Sunday, October 31, 2021

Climate change means Arctic may no longer be a safe haven for nesting birds

New predators, diseases and shifting weather patterns

 threaten migratory birds

A polar bear causes chaos in a colony of thick-billed murres, photographed on Coats Island (Appatuurjuaq), Nunavut in July, 2011. (Kyle Elliott)

Our planet is changing. So is our journalism. This story is part of a CBC News initiative entitled Our Changing Planet to show and explain the effects of climate change and what is being done about it.

Wildlife research scientist Paul Smith is a lot like the birds he studies: every spring, when the ice recedes, he migrates north to the Arctic. But while he's been able to adapt to the changing climate, the nesting birds have not been so lucky in the face of new threats.

Historically, in Cape Dorset, Nunavut, when migratory birds would sit on their nests in June and July to incubate their eggs, polar bears were still out on the ice eating seals.

These days, Smith has witnessed an earlier ice melt that leads to bears coming to shore sooner. That means the birds' breeding ground becomes a snack bar.

"The bears are swimming onto islands where there are nesting colonies of birds, and gobbling up thousands of eggs," said Smith, who works for the National Wildlife Research Centre at Environment and Climate Change Canada.

An eider duck is pictured on Southampton Island, Nunavut. Polar bear incursions on the birds' nesting colonies have increased by more than seven times since the 1980s, according to a study co-authored by Smith and Grant Gilchrist. (Grant Gilchrist/Twitter)

In recent years, Inuit elders have reported seeing more bears near their communities, which has led to deadly attacks in some cases. Smith and his fellow research scientists stopped sleeping in tents and now stay in small cabins, surrounded by electric fences. 

Birds such as eider ducks and thick-billed murres are struggling to adapt.

"One bear can eat a thousand eggs in a sitting, and wipe out an entire nesting colony island, and that's it for that year for those birds," Smith said. 

It's a lose-lose situation — the eggs are not enough to substitute a polar bear's traditional diet of seals, which they can't access once the ice melts — and yet the loss of all those eggs is a major blow to the local population of birds.

New predators, parasites and pathogens

A polar bear enjoys a snack of eider eggs on East Bay Island, Nunavut, in 2017. (Evan Richardson/Environment and Climate Change Canada)

A recent qualitative review paper argues that the introduction of new predators is one example of how climate change is eroding the benefits of northward migration for birds, insects and other species around the world.

The authors suggest the Arctic is no longer the safe harbour for breeding and nesting that it once was.

The report, Animal migration to northern latitudes: environmental changes and increasing threatsexplores how climate change is shifting Arctic and boreal habitats by contributing to the spread of parasites and diseases, an increase in predators, and timing gaps between when food supply is available and when offspring need to feed. 

"The [impact on] species could be like a domino," said co-author Tamás Székely, an evolutionary biologist and professor of biodiversity at the University of Bath in England.

Research scientist Paul Smith, left, is pictured with long-time research assistant Josiah Nakoolak, right. Smith has been doing summer fieldwork in the Arctic for the past 20 years in collaboration with local Inuit experts. ( Grant Gilchrist/Environment and Climate Change Canada)

He said it's difficult to know what will happen if climate change continues at this rate — some birds might stop migrating or migrate differently, while others may not be able to adapt. 

"It will not be better, that's for sure," Székely said.

One of the studies cited by the paper has had some of its claims contested by other scientists, including Smith, who said the new report exaggerates some specifics, such as the rates of predation of shorebirds. 

Still, Smith said the report raises important ideas about climate change and the benefits of migration.

  • Have questions about COP26 or climate science, policy or politics? Email us: ask@cbc.ca. Your input helps inform our coverage.

"Migratory birds definitely are susceptible to climate change more so than other animals, because they're travelling through a whole bunch of different environments throughout the year," Smith said. 

Migratory shorebirds in decline

The rufa red knot has one of the longest migrations among bird species, and its numbers are in steep decline. During an annual count in the spring of 2021, conservationists found numbers of the shore birds had dropped to the lowest since tallies began 40 years ago. (Submitted by May Haga)

The Arctic is warming at more than twice the global average, and how that factors into the decline of certain bird populations is a topic experts say should be studied more — especially when it's well known that these species are already dealing with more pressures and threats along their flight north.

Shorebirds are among some of the most rapidly declining birds in Canada, according to the 2019 State of Canada's Birds report, published by the North American Bird Conservation Initiative and Nature Canada.

Ted Chesky, naturalist director with Nature Canada, said climate change can, for instance, change the dates when certain insects hatch. This means food might not be available at a specific location where birds stop on their flight north.

"The birds arrive, and there's no food there. You're driving across a long distance and you get to a gas station and you're almost out of gas, and there's nothing there," Chesky said.  

The steep decline in population of the rufa red knot shorebird is an example that experts point to as a canary in the coalmine, so to speak.

Every year, the terracotta-orange coloured birds travel 30,000 kilometers round-trip between Tierra del Fuego, an archipelago at the southernmost tip of South America, and the Canadian Arctic, where they breed. The red knot has one of the longest migrations of the bird kingdom, and that makes the bird more vulnerable to the ripple effects of climate change along its journey.

"Basically, they're travelling along the entire length of the hemisphere — expecting certain conditions at certain times — and everything is out of whack because of climate change," Smith said. 

Researchers say they're concerned about what will happen if, year after year, the birds that survive their risky journey north arrive in the Arctic only to discover the weather or food supply isn't favourable for nesting. 

"Sometimes, they'll even just turn around and start their leisurely migration back because they know it's not worth the energy," Chesky said. "If that happens over successive years, then you start losing generations of birds."

Eider ducks survive cholera, only to face new predator

Even when birds do survive or adapt to new threats in the Arctic, it's often only one of several shifting conditions they're up against.

Grant Gilchrist, a research scientist with Environment and Climate Change Canada, was part of a team of scientists who worked with Inuit experts to investigate an avian cholera outbreak that was killing off an Arctic colony of eiders, birds that had never been exposed to it before. Their findings were published in 2016.

Gilchrist said it's impossible to know definitively whether the spread of avian cholera was caused directly by climate change.

Since that study, the eiders have developed antibodies and fewer members of the colony are dying off as a result of the disease. But, that's not the only threat the local population is facing.

"The colony is not recovering," Gilchrist said. 

That's because polar bears are eating their eggs, which has resulted in "almost complete reproductive failure of the colony for the last five to seven years," he said. In other words, the eiders' offspring aren't surviving.  

Experts say it's difficult to predict exactly what will happen to birds who rely on the safe haven of the Arctic to breed, but they generally agree that if the world continues on the path that it's on right now, it doesn't bode well.

The complex domino effects of climate change on vulnerable species is exactly why, researchers say, it is essential that leaders commit to measures to cut emissions and slow the rate of climate change, while also putting conservation measures into place to protect vital habitats. 

"Major societal change in the way we live, making our economies more circular, respecting nature, these things are all a fundamental part of where we've got to go," Chesky said.

