HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada


Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #1421  
Old Posted Jun 2, 2020, 1:11 AM
CityTech CityTech is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2016
Location: Ottawa
Posts: 2,807
Carbon fibre is a material of the future, so if bitumen works well for that, that could be a big win.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1422  
Old Posted Jun 2, 2020, 8:20 PM
Airboy Airboy is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Edmonton/St Albert
Posts: 9,155
New Carbon Capture project starts operation.
https://www.cbc.ca/news/business/act...ccus-1.5593969
__________________
Why complain about the weather? Its always going to be here. You on the other hand will not.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1423  
Old Posted Jun 2, 2020, 11:24 PM
milomilo milomilo is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: Calgary
Posts: 10,499
It's very interesting for sure and could be promising, but I think it would be interesting to compare the cost per ton of CO2 removed. It's a $1.2B project that initially will remove 1.8MT of CO2 per year. Doing a straight division that's $667/T, but of course this will be running for many years but we also need to take into account running costs and it will scale up to a larger volume. I don't have the information to figure out the final cost per ton of CO2, but it actually doesn't look that bad.

Also what would be interesting is how this is all accounted for - does a producer that sends its CO2 down this pipe get exempt from emissions pricing etc? If our politicians weren't all determined to make policy as poor as possible, we'd just have a straight carbon price, but we can't have that now can we.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1424  
Old Posted Jun 3, 2020, 1:30 AM
WarrenC12 WarrenC12 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: East OV!
Posts: 21,617
It looks good on paper, but I'm always wary of CCS. There have been so many failures in this space so far.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1425  
Old Posted Jun 3, 2020, 1:43 AM
milomilo milomilo is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: Calgary
Posts: 10,499
Quote:
Originally Posted by WarrenC12 View Post
It looks good on paper, but I'm always wary of CCS. There have been so many failures in this space so far.
Agreed. It only takes one project to be successful though to start the industry. I'm wary too, but this does have promise - the infrastructure is now there and adding more should be easy.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1426  
Old Posted Jun 3, 2020, 3:59 PM
Hackslack Hackslack is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2015
Posts: 2,307
Cool to see! Human ingenuity, innovation, and adaptability is what is driving change to a cleaner world all relying a product that drives the world's economy... I look forward to enhancements to the sorts of projects. The innovation does not stop here, it will continue to advance, in much the same way EV technologies are advancing as well.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1427  
Old Posted Jun 3, 2020, 4:15 PM
Truenorth00 Truenorth00 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2017
Posts: 24,196
Innovation made economical by carbon pricing providing a cost avoidance incentive. Yet so often those who claim innovation will solve everything are often opposed to the very incentive system that improves the economic viability of such innovation.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1428  
Old Posted Jun 3, 2020, 4:33 PM
Hackslack Hackslack is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2015
Posts: 2,307
Quote:
Originally Posted by Truenorth00 View Post
Innovation made economical by carbon pricing providing a cost avoidance incentive. Yet so often those who claim innovation will solve everything are often opposed to the very incentive system that improves the economic viability of such innovation.
A number of the largest investment firms have pulled investments out of the oil sands, due to the image that oil sands are emit too much ghg's, which I think will drive more of the development of these such technologies, rather than a domestic tax (my opinion). Those investors obviously didn't take into account the carbon tax for large emitters that has existed in Alberta since 2007.

Not to mention, the Alberta Trunk Line was actually proposed back in 2004, but were put on hold due to the Great Recession in 2008. long long before a carbon tax was even thought about. So I wouldn't credit the Liberal imposed carbon tax to any of the innovation that went into this particular project
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1429  
Old Posted Jun 3, 2020, 4:37 PM
milomilo milomilo is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: Calgary
Posts: 10,499
Yeah it sounds like more direct investment from the government rather than price incentive, though there still must be some carbon pricing built in or it would be impossible to finance the operating costs. It'd be very interesting to see the financials.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1430  
Old Posted Jun 3, 2020, 4:38 PM
Hackslack Hackslack is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2015
Posts: 2,307
Quote:
Originally Posted by milomilo View Post
Yeah it sounds like more direct investment from the government rather than price incentive, though there still must be some carbon pricing built in or it would be impossible to finance the operating costs. It'd be very interesting to see the financials.
Here is a breakdown of the economics from Wikipedia:

