Canada's Energy Problem: Part 2 - It's not just the Economy, Stupid

It's actually a bit odd in Toronto as of late. At least in the malls...not because they are empty due to recession woes, but because they're absolutely packed. I've seen and heard of the hordes of people clamoring for parking spots (this is why public transit is so wonderful, no parking!) and waiting in long lines at the Food Court at Vaughan Mills, Yorkdale and Eaton Centre. I sometimes wonder whether the recession affected Toronto at all...and then I hear from my friends in quiet conversations that their parents have been laid off and run out of employment insurance. They wonder aloud to me if they should take a year off school to try and help with the family finances. Some are actually working full-time, frantically trying to budget and scrimp to pay their tuition and travel costs for the next school year. The majority of their parents work in the manufacturing sector. It's either they've been laid off, their hours have been reduced or there is a strange "two weeks laid off with EI one week work" sort of deal. Their parents are not even employed by GM or Chrysler, they're employed by the parts suppliers (as far as I'm aware, none of their parents belong to unions, in case you wanted to know). This was before GM filed for bankruptcy protection yesterday of course. This was also before Magna decided to have a hand in the European Opel-Vauxhall deal (anyone want to enlighten me how this is going to turn out for my friend's parents?). 

Now I'm not so sure how my friends and their families will do. Line of credit to tide them over? I guess...but if you're homeless because the bank foreclosed on the family home when your parents ran out of EI and emergency funds, I wonder how you'll convince the bank you're a good loan candidate.

To be honest, as an environmentalist that raves about public transportation and biking, I should probably clamor for these outdated car companies to go the way of the dodo. When I look at my friends however...I cannot bring myself to say it, although I would love to join the throngs of people who seem to relish in the demise of these automotive giants. A much more helpful alternative was proposed by Michael Moore, the ever controversial filmmaker. An article he posted on his website yesterday detailed a specific plan to repurpose the manufacturing plants and various car dealerships to be shutdown due to Chrysler and GM's financial woes. However, despite his great suggestions I don't think it's just the economy and failing automotive giants that we should be worried about. I think many, like Moore, are overlooking something very important during this recession.

"It's peak oil, stupid!"

While I can appreciate how it supports the alternative transportations, I feel it overlooks what exactly will power all these shiny new theoretical vehicles. Producing electric batteries requires energy, producing all these light-rail systems requires energy, just getting these workers to work requires energy...where is it all going to come from if, as Moore says, we must fight "in this war being waged by the oil companies against you and me." He continues,

They are committed to fleecing us whenever they can, and they have been reckless stewards of the finite amount of oil that is located under the surface of the earth. They know they are sucking it bone dry. And like the lumber tycoons of the early 20th century who didn't give a damn about future generations as they tore down every forest they could get their hands on, these oil barons are not telling the public what they know to be true -- that there are only a few more decades of useable oil on this planet. And as the end days of oil approach us, get ready for some very desperate people willing to kill and be killed just to get their hands on a gallon can of gasoline.

(P.S. You can see this article from Jeff describing a similar situation as detailed at the end of the quote.) I'm sure we can switch all our manufacturing industries into producing modes of transportation that use alternative fuels, but if we're truly past peak oil and energy prices skyrocket, what will we do when we can't power the machines to make these shiny green vehicles? I'm not saying we shouldn't go this route, but we must look for a solution for the upcoming energy crisis while we're busy trying to make all these alternative energies more reliable and cost-effective.

Stensiling in the Future

Okay, I have a lot to say today, and it's a good thing I already changed the format of this blog, because otherwise this post would look really out of place.

My friend Jim Fairthorne over at State of Affairs posted a blog on Thursday detailing environmental watchdog Greenpeace's castigation of the Ontario government's proposed nuclear plan. Jim made a number of prescient points, all of which you can find here, but to summarize, he discussed the importance of keeping Canadian jobs in Canada and argued that if GP spokesman Shawn-Patrick Stensil wanted to criticize nuclear energy, he might do well to come up with some alternatives that were just a little more specific than hiding behind the “green energy” moniker. I'll come back to Mister Stensil in a minute.

