Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : The Exxon Free Environmental Thread -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Crocodile who wrote (19)	3/17/2007 5:28:30 PM
From: Wharf Rat	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 49167

Canada greenhouse gas 'violators' would pay under Liberal plan Fri Mar 16, 8:43 PM ET OTTAWA (AFP) - Polluters releasing more than their share of the so-called greenhouse gases responsible for global warming would be slapped with fines under a plan unveiled Friday by opposition Liberals. The plan -- which could come into effect under a Liberal government from January 2008 if the party is returned to power -- would charge companies 20 Canadian dollars (17 US) per tonne of carbon dioxide released in excess of the company's "carbon budget" and jump to 30 dollars (25 US) in 2011. "We cannot keep using our atmosphere as a dump," Liberal boss Stephane Dion, as he presented the "pay as you pollute" plan. Companies staying below their quotas could reap rewards by selling their rights to pollute. If Liberals are able to implement their plan, they would assign each company its carbon budget, a portion of Canada's commitment to meet the Kyoto Protocol target of six percent below 1990 emissions levels. The Liberal plan targets the largest polluters, especially power generation and the oil and gas industries, such as extractors of oil from Canada's vast deposits of oil sands, which require energy to separate the crude. Liberals argued it would not be a tax. "This is the strongest proposal for regulating industrial greenhouse gas pollution made by any political party in Canada," said the Pembina Institute in a statement. "It sets a new standard against which the (Conservative Stephen) Harper government's soon-to-be-announced regulatory framework must be judged," said Matthew Bramley of Pembina, a Canadian environmental think tank. The Conservative Harper government has said repeatedly that Canada is not up to meeting the Kyoto commitments, but announced early this year financing for environmental projects. Dion said just 700 companies emitted 50 percent of Canada's greenhouse gases. As an incentive to innovate, companies could recover as much as half of their fines to invest in their own projects to lower emissions. A layer of gases in Earth's upper atmosphere allows rays of sunlight in but does not let heat out, as does the glass in a greenhouse. While the effect is necessary for life here, the release of carbon and other gases into the atmosphere since the Industrial Revolution has caused a steady rise in Earth's temperature, which scientists fear could upset weather, sea levels and biological balances. news.yahoo.com

To: Crocodile who wrote (19)	3/18/2007 5:33:30 AM
From: Wharf Rat	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 49167

Alberta is Canada's top polluter, survey finds Province's industry generated 40 per cent of climate-warming gases in 2005 MARTIN MITTELSTAEDT From Thursday's Globe and Mail Alberta industries were Canada's top greenhouse-gas emitters in 2005, accounting for nearly 40 per cent of all the climate-warming gases released that year by major corporations, a survey compiled by two environmental groups says. The survey, based on an analysis of pollution data filed by companies to Environment Canada, found that Alberta businesses far outpaced those of the next-biggest greenhouse-gas emitter, Ontario, which accounted for 28 per cent of the total, and third-ranked Saskatchewan, with 8 per cent. The results, to be released today, show that when it comes to corporate greenhouse-gas releases, Alberta is in a league of its own and would be the most affected by any federal regulations that would cut industrial emissions of gases blamed for global warming. "The greenhouse-gas story in Alberta is a story about two things. No. 1 is the tar sands, the other is coal" used for electricity generation, said Aaron Freeman, policy director at Environmental Defence, a Toronto-based conservation group that, along with the Canadian Environmental Law Association, compiled the survey. In the ranking of individual industrial plants that emit greenhouse gases, Alberta also dominates, with seven of the 10 biggest polluters in the country. Besides plants operated by Syncrude Canada Ltd. and Suncor Energy Inc. in the tar sands, the province has five fossil-fuel-fired generating stations in the top 10. Ontario has two facilities in that group: the Nanticoke generating station operated by Ontario Power Generation, the country's largest single source of carbon dioxide, the main greenhouse gas; and the fifth-ranked Lambton generating station, also operated by OPG. Both stations burn coal, one of the most dirty sources of energy, to produce electricity. Mr. Freeman said Alberta's position relative to other provinces could worsen dramatically in the years ahead if the many oil sands developments now on the drawing boards there are built, and if the Ontario government fulfills a long-standing election pledge to shutter its coal-fired power plants. "You'd see a growing cleavage between Alberta and the rest of Canada," Mr. Freeman said. The survey also found that Alberta's industries led the country in 2005 in the releases of conventional air pollutants, substances such as smog-causing nitrogen oxides and small particulate matter linked to respiratory illnesses such as asthma and bronchitis. Saskatchewan companies were also relatively big greenhouse-gas emitters in 2005, with larger discharges than all the businesses in Quebec, a province with a population more than seven times larger. Saskatchewan ranks so high because it relies heavily on coal for generating electricity, while Quebec generates most of its power from cleaner hydro electricity. All major companies in Canada are required to file annual emission data with Environment Canada showing how much pollution they release into the country's air, water and soil. About half of all greenhouse-gas emissions in Canada are released by industries. Environmentalists are zeroing in on these releases because they believe it would be easier for governments to pass regulations controlling pollution from a handful of major companies than to convince millions of motorists to drive less or purchase more fuel-efficient cars. "If you deal with the biggest emitters first, I think you would deal with a significant portion of the problem," said Fe de Leon, a researcher at the Canadian Environmental Law Association. The Harper government says it favours placing industries under intensity targets when it comes to greenhouse gases. Under these targets, companies would have to ensure that emissions for each unit of output decline over time. theglobeandmail.com