WATCH | Arctic nations discuss the perils of a warming climate:


Alberta has much on the line as UN climate conference gets set to begin

By Amanda Stephenson The Canadian Press
Posted October 30, 2021 
 Oilfield pumpjack on an oil well, foreground, and wind energy turbines on a wind farm near Carmangay, Alberta on Sept. 10. 2020.
 (THE CANADIAN PRESS IMAGES/Larry MacDougal)

As world leaders descend on Glasgow this week for the start of the 2021 UN Climate Conference, Alberta, the Canadian jurisdiction with perhaps the most on the line, will be watching.


COP26, as it is known, will be the most significant global climate change summit since Paris in 2015.

At that time, Canada committed to reducing the country’s greenhouse gas emissions by 30 per cent below 2005 levels by 2030, with the aim of keeping global warming below 1.5 degrees Celsius.

READ MORE: Alberta economy to return to pre-pandemic levels by 2022; Calgary mayor sets stage for city’s recovery

That target led directly to a number of actions taken by the Trudeau government, including the introduction of a federal price on carbon and a clean fuel standard that is on the way.

The federal government has since raised the bar for its own emissions reductions ambitions, saying it now aims for a 40 to 45 per cent reduction by 2035. To help meet that target, the government has announced five-year emissions reductions targets for the oil and gas industry as well as regulations around methane.

These types of policy implications are the reason why many in Alberta — home to Canada’s oil and gas industry — will be closely watching to see what comes of the Glasgow summit.

“It’s important. It does have influence on policy and the development of the resources,” said Tristan Goodman, president of the Explorers and Producers Association of Canada, a lobby group that represents oil and gas companies.

Goodman said while in the past, the oil and gas industry may have looked to the UN climate summits with a sense of trepidation, that’s no longer the case. Since Paris, Goodman said, the industry has undergone a sea change in its understanding of the climate change issue, with many companies making net-zero commitments of their own and investing in everything from hydrogen to carbon capture and storage to wind power.


“Most of the energy companies in Canada, they know they’re going through an energy transition. And they’ve moved well past acceptance of that, into looking at the opportunities,” Goodman said.


The Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers (CAPP) will send its own delegation to the Glasgow summit, including CAPP president Tim McMillan.

However, neither Alberta Premier Jason Kenney nor any of his cabinet ministers will attend the climate summit. In an email, Environment Minister Jason Nixon said the UCP government is avoiding non-essential travel right now, adding, “one more politician flying into Glasgow is not going to make any meaningful difference.”


Nixon said Alberta takes climate change seriously, pointing to the province’s own methane reduction targets as well as its ahead-of-schedule phase-out of coal-fired electricity.

But he said Alberta, and the province’s energy industry, are frustrated with Canada’s “ever-changing emissions targets” and needs clarity and predictability when it comes to climate policy.

NON PARTISAN MEANS 'CONSERVATIVE' GARY WAS A CABINET MINISTER IN THE ALBERTA PROGRESSIVE CONSERVATIVE GOVT OF RALPH KLEIN
Gary Mar, president and chief executive of the Calgary-based non-partisan think tank The Canada West Foundation, said many Albertans are concerned that COP26 will mean an evermore aggressive push towards the total phase-out of fossil fuels. He said the energy industry is making real strides on emissions reductions, but it’s foolish for anyone to suggest it can flip on a dime overnight or be replaced tomorrow by renewables.


“You can’t actually make a transition just by taking things away. You actually have to know what it’s going to be replaced by,” Mar said.

READ MORE: Guilbeault says he is ‘cautiously optimistic’ about UN climate summit

Critics, however, say Alberta is not doing all it can on the climate front. The province doesn’t even have an overall emissions goal in place, said Simon Dyer, deputy executive director of the Pembina Institute, a clean-energy think tank.

“Alberta is responsible for the largest proportion of Canada’s total emissions, the oil and gas sector is the largest single economic subsector, so Canada cannot achieve the emissions reductions it needs to achieve without the jurisdiction that’s responsible for the largest portion of those emissions,” Dyer said.


Dan Balaban, chief executive of Alberta-based renewable energy company Greengate Power, said Canada needs to use the Glasgow summit as a prompt to move past talk and into action. He said it’s important to get government funds flowing to the renewable energy sector, though that may involve tough choices.

“There are all sorts of industries that are out there vying for government support of some kind. The fossil fuel industry as well as the renewable energy industry,” Balaban said.

“And if we’re going to achieve our net zero ambitions, we need to make very clear who we intend to support going forward.”
© 2021 The Canadian Press
New federal environment minister says his climate plan is not a ‘secret agend

By Mia Rabson The Canadian Press
Posted October 27, 2021 

The new federal environment minister is reassuring Albertans that he is not going to try to kill jobs in oil and gas. Steven Guilbeault co-founded an organization named in a recent inquiry looking into critics of the province's oil sector. But as Breanna Karstens-Smith reports, he is promising to work with the province.



OTTAWA — Newly minted Environment Minister Steven Guilbeault said Wednesday there is nothing “really new“ in the political rhetoric between Alberta and Ottawa around climate change this week, and shrugged off any suggestion his appointment will make that relationship more difficult than it already is.

Guilbeault is a former environmental activist from Quebec who has called the oilsands “dirty” and argued that pipelines and oil and gas expansion are not compatible with meeting Canada’s climate goals.

Elected in 2019, he was appointed to cabinet but not to the environment post many expected. Instead, he spent the last two years as minister of heritage while former cleantech CEO Jonathan Wilkinson shepherded through net-zero climate legislation and stronger greenhouse gas targets in the Environment Department.

There was talk in 2019 that Guilbeault’s appointment would have rubbed salt in the open sore that was the Ottawa-Alberta relationship. But that all changed Tuesday when Prime Minister Justin Trudeau majorly shook up his inner circle, moving Wilkinson to Natural Resources and Guilbeault into Environment.

READ MORE: Jim Carr out of cabinet, no more special envoy to Prairies for Liberal government

It was not, Guilbeault insists, at his demand.

“I was never promised anything and I never asked for anything either,” he said in an interview with The Canadian Press.

But rub salt in the wound it has, with Conservative MPs critical of the decision and Alberta Premier Jason Kenney warning that Guilbeault’s appointment to the environment portfolio sent a “problematic message” to his province about Ottawa’s plans for the oil and gas sector. He called Guilbeault’s “personal background and track record” on climate and oil and gas concerning.

Guilbeault dismissed any suggestion he will make the job of Ottawa-Alberta relations more thorny, pushing back with his own criticism of Kenney for skipping the United Nations COP26 climate talks that start next week in Scotland.

“I’m disappointed that Jason Kenney won’t be in Glasgow, other premiers will be there,” he said in a post-cabinet scrum Wednesday.

READ MORE: Trudeau unveils new cabinet with 9 new faces, major shake ups to top jobs

And he said Kenney using his appointment to pick a fight with Ottawa on climate action is just new lyrics to the same old song.

