is the other, and well you are trying to stop that, power generation, well your trying to stop that, your aquaculture, trying to stop that !!

If our governments listened to and stopped everything the people wanted to stop there would be 0 industry in this country 0. This is why the government will eventually step in on most of these cases and do what is best for the country as a whole.
It's hard to tell if you are being sarcastic, funny – or naive/inexperienced, Walleyes. You have admitted that you are older – so, it almost seems you believe what you wrote on this post. It's hard to believe there is anybody alive still that naive.

Let me ask you this:

Is Allison Redford “working for the good of the country”??

How about Mike Duffy?

Rob Ford?

Hitler?

Ever hear of the sponsorship scandal? The Mulrooney/Schriber affair? Been locked away for the past 30 years or so?

The only time this **** happens is when government STOPS LISTENING to the people,!

Sheezish, Walleyes...
 
http://www.cbc.ca/news/technology/caribou-habitat-in-alberta-ravaged-beyond-repair-1.2745870

Caribou habitat in Alberta ravaged beyond repair
Disturbance in Alberta's northwestern foothills will make restoration selective
The Canadian Press Posted: Aug 25, 2014 11:35 AM ET Last Updated: Aug 25, 2014 11:35 AM ET


"There's just so much disturbance, it's important we prioritize," said Laura Finnegan, a biologist with the Foothills Research Institute in Hinton, Alta.

Alberta selling mountain caribou habitat
Aboriginal groups fear for George River caribou herd
George River caribou population continues alarming decline
The institute is one year into a three-year study on how animals and humans continue to use this ragged landscape in an effort to understand how to best restore it.

Governments are counting on that work to help them live up to promises of sustainable development.

Deforestation worst than in Brazil

This stretch of foothills still looks like pristine, trackless boreal forest when seen from the highway. But back roads into the bush reveal a patchwork of clearcuts, well pads, access roads and seismic lines so extensive that gravel and green greet the eye almost equally.

Alta Seismic Restoration 20140824
Scientists are trying to remediate the lines that help wolves get deep into the forest of Alberta's foothills and are partly responsible for vanishing caribou herds, but there are so many that they're focusing on which ones would do the most good. (HO, Foothills Research Institute/Canadian Press)

It's part of an area that recent satellite data suggests is being deforested at a rate that outpaces what's going on in Brazil's rainforests.

There are more than 16,000 kilometres of seismic lines, cut by the energy industry through the forest, within the study area's 13,000 square kilometres.

About five per cent of range for the Little Smoky and a la Peche caribou herds remains undisturbed — a long way from the federal government's 65 per cent target.

Finnegan and her colleagues are trying to figure out how to bridge that gap. Their first step is to understand how both animals and humans are using what's on the ground.

That means understanding the impact of seismic lines, which are used to study geology underground.

Wolves normally prefer to prey on deer and moose, but seismic lines allow them to penetrate into the deep woods where caribou hide.

Caribou also normally avoid coming within 500 metres of a seismic line, making every line, in effect, a kilometre wide.

It takes up to 70 years in this cold climate for nature to efface a seismic line. The passage of even a single quad can retard that restorative creep by crushing plants and compacting soil.

"You can just look at the vegetation on the line and you'll see tracks," Finnegan said.

Snowmobiles ravaging the terraine

Researchers have used sophisticated satellite-based radar to map average vegetation heights across the entire study area to within a few centimetres.

They've erected motion-sensitive cameras on selected seismic lines to record what's using them — caribou, wolves and snowmobilers alike.

Preliminary results suggest there's a threshold at which the lines are no longer an easy way for animals to get around.

"Seismic lines with vegetation heights less than 1.4 metres facilitate movement by caribou predators," says the institute's report.

Human use is more complex. Snowmobilers and quadders prefer little ground cover and dry soils as well as lower vegetation.

"Human motorized use of seismic lines is extensive across the range of a la Peche and Little Smoky caribou, and the probability of high levels of motorized human use increased when vegetation height along seismic lines was less than two metres in height," says the report.