To: Crocodile who wrote (19)	3/18/2007 6:28:57 AM
From: Wharf Rat	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 49167

"Wonder where they'll find the fuel to keep running all of these planes." Liquified coal Army Foresees Natural Gas Crisis The Pentagon has been talking recently about going oil-free by 2050, a fairly radical initiative given the hidebound nature of the institution and the complexity of the technologies it employs. But oil apparently is among the least of the Army's energy problems. According to this newly-minted memorandum , the Army's assistant chief of staff for installation management is more worried that the worldwide supply of natural gas will dry up within 25 years. Says the memo: "Current Army assumption is that natural gas may cease to be a viable fueld for the Army within the next 25 years based on price volatility and affordable supply availability." If the Army's assumptions are correct, the situation may "threaten the Army's ability to house, train and deploy soldiers," adds the memo. What will replace natural gas? This is certainly not my field of expertise, but perhaps readers or other bloggers may have something to add here. I know the Air Force is keen about a new form of synthetic fuel derived from liquefied coal to power its jet aircraft. A demonstration is underway with the B-52, which is actually using a slightly different synthetic product derived from -- oops -- natural gas. The fuel is made using a process known as Fischer-Trope, which has the unfortunate distinction of being employed by only two countries -- Nazi Germany and apartheid South Africa. -- Stephen Trimble defensetech.org

To: Crocodile who wrote (19)	3/20/2007 11:17:50 AM
From: Wharf Rat	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 49167

We'll keep them flying, one way or the other :>) Using Fats for Flying, Not Frying By Mick Kulikowski, NC State News Services It really does take a rocket scientist to coax jet fuel out of animal fat. Not to mention a chemical and biomolecular engineer as well as a biological and agricultural engineer. New biofuels technology developed by this diverse set of NC State engineers has the potential to turn virtually any fat source – vegetable oils, oils from animal fat and even oils from algae – into fuel to power jet airplanes. The technology – called Centia™, which is derived from “crudus potentia,” or “green power” in Latin – is “100 percent green,” as no petroleum-derived products are added to the process. Centia™ can also be used to make additives for cold-weather biodiesel fuels and holds the potential to fuel automobiles that currently run on gasoline. NC State received provisional patents to use the process to convert fats into jet fuel or additives for cold-weather biodiesel fuels. The technology has been licensed by Diversified Energy Corp., a privately held Arizona company specializing in the development of advanced alternative and renewable energy technologies and projects. Dr. William Roberts, professor of mechanical and aerospace engineering and director of the Applied Energy Research Laboratory at NC State, developed the biofuels process with NC State’s Dr. Henry Lamb, associate professor of chemical and biomolecular engineering; Dr. Larry Stikeleather, professor of biological and agricultural engineering; and Tim Turner of Turner Engineering in Carrboro, N.C. Roberts says that besides being “100 percent green,” the new technology has some key advantages over other biofuel projects. “We can take virtually any lipid-based feedstock, or raw material with a fat source – including what is perceived as low-quality feedstock like cooking grease – and turn it into virtually any fuel,” Roberts says. “Using low-quality feedstock is typically 30 percent less costly than using corn or canola oils to make fuel. And we’re not competing directly with the food supply, like ethanol-based fuels that are made from corn.” The fuel created by the new process also burns cleaner, so it’s better for the environment, Roberts says. There is no soot or particulate matter associated with fuel from fats. Further, Roberts says, the Centia™ process puts to use what other biodiesel processes throw away. Converting feedstock into fuel produces a low-value commodity – glycerol – as a by-product. Rather than discarding glycerol as waste like most biodiesel plants do, the NC State engineers’ process burns glycerol cleanly and efficiently to provide some of the process’ requisite high temperatures. “Instead of composting the glycerol as waste, we use it as an integral part of the fuel-making process,” Roberts said. Finally, the physical and chemical properties of traditional biodiesel fuels – their combustion characteristics and viscosity, for example – don’t match the stringent requirements required of jet fuels, making biodiesel unacceptable for the task. For example, Roberts says, “Jet fuel travels at 25,000 to 35,000 feet where temperatures can reach 70 degrees below zero Fahrenheit, so it needs to flow better in cold temperatures.” While the concept of turning hog lard into jet fuel might cause some to say it’ll only be possible when pigs fly, Roberts thinks the new process has the potential to be well received by the aviation industry. “We produce one-and-a-half billion gallons of animal fats annually, which is about half of the amount of vegetable oil produced yearly,” Roberts said. “Animal fats are harder to work with, but cheaper. Last year, for the first time ever, fuel costs in the aviation industry exceeded labor costs. We think the aviation industry is keen on finding alternatives to petroleum-based jet fuel.” news.ncsu.edu