I'm going to go out on a limb here, and throw my support behind Jim on this one. Yes, I'm a huge supporter of green technology. Yes, I think wind turbines and solar panels are wonderful ideas and a great support network for our energy infrastructure. But the bottom line is this: according to the 2008 Independent Electricity System Operator statistics, here's how our energy generation-to-consumption worked:

- Ontario Energy Production totalled 159.3 TWh
- Generation by Fuel Type:
- 53 per cent from Nuclear (84.4 TWh)
- 24.1 per cent from Hydroelectric (38.3 TWh)
- 14.5 per cent from Coal (23.2 TWh)
- 6.9 per cent from Gas/Oil (11 TWh)
- 0.9 per cent from Wind (1.4 TWh)
- 0.6 per cent from Other Sources (1 Twh)

Okay? Okay. Nuclear energy provides over half this province's power – fact. The so-called “green” energy totals (if we assume that all “other sources” are green in nature) generate roughly three percent of what the current nuclear plants generate. So clearly, at least in the short term until green tech can be made more efficient and the red tape of any major changeover can be cleared up, the Power Of The Atom looks like a pretty good alternative to things like coal, oil and other major pollutants.

Jim's article (if you haven't read it yet, and you should) doesn't even directly deal with the issue of whether or not nuclear power is “good” – he skips over that pointless argument and goes right into the economic ramifications of the Ontario government contracting the building and maintenance of our nuclear reactors to external, non-Canadian companies. Jim argues that it's a much better idea for Ontario's economy to make sue of the existing CANDU infrastructure and keep these jobs in Canada, and I tend to agree with him.

And now back to Mister Stensil, who personally responded to Jim's blog post. I've included the text here:

Hey Jim,
I don’t think you tried to hard to find alternatives to Ontario’s nuclear plans on Greenpeace’s website.
I [sic] took me two clicks to find this link: renewableisdoable.ca
You’ll find a report there that’s been endorsed by all of Canada’s major environmental organizations on how to replace the Pickering B and Bruce B nuclear stations.
At a global level please check out Greenpeace’s Energy Revolution report on how we build a climate friendly energy system (without nuclear): http://www.energyblueprint.info/
Cheers.

I took the liberty of checking out the links Mister Stensil included in his post, and what I came up with solidifies my irritation with this whole situation.

If you go to the “Renewable Is Doable” site, you'll find an awful lot of rhetoric about how green technology is a Better Idea than nuclear power, but they don't really say a great deal about how it's better, why it's more economically feasible or even what technologies they want to use instead. They make mention of a trend towards lower energy requirements in Ontario and reference the IESO statistics for 2008 that I mentioned above. However, upon reading the IESO report, I discovered the “trend” is actually the result of wetter, more temperate summers decreasing the public desire for air conditioning. So basically what they're saying is because the trends are dependent on the weather, we can no more predict energy consumption than we can plan a picnic with any real assurance it won't be rained out. And yet, Greenpeace is still railing against the idea of nuclear energy as unnecessary.

In a blog post on January 13th, 2009, Mister Stensil contends that these predictions render nuclear energy an overcompensation for a non-existent need. He figures we can replace the existing CANDU network with a wide array of solar panels and wind turbines to shore up what will amount to 75% of our energy requirements by 2010 (especially once the plan to shut down Ontario coal plants goes into effect).

Once again, I'm all for the prospect of reducing our dependence on pollutant-rich energy sources in favour of green alternatives, but this has not been well thought-out. What happens if we decide to shut down every nuclear reactor in favour of fields of wind turbines (that people already don't want), or sheets upon sheets of solar panels? Do you have any idea how much this kind of initiative would cost? Certainly I don't think it would result in the “billions of dollars” of savings Mister Stensil is suggesting.

The bottom line is this: we're in the midst of a much-touted economic crisis. Jobs are going the way of the dodo with alarming rapidity. Changing our entire energy system to a green network whose efficiency is still under debate would be a monstrous, costly undertaking. We have existing power which, while it's not perfect, is rather efficient and will cost us far less in the short term and shore up our energy requirements while we research green technology and figure out ways to improve its efficacy in the interest of eventually making that changeover. The green revolution is coming, folks, but it's not going to be built in a day.

Feedback on this issue would be much appreciated – we need to talk about this.