“Alberta has been trying to pick a fight with us on climate for quite some time,” he told The Canadian Press.

“They’ve taken us to court on carbon pricing, they’re taking us to court on environmental impact assessment. There’s nothing really new or surprising about that.”

Canada’s climate plan also isn’t changing with him in charge, said Guilbeault, noting it was not secret before and it’s not secret now that the plan is to curb emissions from every sector, including oil and gas.

READ MORE: Shortage of rig workers could slow Canadian oilpatch recovery, industry warns

Among his first priorities will be legislating or regulating an emissions cap on oil and gas, and then setting targets to force them downward over the next 30 years, in five-year increments.

The details of how and when are yet to be developed but Guilbeault said Wednesday the cap will be set at “current emissions” and go down from there.

The oil and gas industry produced almost 200 million tonnes of greenhouse gases in 2019, more than one-quarter of Canada’s total emissions. Catherine Abreu, executive director of Destination Zero, said climate action won’t be successful without getting those down.

She said the political will to do it has not been there before.

Prime Minister Justin Trudeau has instead tried to balance support for the fossil fuel sector with climate policy, without much success. Canada’s emissions are likely lower than they would have been without Trudeau’s climate policies, but they’re still about seven million tonnes higher than they were when he took office.

READ MORE: Alberta public inquiry finds no wrongdoing in anti-oilsands campaign

Almost all of that growth is due to oil and gas extraction and road transportation.

Guilbeault’s first job will be to sell Canada’s climate plan on the global stage. On Monday, the United Nations COP26 climate talks kick off in Glasgow.

Guilbeault is no stranger to COP meetings — this will be his 19th. But it’s his first from the government side of the table. He said Canada, like everyone else in the world, needs to do more to slow global warming, and that’s the message Canada will be pushing in Scotland.

The COP26 meetings, delayed one year by COVID-19, are intended to finalize the rule book for the Paris accord, including on such matters as how carbon emissions trading can work between countries, and what each country has to report about progress toward climate goals.

WOW THEY AGREE
Kenney, Notley both upset with Trudeau's choice of environment minister




Premier Jason Kenney and NDP leader Rachel Notley both express concerns about Canada's new environment minister on Oct. 26, 2021.


Sean Amato
CTV News Edmonton
Follow | Contact
Updated Oct. 26, 2021 6:07 p.m. MDT

EDMONTON -

A pair of rival Alberta politicians had a rare moment of agreement on Tuesday: both are unhappy with the prime minister's pick for environment minister.

Steven Guilbeault, formerly a leader of Greenpeace Quebec and co-founder of Equiterre, was appointed to the position by Justin Trudeau Tuesday.

Alberta Premier Jason Kenney said he was worried Guilbeault would impose a "radical agenda that would lead to mass unemployment."

Environmental groups welcome Guilbeault's appointment as new environment minister, with some reservations

Both Equiterre and Guilbeault were mentioned in the final report of a commission, struck in July 2019, to look into allegations that environmentalists were accepting foreign money to fund campaigns aimed at impeding expansion of Alberta's oilsands, a major source of greenhouse gases.

The inquiry found Canadian environmental groups were exercising their democratic rights of free speech when they accepted foreign funding for campaigns opposing oilsands development, which the Alberta government has coloured wrong depite not being illegal. Equiterre, the report's commissioner wrote, sought to "frustrate" oil sands development.

Guilbeault left Equiterre in 2018.

"I hope that he will send a signal that he is willing to work constructively and cooperatively with us, as partners, in reducing greenhouse gas emissions while growing the economy," Kenney said.

NDP Leader Rachel Notley agreed with Kenney before quickly adding it's his government's job to sell Alberta's industry and environmental initiatives.

"I share some of the concerns about some of the historical positions taken by that minister in the past, some of his anti-pipeline commentary, that is certainly troubling," she said.


"After 30 years of fighting climate change outside of government, I am humbled and I am honoured to be given the opportunity to accelerate our fight against climate change as Canada’s new Minister of Environment and Climate Change," Guilbeault tweeted.

The new minister said one of his first assignments was to attend an upcoming UN Climate Change Conference in Scotland.

Notley said Kenney or Environment Minister Jason Nixon should join him there to promote Alberta's industry.

Nixon called Guilbeault a "radical environmentalist" and invited him to come out west so he can see Alberta oil and gas operations for himself.

Some environmental groups applauded Guilbeault's appointment.

With files from CTV News Edmonton's Chelan Skulski and The Canadian Press


  


Oilpatch concerned as former Greenpeace activist Steven Guilbeault named environment minister

Alberta Premier Jason Kenney said Guilbeault’s appointment sent a 'very problematic' signal to the province

Author of the article:Geoffrey Morgan
Publishing date:Oct 26, 2021 •
Minister of Environment and Climate Change, Steven Guilbeault speaks during a press conference in Ottawa, Canada on Oct. 26, 2021.
 PHOTO BY LARS HAGBERG/AFP VIA GETTY IMAGES FILES

CALGARY — A former activist is the new environment minister in Canada and the oil and gas industry is extremely concerned.

Prime Minister Justin Trudeau picked Steven Guilbeault, a former Greenpeace activist and founder of the Quebec environmental group Équiterre, to be the country’s next environment minister Tuesday in a move that oil patch insiders say is disappointing and concerning.

Guilbeault, who was previously heritage minister, succeeds Jonathan Wilkinson at Environment and Climate Change Canada. Wilkinson is the country’s new Natural Resources Minister.

Alberta Premier Jason Kenney said Guilbeault’s appointment sent a “very problematic” signal to the province, which is the largest oil-and-gas-producing region in the country.

“I certainly hope that the new minister, Minister Guilbeault, will quickly demonstrate to Alberta and other resource producing provinces a desire to work together constructively on practical solutions that don’t end up killing hundreds of thousands of jobs, but his own personal background and track record on these issues suggests somebody who is more of an absolutist than a pragmatist,” Kenney said. “I hope that I’m wrong about that.”

Alberta Premier Jason Kenney in Edmonton on Oct. 26, 2021. 
PHOTO BY GREG SOUTHAM/POSTMEDIA

One energy executive, who declined to speak on the record, said they would wait to see the mandate letters for Guilbeault and Wilkinson before they make any conclusions but they are concerned that Guilbeault will now have the power to start and stop major project reviews under the Impact Assessment Act.

There are also concerns about Guilbeault’s hostile history to oil and gas extraction. He vehemently opposed the Trans Mountain Pipeline expansion from Alberta to B.C. and has previously been arrested for protesting oil and gas infrastructure.

“This will be very concerning and frustrating for everyone who’s part of the natural resource economy in Canada,” said Heather Exner-Pirot, a fellow at the Macdonald-Laurier Institute, adding that a former Greenpeace activist “will have significant influence on how we go forward with our resource development.”

La Presse newspaper once dubbed Guilbeault “the green Jesus of Montreal.”

“The background is concerning,” said Jeremy McCrea, who covers Canadian oil and gas stocks for Raymond James.