Economics
The project has been estimated to cost CAN$1.2 billion but will find approximately CAN$558 million from several energy funds and carbon capture technology initiatives.[3][4] Over 15 years, the Alberta province will be funding the project with CAN$495 million from the Alberta CCS Fund.[4] The Canadian government is giving a total of CAN$63 million: CAN$30 million from the Clean Energy Fund and CAN$33 million from ecoENERGY Technology Initiative.[4]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alberta_Carbon_Trunk_Line
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1431  
Old Posted Jun 3, 2020, 5:12 PM
Hackslack Hackslack is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2015
Posts: 2,307
Don't get me wrong either, I understand the benefits of a Carbon tax, in that it is a driver to steer people away from fossil fuels. In my mind, where the tax falls short is 1) money getting rebated to people and 2) actually seeing the change of peoples purchases from FF's to less or no carbon intensive fuels will take a long time, unless that tax is significantly increased. Considering those 2 points, I think a better way to allocate that money is to put it in Clean Energy Fund, like that which helped financed the ATL. We will actually see tangible benefits of the tax, i.e. this project will help reduce the equivalent of currently 339,000 vehicles, with the potential to reduce to almost 3 million vehicles. My question is, how long would it take to just have a carbon tax that is simply rebated to people that would reduce the same as the ATL?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1432  
Old Posted Jun 3, 2020, 10:23 PM
Truenorth00 Truenorth00 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2017
Posts: 24,196
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hackslack View Post
Don't get me wrong either, I understand the benefits of a Carbon tax, in that it is a driver to steer people away from fossil fuels. In my mind, where the tax falls short is 1) money getting rebated to people and 2) actually seeing the change of peoples purchases from FF's to less or no carbon intensive fuels will take a long time, unless that tax is significantly increased. Considering those 2 points, I think a better way to allocate that money is to put it in Clean Energy Fund, like that which helped financed the ATL. We will actually see tangible benefits of the tax, i.e. this project will help reduce the equivalent of currently 339,000 vehicles, with the potential to reduce to almost 3 million vehicles. My question is, how long would it take to just have a carbon tax that is simply rebated to people that would reduce the same as the ATL?
If they didn't rebate it, they'd be accused of a tax grab. And we have economic evidence that consumption taxes, including a carbon tax work. Notably BC as the homegrown example. Just need to get to right the price level, which the IMF says is currently US$ 75/tonne to meet the 2C target.

https://www.cnbc.com/2019/10/10/carb...hange-imf.html
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1433  
Old Posted Jun 4, 2020, 2:05 PM
jawagord's Avatar
jawagord jawagord is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Calgary
Posts: 1,703
Quote:
Originally Posted by Truenorth00 View Post
If they didn't rebate it, they'd be accused of a tax grab. And we have economic evidence that consumption taxes, including a carbon tax work. Notably BC as the homegrown example. Just need to get to right the price level, which the IMF says is currently US$ 75/tonne to meet the 2C target.

https://www.cnbc.com/2019/10/10/carb...hange-imf.html

BC’s greenhouse gas emissions were declining for years before the carbon tax. Why was that, because of industrial changes in the forestry industry. The carbon tax has done very little in B.C. compared to actual reductions due to industrial changes. The best you can say for the carbon tax is it has helped slow the rate of increase.

Remember the BC bee hives, in GHG reduction terminology it’s euphemistically called “low hanging fruit”. Countries or Provinces that had high emitting industries like coal fired power plants (UK, US, Ontario), steel making (Eastern Europe), forestry waste burning (BC) get initial big drops in GHG emissions when those industries transition. BC doesn’t have much low hanging fruit left to pick, hence the return to increasing GHG emissions in B.C. with increased population. While $75 per tonne Carbon tax might work as a world average, assuming the rest of the world actually had a tax, BC’s Carbon Tax will need to be much higher to affect meaningful reductions as it has already picked it’s low hanging fruit.


https://www.princegeorgecitizen.com/...ners-1.1097228

https://vancouversun.com/news/politi...-recent-report
__________________
The human ability to innovate out of a jam is profound. That's why Darwin will always be right and Malthus will always be wrong - K.R.Sridhar

‘I believe in science’ is a statement generally made by people who don’t understand much about it. - Judith Curry, Professor Emeritus GIT

Last edited by jawagord; Jun 4, 2020 at 2:16 PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1434  
Old Posted Jun 4, 2020, 2:25 PM
Truenorth00 Truenorth00 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2017
Posts: 24,196
Quote:
Originally Posted by jawagord View Post
BC’s greenhouse gas emissions were declining for years before the carbon tax.
And yet no growth since 2007 despite both substantial GDP and population growth. Displacement which at this point can't be attributed to changes in industrial forestry. What's clear is that BC's carbon tax has avoided all emissions growth, but hasn't been high enough to cut emissions further.

It's amazing that William Nordhaus and Paul Romer got a Nobel Prize (equivalent) for economic theory detailing the relationship between carbon pricing and emissions reductions but FUDsters still want to insist there's no link.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1435  
Old Posted Jun 4, 2020, 3:07 PM
Hackslack Hackslack is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2015
Posts: 2,307
Quote:
Originally Posted by Truenorth00 View Post
And yet no growth since 2007 despite both substantial GDP and population growth. Displacement which at this point can't be attributed to changes in industrial forestry. What's clear is that BC's carbon tax has avoided all emissions growth, but hasn't been high enough to cut emissions further.