Mapping where seismic lines attractive to predators and humans cross what used to be the best caribou habitat could suggest where restoration could do the most good, the researchers say.

Such maps have been produced for the institute's preliminary report. Priority seismic lines for restoration will still add up to many hundreds of kilometres — and the study area is only one small part of a heavily affected natural region that stretches almost all the way down Alberta's western edge.

But the institute's work could provide at least a plan to get started, Finnegan said.

"That's the primary goal of this research, so that land managers on the ground could look at it and know where to begin."
 
Environmental Wackosim: We Are the Idiots
WALTER WILLIAMS (2013.05.21 )
Dr. Henry Miller, senior fellow at the Hoover Institution, and Gregory Conko, senior fellow at the Competitive Enterprise Institute, in their Forbes article “Rachel Carson’s Deadly Fantasies” (9/5/2012), wrote that her 1962 book, “Silent Spring,” led to a world ban on DDT use. The DDT ban was responsible for the loss of “tens of millions of human lives — mostly children in poor, tropical countries — have been traded for the possibility of slightly improved fertility in raptors (birds). This remains one of the monumental human tragedies of the last century.” DDT presents no harm to humans and, when used properly, poses no environmental threat. In 1970, a committee of the National Academy of Sciences wrote: “To only a few chemicals does man owe as great a debt as to DDT. … In a little more than two decades, DDT has prevented 500 million human deaths, due to malaria, that otherwise would have been inevitable.” Prior to the DDT ban, malaria was on the verge of extinction in some countries.

The World Health Organization estimates that malaria infects at least 200 million people, of which more than a half-million die, each year. Most malaria victims are African children. People who support the DDT ban are complicit in the deaths of tens of millions of Africans and Southeast Asians. Philanthropist Bill Gates is raising money for millions of mosquito nets, but to keep his environmentalist credentials, the last thing that he’d advocate is DDT use. Remarkably, black congressmen share his vision.

Wackoism didn’t end with Carson’s death. Dr. Paul Ehrlich, Stanford University biologist, in his 1968 best-selling book, “The Population Bomb,” predicted major food shortages in the United States and that “in the 1970s … hundreds of millions of people are going to starve to death.” Ehrlich saw England in more desperate straits, saying, “If I were a gambler, I would take even money that England will not exist in the year 2000.” On the first Earth Day, in 1970, Ehrlich warned: “In ten years all important animal life in the sea will be extinct. Large areas of coastline will have to be evacuated because of the stench of dead fish.” Ehrlich continues to be a media and academic favorite.

Then there are governmental wacko teachings. In 1914, the U.S. Bureau of Mines predicted our oil reserves would last 10 years. In 1939, the U.S. Department of the Interior revised the estimate, saying that American oil would last 13 years. In 1972, the Club of Rome’s report “Limits to Growth” said total world oil reserves totaled 550 billion barrels. With that report in hand, then-President Jimmy Carter said, “We could use up all proven reserves of oil in the entire world by the end of the next decade.” He added, “The oil and natural gas we rely on for 75 percent of our energy are running out.” As for Carter’s running-out-of-oil prediction, a recent report by the U.S. Government Accountability Office and private industry experts estimate that if even half of the oil bound up in the Green River formation in Utah, Wyoming and Colorado is recovered, it would be “equal to the entire world’s proven oil reserves.” That’s an estimated 3 trillion barrels, more than what OPEC has in reserve. Fret not. Carter, like Ehrlich, is still brought before the media for his opinion.

Our continued acceptance of environmentalist manipulation, lies and fear-mongering has led Congress to establish deadly public policies in the name of saving energy — such as Corporate Average Fuel Economy standards, which downsize autos and cause unnecessary highway fatalities. That’s on top of the stupid 1970s 55 mph laws. The next time an environmentalist warns us of a pending disaster or that we are running out of something, we ought to ask: When was the last time a prediction of yours was right? Some people are inclined to call these people idiots. That’s wrong. They have been successful in their agenda. It’s we who are the idiots for listening to them and allowing Congress to let them have their way.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top