“It’s the perception that that’s the kind of person that will have more of a voice in the Trudeau cabinet,” he said, adding it could add to the “political headwinds for an investor that’s worried about the political landscape here.”

This will be very concerning and frustrating for everyone who’s part of the natural resource economy in Canada
HEATHER EXNER-PIROT


Guilbeault scaled the CN Tower in Toronto in 2001 while working with Greenpeace to unfurl a banner that called Canada and former U.S. president George Bush “climate killers.”

“After 30 years of fighting climate change outside of government, I am humbled and I am honoured to be given the opportunity to accelerate our fight against climate change as Canada’s new Minister of Environment and Climate Change,” Guilbeault said in a social media post Tuesday.

Greenpeace applauded both Guilbeault’s appointment and Wilkinson’s shift to the natural resources portfolio on Tuesday.

“Minister Guilbeault knows the file, he knows the key players and he understands just how much is at stake,” Keith Stewart, senior energy strategist at Greenpeace Canada, said in a statement. “He’s also a practical person who knows the rules, which is important because implementing and raising the Liberal government’s climate commitments is going to take the whole government pulling hard in the same direction.”

Mount Royal University political scientist Duane Bratt expected “heads exploding” in both the Calgary oil patch and in the Alberta Legislature on Tuesday.

“They’ve just flown a huge red flag in front of the Kenney government and some elements of the oil patch,” Bratt said.


Bratt said the appointment comes immediately before the global COP26 climate conference in Glasgow begins this weekend and is likely intended to signal Canada’s commitment to reducing emissions. “They’re walking in with tougher targets and a stronger commitment to climate change,” he said.

The Calgary oil patch has made the case in previous years that emissions can be reduced without cuts to crude oil production, which is a case the industry and the provincial government will need to make again to the incoming environmental minister.

“The question is sometimes framed as to whether or not we should have a fossil (fuel) free future. That is the wrong question, the correct question is whether we should have an emissions free future,” said Gary Mar, president and CEO of the Canada West Foundation. “Energy is good, it’s the emissions that are bad.”

With files from the Canadian Press

Canadian oil producers eye new pipeline route to Gulf Coast as Marathon reverses Capline conduit

Canadian producers don’t have to be physically shipping on the Capline to benefit from the reversal

Author of the article: Geoffrey Morgan
Publishing date: Oct 28, 2021 •
A storage tank at the Marathon Petroleum Corp. Catlettsburg refinery in Catlettsburg, Kentucky, U.S., on Oct. 18, 2016. P
HOTO BY LUKE SHARRETT/BLOOMBERG FILES


CALGARY — Canadian oil producers may soon enjoy higher prices for the crude they sell into the U.S. as a major south-to-north pipeline is in the final stages of a reversal — an under-appreciated event that could lift the prospects of the domestic oil industry.

Ohio-based Marathon Pipelines LLC filed tariffs for transportation of crude oil on its Capline pipeline from Patoka, Ill. to St. James, Louisiana for rates effective Oct. 25, according to RBN Energy, an energy markets consultancy.

Capline was the largest south-to-north flowing pipeline in the United States with a capacity of 1.2 million barrels of oil per day, but owner Marathon Petroleum has been working to reverse the flow since 2017, which would allow both heavy and light oil to flow from a storage hub in the U.S. Midwest to a major refining centre on the Gulf Coast. The company website notes that the reversal will be completed this year.

“They’re doing line fill right now,” BMO Capital Markets analyst Randy Ollenberger said of the Capline, adding that he expected the pipeline to shrink Western Canada Select discounts relative to West Texas Intermediate oil prices to US$10 per barrel. A barrel of WCS traded up 1.67 per cent Thursday to US$67.08, which implies a US$15.50 per barrel discount relative to the WTI price of US$82.58 per barrel.

“We don’t know who has contracts on the Capline, but we do think that everybody benefits in the sense that the spread comes in. You don’t have to be physically shipping on the Capline to benefit,” Ollenberger said, adding that he expects to see the impact of the line on the bottomlines of Canadian producers in the second quarter of 2022.

Oil producers contacted by the Financial Post said they expected the project would improve the returns of their barrels.

“I’m excited about it. I think the Capline reversal would certainly be a positive for Canadian producers and improve pipeline optionality, specifically for the heavier producers, but it’ll de-weight the entire pipeline system in Canada,” Grant Fagerheim, president and CEO of Whitecap Resources Inc., told the Financial Post, referring to problems where Canadian oil exports have exceeded pipeline capacity in the past.




Fagerheim said he would look at using the Capline to move more of his company’s oil to the U.S. Gulf Coast, adding the option of delivering oil to either the U.S. Midwest or the U.S. Gulf Coast provides some “insurance” for the oilpatch by providing a diversity of markets.

Credit ratings agency Fitch also expects the Capline reversal to draw crude oil from Canada, North Dakota and “mid continent” into the U.S. Gulf Coast.

To use the Capline, Canadian oil producers will need to ship their crude on Enbridge Inc.’s Mainline pipeline system to the U.S. Midwest, and then switch to the Enbridge’s Southern Access pipeline connected to the Patoka oil storage hub, which provides direct access to the Capline and a straight shot to the refineries of the U.S. Gulf Coast.

The Capline reversal is coming into service in tandem with Enbridge’s 760,000-bpd Line 3 replacement project, which the Calgary-based pipeline giant completed in September and is now fully operational. The Capline rates range from $1.75 per barrel for shippers committing to move more than 100,000 barrels per day on the line to $3.75 per barrel on a spot basis.

For years, Canadian oil producers sold the majority of their barrels to refiners in the U.S. Midwest. TC Energy Corp.’s Keystone XL pipeline was proposed as a way to reduce the dependence on that market by taking 830,000 bpd directly to the U.S. Gulf Coast, which is home to the world’s largest concentration of heavy oil refineries.

At times when gasoline demand in the Midwest declined or refineries in the region were offline for maintenance, the Canadian heavy oil barrels, called Western Canada Select, suffered large — sometimes as high as US$40 per barrel — discounts relative to West Texas Intermediate benchmark.

The same thing happened when Canadian oil production outstripped pipeline capacity in late 2018.

The Capline reversal functions like a “mini Keystone XL,” said Rory Johnston, managing director and market economist at Price Street in Toronto, adding that it would provide oil producers the option to ship to the Midwest or the Gulf Coast.

“On its face, I don’t think it should have a direct narrowing impact (on WCS/WTI differentials) because it’s not really increasing egress from (Alberta) proper, but there is a pretty robust monopsony and buyer concentration for Canadian players in the U.S. Midwest,” Johnston said.

“It reduces the likelihood of big, big blowouts should you see issues like heavier maintenance (in the Midwest region) , for instance,” he said.

“This will certainly help to keep the differentials tighter than what we’ve seen in the past because you’ll have more egress optionality out of Western Canada,” said Martin King, senior analyst with RBN Energy, adding he expected the reversal could help differentials trade within the US$12 per barrel to US$14 per barrel range.

