The world (including us) seems intent on continuing our conga-lemming dance over the cliff and into a shallow future.
My years of banging on about the dangers of climate change may not have been sufficiently informative or inspiring to change much, but my attitude and opinion on the phenomenon haven’t shifted significantly — only my surprise at the increasing speed with which the catastrophes are piling up.
“The upcoming election provides another opportunity for politicians to clarify their position on the issue, and to act. My prediction is that not much of any use will happen.”
Several months ago, before the election was called, I emailed both Ellis Ross and Taylor Bachrach, offering to buy them lunch to discuss climate issues — particularly those relating to LNG, which seems to be almost everyone’s hope for a prosperous energy future.
Neither candidate replied, although I’ve spoken to Mr. Bachrach on the issue several times, and he says he supports climate action.
Apparently, Mr. Ross once opposed the proposed Northern Gateway Pipeline intended to carry dilbit to Asian markets. However, his strong support for LNG is evident. The industry argument is that gas is cleaner than coal and that we can make a lot of money selling it to China, helping them move away from coal-fired electricity.
Careful analysis of this claim has concluded that, if any difference between the two fuels exists, considering all factors involved, shipping LNG to China is worse for the climate than burning Chinese coal. These factors include leaking methane — another potent greenhouse gas — at the wellheads and along the pipelines, the energy costs of liquefaction, burning bunker fuel while shipping the liquefied gas, fuelling transport within China to reach generating facilities, and then the burning of the gas itself.
In the recent provincial election, I emailed this study to our new MLA, Claire Rattée, suggesting she might want to understand it before basing her political reputation on LNG. She never replied. Bad news may sell newspapers, but not politicians.
Nearly everyone, including our NDP government and some First Nations, appears to love LNG. The argument goes that we’ve got abundant gas and we’d be foolish not to sell it, despite the obvious and accumulating dangers. If we don’t do so, other nations like the central Asian republics, Russia, and Saudi Arabia will — so we might as well take our share. We might seem naïve for taking the high road and refusing to join this mad scramble to sell gas, but it appears we’ve opted for the low road.
We’re already complicit in much of the climate wreckage inflicted globally: increasingly severe hurricanes, wildfires, droughts leading to forced migration, political insecurity, wildlife destruction, ocean acidification, coral bleaching, human starvation — and the list continues. I’m not sure how much of Canada must burn before people realise there are more important issues at stake than buying their next new pickup. Apparently, more.
Most politicians are reputable, decent people, one hopes doing their best for their constituency, the country, and the world beyond. However, in a political environment driven by social media lies and mudslinging, it’s difficult to remain hopeful.
To riff on Game of Thrones’ “winter is coming” — summer is coming. Ready for the burn?