Marathon did not respond to a request for comment on when the reversed Capline would begin flowing large volumes of heavy crude oil. The project is scheduled to begin shipping small volumes of light oil this year, followed by heavier blends in 2022.

Saturday, October 30, 2021

Project Pele: Why the DoD is Betting on Tiny Nuclear Reactors to Solve Its Power Woes

By Jessica Hall on October 29, 2021



In 2019, the government signed a declaration mandating that we develop an itty bitty nuclear reactor by 2027. In compliance with that order, the US Air Force is launching a “microreactor” pilot project at Eielson AFB, in Alaska.


Per usual, the Air Force is playing its cards pretty close to the chest. As of October 27, the Office of Energy Assurance (OEA) hasn’t even announced that they’ve chosen a specific reactor technology. But all evidence suggests that this new installation is part of an energy-resilience effort known as Project Pele. The goal of Project Pele, according to the Dept. of Defense’s Research and Engineering office, is to “design, build, and demonstrate a prototype mobile nuclear reactor within five years.” Three separate development contracts have been awarded, with the final “mature” design submissions TBA.

Project Pele has two main themes: the reactor has to be 1) small, and 2) safe. What we’ve learned from Chernobyl and Fukushima is that failure of the coolant system can have terrible consequences, and in both cases, power failure to the cooling system is what allowed the fuel to become so hot that it entered meltdown. Failure is simply unacceptable. With nuclear power, we also have to consider decay heat and spent fuel disposal. Inability to dispose of hazardous byproducts counts as being unsafe. Even worse, the same stuff we use to make the power can be used to make weapons. But the new Generation IV reactors can further the conversation.

Without getting all breathless, I want to talk about one of the three designs likely being put forth in particular. One of the commercial contractors chosen to submit a design is a domestic outfit called X-Energy, whose higher-ups come from NASA and the US Department of Energy. Its CEO, Jeffrey Sells, previously served as Deputy Secretary of Energy, and founder Kam Ghaffarian operated a NASA service contractor that supported the former Mission Operations Data Systems at Goddard. The X-energy model is a Gen IV high-temperature gas-cooled pebble bed reactor. It uses TRISO fuel pellets or “pebbles” (TRISO stands for TRi-structural ISOtropic particle fuel) loaded into a column that’s then flooded with a heavy, nonreactive gas. And the whole thing is absolutely tiny: X-energy’s website describes their reactors not as building sites, but as modular products, shippable using existing road and rail.


The pebble-bed model used by X-Energy is clearly meant to specifically address many known failure points of nuclear power production. Whether it actually delivers on that promise is yet to be seen, because this is all still in the planning stages, but the design principles are there. First and worst is meltdown, which X-Energy is mitigating via the composition of the fuel itself. The TRISO pebbles are made of granules of uranium oxycarbide the size of poppyseeds, layered with pyrolytic graphite and embedded within a silicon carbide firebreak. The whole thing is the size of a cue ball.

Silicon carbide is what NASA uses in the heat shielding for numerous spacecraft. It’s tough stuff, very strong under pressure, and very difficult to melt. Carbides aren’t melted and cast like regular metals, because their melt points are higher than any other metal. Instead, uranium oxycarbide is created using spark plasma sintering. TRISO pebbles are also passively governed by a negative-feedback mechanism that starves the fuel of neutrons as the temperature rises, independent of any active or mechanical control. Higher temperatures mean falling reaction power, enforced by the nature of the material itself. It’s hard to have a meltdown if your fuel just… won’t melt.

Explosions also present their own set of dangers, including particulate from burning fissile material or graphite shielding. In this design, the reaction is held at temperatures far above the annealing point of graphite. This prevents stray potential energy from neutron bombardment from getting “stuck” in the graphite’s crystal lattice and eventually escaping in an uncontrolled burst, which is what happened in the Windscale fire. Pyrolytic carbon can burn in air if it’s also in the presence of enough water to catalyze the reaction, but there is no water-cooling loop, which prevents a steam explosion.

The use of uranium oxycarbide instead of uranium oxide or carbide is intended to reduce the oxygen stoichiometry; carbides are strong under pressure but not under expansion, so the oxycarbide should produce less gas under decomposition. That means that even if one of the carbide pebbles should rupture, smothered in the heavier-than-air gas, it won’t catch fire. The coolant never leaves the gas phase. The design relies on simply placing a critical mass of fissile material inside a gas-cooled reaction vessel, where it will go critical on its own. They’re just sitting a bunch of angry jawbreakers in the bottom of a tank, where they irritate one another into producing energy. Instead of shutting down to replace fuel rods, in pebble bed reactors, at regular intervals a pebble is collected from the bottom of the container by way of gravity, tested, and recycled to the top of the column.


Look at it. It’s the worst Gobstopper.


Once fully operational, the reactor will produce between one and five megawatts. That’s quite small for any power plant, and even more so for a nuclear plant — nuclear plants are often rated in the hundreds of megawatts or even the gigawatt range. At five megawatts it still barely clears a third of the Eielson base’s gross energy budget. But the micro-reactor isn’t being installed so that it can handle the base’s power consumption. This is a proof of concept, for both a reactor design that fails toward safety, and a portable source of radiant energy that doesn’t require a constant external material supply.

One serious weak spot this reactor could address is the way the armed forces get power in the field. For example, in Iraq and Afghanistan, the military used fuel convoys to truck in diesel to their installations, which ran on diesel generators. But generators are loud, dirty, expensive, and prone to breakdowns. They are also a hazard to human health: fuel-burning generators produce dangerous fumes and super-fine particulate. Furthermore, the convoys themselves were low-hanging fruit for insurgent attacks. All of this requires maintenance and lots of security. Much of the reason Eielson was chosen over any other site comes down to its reliance on fossil fuels that have to be transported in, like coal and diesel. The armed forces have a direct strategic interest in weaning their operations off petroleum fuels, to the extent they can.

What benefits the military, though, often ends up also improving civilian lives. Eielson AFB is only about a hundred miles south of the Arctic Circle. During the heating season, the base can burn 800 tons of coal every day. Like much of Alaska, it is beholden to energy supply lines prone to failure exactly when they’re most needed. Most of the state uses coal or diesel to provide electricity and heating. Much of Alaska is also only accessible by boat or plane. Juneau doesn’t even have a road connecting it to the outside world, because the terrain is so uncooperative. One failure point can easily line up with another. Eielson’s northerly location, along with its inexhaustible need for fuel, make it an excellent sandbox (snowbank?) for field testing the microreactor. Greater Alaska is also keenly interested: According to the Anchorage Daily News, “a cost-effective 1-5 MW power generator that doesn’t require refueling could represent a sea change for rural power in our state, as that range covers the needs of dozens of villages off the road system that currently have some of the most costly power in the state — and which are vulnerable to generator breakdowns in the dead of winter, when the consequences can be life-threatening.”

The issue of waste disposal remains unresolved. Shiny and chrome though these pebbles may be, they still embody about the same radioactivity per kilowatt hour as spent conventional fuel — it’s just spread across a larger volume. While this makes any generated waste hypothetically less awful to handle, there’s more of it, and that complicates the already manifold problems with waste handling and storage.

Final designs are to be chosen in fiscal 2022. From there, the DOD wants a reactor up and running by 2027.

Now Read:
New Molten Salt Thorium Reactor Powers Up for First Time in Decades
NASA Successfully Tests Nuclear Reactor to Power Future Missions
Chinese Fusion Reactor Gets 6 Times Hotter Than the Sun

Construction licence issued for Akkuyu 4

29 October 2021

Construction of Turkey's fourth nuclear power reactor will start at the beginning of 2022, after the project was granted a construction licence by the country's Nuclear Regulatory Authority. Akkuyu will become the largest nuclear construction site in the world, Rosatom said.

Akkuyu 1 rises at the construction site (Image: Akkuyu Nuclear)

"At the beginning of next year, we will start building the foundation slab of the nuclear island buildings,” said Anastasia Zoteeva, director general of Akkuyu Nuclear, the project company executing the four-reactor power plant.

Preparatory work, including engineering surveys and excavation of over 650 square metres, have already been carried out on the basis of a limited construction permit issued in June. "By the end of this year," Rosatom said, "the construction of the concrete base of the foundation slabs of the reactor and turbine buildings is expected to start. The foundation slabs will then be reinforced." The plant will then be ready for the official start of construction, which is the pouring of first safety-related concrete, the foundation slab.

Akkuyu is a new nuclear power plant on Turkey's Mediterranean coast. It has three VVER-1200 reactors designed by Rosatom subsidiary Gidropress already under construction, as well as the fourth about to begin. The first unit is scheduled to generate power in 2023, subject to further approvals from the Nuclear Regulatory Authority.

Pictures from last week show Akkuyu 1 rising to a height of 36 metres with the placement of its fourth inner containment ring. This is the last cylindrical segment. It will support the reactor's polar crane and will be finally capped with a dome after all major components such as the reactor pressure vessel and steam generators are installed inside.

With the construction of unit 4, Akkuyu will become the largest nuclear construction site in the world, Rosatom said, with four large reactors under construction at the same time. "Simultaneous construction of four power units of the nuclear power plant will require a high concentration of resources, but we are fully prepared for this", Sergei Butckikh, the first deputy CEO of Akkuyu Nuclear, said in August. Some 12,000 people currently work at the site, which features more than 70 cranes.

Rosatom State Atomiс Energy Corporation ROSATOM global ...

https://rosatom.ru/en

Rosatom State Atomiс Energy Corporation ROSATOM global leader in nuclear technologies nuclear energy NPP engineering NPP construction energy generation nuclear fuel R&D back-end nuclear medicine power engineering nuclear icebreaker fleet wind power plants uranium mining uranium enrichment

Nuclear to power remote gold mine


Nuclear power is the required energy source for development of the Russian gold deposit at Kyuchus, the country's minister of natural resources and the environment, Alexander Kozlov made clear as the deposit's development rights were auctioned. The small reactor planned for Ust-Kuyga will supply the mine.

How a power plant based on RITM-200 technology could appear (Image: Rusatom Overseas)

"It is important that for the first time, one of the special conditions of the auction spelled out the use of at least 35 MWe of nuclear electricity, to be supplied by a small nuclear power plant in Yakutia," said Kozlov.

The small nuclear power plant in question is planned for construction at Ust-Kuyga. It will produce about 55 MWe from a single RITM-200N reactor. The regional government has agreed to take up to 50 MWe of the plant's production, with 35 MWe of this apparently being sold on to the mining operation. A licence for construction is expected to be issued in 2024.

There is virtually no infrastructure in the area of Kyuchus. The ministry said nuclear power "will make it possible not only to develop the field, but also to provide energy to the nearby territories. According to the auction conditions, no later than 30 June 2028, the winner of the auction must start using nuclear power, which must be supplied by the small nuclear power plant in the Yakutia region. In addition, the winner is obliged to ensure the level of production of at least 10 tons of gold per year from the date of reaching the design capacity."

A company called Beloye Zoloto won the auction, paying RUB7.7 billion (USD107.7 million) as a one-time payment for subsurface resources at Kyuchus, which are estimated to be as much as 250 tons of gold. Among the unsuccessful bidders were uranium miners Atomredmetzoloto and the Priargunsky Industrial Mining and Chemical Combine.

Separately, the development of another large mineral deposit in the Russian Arctic is also being supported by small nuclear reactors. Baimskaya is a copper and gold project in the Chukotka region which will be powered by two floating power plants at Cape Nagloynyn, each with two RITM-200M units, from 2027.

Researched and written by World Nuclear News

Westinghouse micro-reactor feasible option for Canada, study finds

27 October 2021


The eVinci micro-reactor can provide necessary, clean and cost-competitive energy to decentralised, off-grid markets in Canada, a feasibility report prepared by Bruce Power and Westinghouse has found.

The eVinci heat-pipe reactor is described as a "small battery" in the report (Image: Westinghouse)

The report comes a year after the two companies agreed to explore applications of Westinghouse's eVinci technology programme within Canada. A 12-page executive summary, providing a market overview of opportunities for the deployment of the reactor in Canada, its benefits and opportunities, has been shared by the companies. The document also considers the key federal, provincial, and territorial policy and regulatory enablers needed for its deployment.

The eVinci micro-reactor is described in the report as a "small battery" for decentralised generation markets and for micro grids, such as remote communities, remote industrial mines and critical infrastructure. The nominal 5 MWe heat pipe reactor, which has a heat capability of 14 MWt, features a design that Westinghouse says provides competitive and resilient power as well as superior reliability with minimal maintenance. It is small enough to allow for standard transportation methods, making it perfectly suited for remote locations and rapid, on-site deployment. These features, the company says, make it a viable option for mines and remote and off-grid communities.

A single eVinci micro-reactor is expected to be between 14% and 44% more economic than a diesel generator, depending upon the price of diesel fuel and the price for carbon, and in mining scenarios, such a unit - with diesel back-up - could reduce carbon emissions by about 90%, the report notes in its key takeaways.

Successful deployment would depend on achieving a regulatory model that considers the unit's size and has a predictable outcome, to reduce risk to operations at the host site, it finds. Westinghouse applied in February 2018 to the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission for a pre-licensing vendor design review of the eVinci. The report estimates that the first commercial unit in Canada "should be licensed within three years," but adds that broad public and host community acceptance will be essential to reactor deployment.

The study concludes that the eVinci micro-reactor represents a "feasible alternative" to diesel generation at mines and in remote communities, where it can provide opportunities to reduce or eliminate dependence on expensive diesel generation with a more economic option that also reduces emissions. The reduced cost electricity and heating provided by the reactor can also provide opportunities for economic growth.

"The strong partnership between Bruce Power and Westinghouse has set the stage for the deployment of a leading eVinci micro-reactor programme within Canada, to provide a reliable source of carbon-free energy in grid-edge and off-grid communities," it says. "These efforts support actions by the federal and provincial governments to study applications for nuclear technology to reach their goal of a net-zero Canada by 2050."

Mike Shaqqo, senior vice president for advanced reactors at Westinghouse, said the Canadian government's Small Modular Reactor Roadmap had set out the opportunity for nuclear energy to support the country’s decarbonisation goals in remote, off-grid communities. "The feasibility study shows the unique features and advantages of eVinci micro-reactor make it the right solution, including a small footprint, mobility, flexibility, lifespan and cost," he said.

"The nuclear industry is a leader in addressing global challenges, and Bruce Power is committed to decarbonising our economy and helping Canada achieve net-zero emissions by 2050," said Heather Kleb, director of next generation nuclear technology at Bruce Power. "Nuclear energy is a clean, reliable source of baseload power, and the industry is evolving further with new technologies, such as the eVinci micro reactor, that will expand its clean energy impact."


New Brunswick fast reactor operational 'within the decade'

07 October 2021

A 2029 start-up for an ARC-100 advanced small modular reactor in New Brunswick is an "aggressive" but achievable target, the CEO of ARC Clean Energy Canada said yesterday. Bill Labbe was speaking at an event hosted by the Organization of Canadian Nuclear Industries (OCNI), held as the company prepares to begin the second phase of the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission's Vendor Design Review (VDR) process.

ARC, along with NB Power and Moltex Energy, is part of an SMR vendor 'cluster' established in New Brunswick in 2020 with the aim of establishing an SMR supply chain in the province and deploying SMRs at NB Power's existing Point Lepreau site, which is currently home to a 660 MWe (net) Candu 6 reactor. The Government of New Brunswick earlier this year announced CAD20 million (USD16 million) in funding towards the advancement of the ARC-100 sodium-cooled fast reactor. The Government of Canada has also this year announced funding to advance the design of Moltex's Stable Salt Reactor - Wasteburner and WAste to Stable Salt (WATSS) facility, and has also announced funding for NB Power to prepare the Point Lepreau site for SMR deployment and demonstration, and to the University of New Brunswick to expand its capacity to support SMR technology development.

Also speaking at the OCNI event were Andy Hayward, director of advanced reactor development at NB Power, and Bill Cooper, vice-president of engineering at ARC, as well as New Brunswick Minister of Natural Resources and Energy Development Mike Holland. The event was chaired by OCNI President and CEO Ron Oberth.

The ARC-100 is a 100 MWe fast reactor that leverages proven technology developed at the Experimental Breeder Reactor-II (EBR II) sodium-cooled fast-reactor, which was developed at the US government's Argonne National Laboratory where it operated successfully for thirty years. The inherent safety characteristics and passive safety features of this design have already been proven, Hayward said. Currently, activities are focusing on preliminary design work, the VDR process, and development and preparation work at Point Lepreau, as well as progressing supply chain activities and First Nations and public engagement.

The timeline for ARC-100 commercialisation has been "accelerating", Labbe said. The first - Scoping - phase was completed in 2019; the second phase - Preliminary Design, which includes the second VDR phase, the completion of preliminary design work, validation of cost estimates and integrated schedule, as well as scoping fuel supply and manufacturing capabilities - is now under way and is expected to be completed by the end of 2023. Phase 3, which will include completion of the detailed engineering, procurement orders, construction permit licensing and approval, site preparation work and the execution of a construction contract, is scheduled to run until 2026.

The final - deployment - phase will run from 2027-2030, according to the timeline, and the company expects the first core to be delivered on site by the end of 2028, Labbe said. "I haven't seen anything in our schedule yet that moves us beyond [a 2029 operational date]", he added. "It's really coming down to a resource constraint at this point. Those are the types of things that we can manage."

"The other part is the regulatory approval. We need to have good quality documents, good discussions, good interface with regulatory agencies, and we need to make sure we provide them with everything that they need so that they can make decisions in a timely manner. That's a piece that's a little bit out of our control, but we can certainly set that stage very well with what we deliver, and that will enable our schedule to progress."

"We are in an envious position in New Brunswick, with the support of the New Brunswick government, a utility that has a long history of operating nuclear power plants, and a technology that's very mature and well proven," Cooper said. "This is an exciting time for SMRs and we don't have any obstacles in front of us that we can't get through to have one of these units up and running within the decade."

Researched and written by World Nuclear News


Vale receives notice from SEC ahead of potential probe
Reuters | October 28, 2021 |

Vale’s tailings dam failure on Jan. 25, 2019, killed 270. 
(Image courtesy of Vinícius Mendonça | Ibama)

Brazilian miner Vale said on Thursday it has received a formal notice from the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission regarding a potential probe of the company.


The SEC investigation would try to find evidence of “misconduct” related to public disclosures after a dam disaster in the town of Brumadinho, which killed 270 people in January 2019.

The so-called Wells notice received by Vale does not mean charges will be brought against the miner, the filing said.

“The notice gives Vale the opportunity to provide its point of view and address the issues raised by the SEC staff before the SEC makes any decision about authorizing proceedings to begin,” Vale said.

Shares in the miner fell 0.4% in mid-morning trading while Brazil’s benchmark Bovespa index rose 0.4%.

Vale to receive binding offers for coal business
MINING.COM Staff Writer | October 29, 2021 | 8:28 am Top Companies Latin America Coal

Stockyard at Moatize coal mine, Mozambique. (Image courtesy of Vale)

Vale expects to receive binding offers for its coal business in early November, an executive said on Friday, as it aims to completely exit the sector and has decided to divest of its Moatize asset even before it reaches goals projected in the firm’s business plan.


“We have already received some indicative proposals to sell the business. Now we expect to receive binding offers in early November,” Vale’s Finance VP Luciano Siani said during a conference call.

Vale signed a deal to acquire Mitsui& Co’s stake in the Moatize metallurgical and thermal coal mine and port project in Mozambique in April.

Moatize is Vale’s largest venture in the coal sector, and has been operational since 2011. The complex has a capacity of 22 million tonnes of coal a year, including metallurgical and thermal types.

In 2017, Mitsui paid $690 million for its interest in the mine.
What are carbon credits? How fighting climate change became a billion-dollar industry

Companies seeking to offset their greenhouse gas emissions have turned to carbon credits, worrying some environmentalists who say they are doing little to slow climate change.

Smoke billows from U.S. Steel Edgar Thomson Works on Jan. 21, 2020, in North Braddock, Pa.
Brendan Smialowski / AFP via Getty Images file


Oct. 30, 2021

By Lucas Thompson and Leticia Miranda

As governments pressure the private sector to limit greenhouse gas emissions, the world’s largest companies have turned to a financial product to offset their environmental footprints — carbon credits.

It’s a hot market, hitting all-time highs in volume and on track to be worth $1 billion in 2021, according to Ecosystem Marketplace, a market publication run by the environmental finance research nonprofit Forest Trends. And just ahead of the United Nations Climate Change Conference starting Sunday, the U.N. Environment Programme issued a report that said carbon markets could “help slash emissions” with clearly defined rules and transparency.

But why are carbon credits important? And why does it matter whether they’re used or not?

What is a carbon credit?


A carbon credit is a kind of permit that represents 1 ton of carbon dioxide removed from the atmosphere. They can be purchased by an individual or, more commonly, a company to make up for carbon dioxide emissions that come from industrial production, delivery vehicles or travel.

Carbon credits are most often created through agricultural or forestry practices, although a credit can be made by nearly any project that reduces, avoids, destroys or captures emissions. Individuals or companies looking to offset their own greenhouse gas emissions can buy those credits through a middleman or those directly capturing the carbon. In the case of a farmer that plants trees, the landowner gets money; the corporation pays to offset their emissions; and the middleman, if there is one, can earn a profit along the way.

But this only goes for what is called the “voluntary market.” There is also something called the involuntary or “compliance market.”

What is the “compliance market” for carbon credits?


In the compliance market, or involuntary market, governments set a cap on how many tons of emissions certain sectors — oil, transportation, energy or waste management — can release.

If an oil company, for example, goes over the prescribed emissions limit, it must buy or use saved credits to stay under the emissions cap. If a company stays under that cap, it can save or sell those credits. This is known as a cap-and-trade market. The cap is the amount of greenhouse gases a government will allow to be released into the atmosphere and emitters must trade to stay within that limit.


Greta Thunberg says U.S. ‘not really treating the climate crisis as an emergency
OCT. 29, 2021 01:29

Article 6 of the 2015 Paris Agreement tasks national leaders with figuring this out on a global scale. So far, about 64 carbon compliance markets are now in operation around the world, the World Bank reported in May. The largest carbon compliance markets are in the European Union, China, Australia and Canada.

While politicians and business executives have discussed putting a price on carbon, the U.S. does not have a federal, wide-ranging cap-and-trade market for greenhouse gases.

Regulators, businesses and environmentalists have debated globalizing a cap-and-trade market for carbon. But it is challenging to agree on a common time frame, common price, common measurement and transparency, said Alok Sharma, president of this year’s United Nations Climate Change Conference, also called COP26.
How big is the carbon credit market?


The voluntary market is on track to reach a record of $6.7 billion at the end of 2021, according to a September report from Ecosystem Marketplace. Currently, traders in the European compliance market project carbon prices to increase 88 percent to about $67 per metric ton by 2030, according to a survey released in June by the International Emissions Trading Association.

The voluntary market’s rapid acceleration over the course of the year is largely driven by recent corporate net-zero goals and interest in meeting international climate goals set out in the Paris Agreement to limit global warming to 1.5 degrees Celsius over preindustrial levels.

What is the pushback?


Critics of the voluntary market, where a company buys carbon credits from a business outside of a regulated exchange, point out that this does not lower the overall amount of greenhouse gases released by buyers. They are simply offset, which gives corporations a way to claim they are eco-friendly without reducing their overall emissions. Critics call this “greenwashing.”

Carbon credits can also be bought from projects that would have happened anyway. For instance, one investment company says they pay farmers to convert their fields into forests and sell those credits to corporations, according to Bloomberg. But several farmers claim they already planted trees through a government conservation program.

Also, some of these carbon credits through these projects are not permanent. For instance, the international soccer governing body FIFA bought credits to help offset emissions from the World Cup in Brazil. But soon after, the trees were cut down. The project was suspended in 2018 after more trees were logged than all the credits sold.

What regulations or oversight does this market have?


The voluntary market operates largely unchecked by federal or local regulators.

Because the voluntary market does not have a cap on how many tons of emissions can be offset, the driving oversight is a set of standards. There are a few respected standards organizations that validate carbon credits.

Verra, a Washington, D.C.-based nonprofit group founded in 2007 by environmental and business leaders to improve quality assurance in voluntary carbon markets, has set the most widely used standard to validate those credits, called the Verified Carbon Standard. Since the organization’s launch, it has registered 1,750 projects around the world and verified almost 796 million carbon units.

The three main things that make up the Verra Carbon Standard are: accounting methodologies specific to the project type, independent auditing and a registry system. This is to “make sure that both the buyer has confidence that they’re buying something that is actually legit, and that the sellers themselves have something valuable,” Verra CEO David Antonioli told NBC News.

Still the firm supports accountability in the market space, he said.

“[If the voluntary market] is going to be effective at helping achieve the targets of the Paris Agreement, it is going to have to complement … either government action, or individual, or company internal reductions,” Antonioli said. “We want actual solutions here. And if someone’s just offsetting, that’s no good … we don’t support that.”
What is the U.S. government doing about carbon credits?


The U.S. Department of Agriculture has not adopted or set its own standards for carbon credits. But it does finance carbon capturing projects and publishes data to help agricultural businesses capitalize on the market.

“We need to scale up … with the recognition that there’s going to be a lot of private investment,” said Robert Bonnie, the senior climate adviser to the USDA secretary. “We don’t want to displace that investment. We want to, in essence, sort of encourage it to come in.”

The USDA recently jump-started federal carbon credit regulation with a proposed climate partnership initiative, which would fund conservation projects on working land and quantify the carbon and sustainability benefits that come as a result of those projects.

The Growing Solutions Act, which is waiting to be heard in the House, would help farmers, ranchers and foresters learn about carbon markets and sell carbon credits through a third-party certification process overseen by the USDA.

The Environmental Protection Agency currently runs an acid rain program, which cuts emissions of sulfur dioxide by setting a similar cap-and-trade program. Under this program, emitters of sulfur dioxide can sell or save excess sulfur dioxide permits if they reduce emissions and have more than they need, or buy permits if they are unable to keep emissions below the determined level.
Are states creating any kind of market for carbon trading?


California is the only state with a state cap-and-trade market for carbon. By 2030, the state aims to lower emissions to 40 percent below 1990 levels. About 450 entities targeted by the market must deliver an overall 15 percent reduction in greenhouse gas emissions compared to the ”business-as-usual” scenario in 2020. Companies covered by the state law can purchase a certain percentage of carbon credits to stay under the emissions cap. California carbon credits are expected to increase by about 66 percent to $41 by 2030, according to the International Emissions Trading Association.

Aside from California, Oregon considered a bill this year that would limit emissions from regulated sectors to reach a 45 percent reduction from 1990 levels by 2035, and an 80 percent reduction below 1990 levels by 2050.

Washington recently passed a law this year that puts a limit on the amount of greenhouse gases that can be emitted and then auction off allowances to certain highly pollutive sectors until that cap is reached. The state’s goal is to reduce emissions by 95 percent below 1990 levels by 2050. Each year until then, the cap will be reduced allowing total emissions to fall. The program’s first compliance period will begin in 2023.