It's amazing that William Nordhaus and Paul Romer got a Nobel Prize (equivalent) for economic theory detailing the relationship between carbon pricing and emissions reductions but FUDsters still want to insist there's no link.
I understand that there are people out there that don't believe there is no link. Common sense is that there is of course a link. I personally agree with their conclusive answer:

Laureate William Nordhaus’ research shows that the most efficient remedy for problems caused by greenhouse gas emissions is a global scheme of carbon taxes uniformly imposed on all countries. The diagram shows CO2 emissions for four climate policies according to his simulations.

(https://www.cbc.ca/news/world/nobel-...mics-1.4854371)

The key to the conclusive answer is:a global scheme of carbon taxes uniformly imposed on all countries.

Reality is that the globe is no uniformly imposed on all countries. So when another tax is imposed domestically, and those domestic taxes aren't even imposed evenly, what impact does it truly have?

It's nice that subsidies are given to say the O&G sector to build things like the ATL, or in my opinion that financing should be generated from say the Carbon tax, or as it was done since 2007 from the Alberta CCS Fund.

But again, aside from the image that Canada is infact spending billions of dollars to remove CO2 from the atmosphere, and in my opinion, with the ATL removing 339,000 cars worth is significant, though it still does not provide much of a dent in the global scheme of things, especially evident that the worlds largest banks are pulling out of Canada's O&G sector while investing in other portfolios that include other countries O&G sector that likely aren't advancing technologies such as the ATL... (That is where I think it is on Canada's O&G sector themselves failing to market themselves as a sustainable market, through associations such as CEPA and CAPP).

Anyway, nonetheless, I think conversations like these need to be had which will help advance technologies, not only in markets like the EVs, but FFs as well. The O&G sector does not want to die, and need to make advancements like these in order to be competitive with battery storage market, essentially capitalism working as it should, through competition. Previously, FFs had no such competition, but now they the realistically do, continual advancements like this will be made, which is, everything considered, very good.

My outlook on things of course. Please don't attack me!

Good chat!

(BTW, I appreciate you providing such information, as you have enabled me to educate myself on things like this... education is key to advance sustainable investment)
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1436  
Old Posted Jun 4, 2020, 3:42 PM
Truenorth00 Truenorth00 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2017
Posts: 24,196
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hackslack View Post

The key to the conclusive answer is:a global scheme of carbon taxes uniformly imposed on all countries.
That is what they said would be the ideal solution. That is not what they won the Nobel Prize for. They won it for actually showing the relationship between between carbon pricing and emissions reduction and/or avoidance. Which is what jagaword is trying to dispute.

Personally, I'm down for a carbon border tax. And the EU is going the same way too:

https://news.bloombergtax.com/daily-...-official-says

This would put jurisdictions with a carbon tax on equal footing.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1437  
Old Posted Jun 4, 2020, 5:20 PM
MolsonExport's Avatar
MolsonExport MolsonExport is offline
The Vomit Bag.
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Otisburgh
Posts: 44,716
I humbly submit that the fact that carbon taxes work is precisely the reason for his opposition to them.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1438  
Old Posted Jun 4, 2020, 5:40 PM
WarrenC12 WarrenC12 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: East OV!
Posts: 21,617
Quote:
Originally Posted by Truenorth00 View Post
That is what they said would be the ideal solution. That is not what they won the Nobel Prize for. They won it for actually showing the relationship between between carbon pricing and emissions reduction and/or avoidance. Which is what jagaword is trying to dispute.

Personally, I'm down for a carbon border tax. And the EU is going the same way too:

https://news.bloombergtax.com/daily-...-official-says

This would put jurisdictions with a carbon tax on equal footing.
That would be great. I think it current violates many of our trade treaties.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1439  
Old Posted Jun 4, 2020, 6:32 PM
Truenorth00 Truenorth00 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2017
Posts: 24,196
Quote:
Originally Posted by WarrenC12 View Post
That would be great. I think it current violates many of our trade treaties.
Can't apply it to the US and Mexico. But can build it in to other trade deals. And our carbon tax was probably part of the incentive for the EU FTA.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1440  
Old Posted Jun 11, 2020, 5:19 PM
Hackslack Hackslack is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2015
Posts: 2,307
More cool technology being developed

Looking to the sky: B.C. company says it is sucking carbon from air, making fuel

https://business.financialpost.com/c...ir-making-fuel

2 points in the article stand out to me. The first, being:

Quote:
As policy-makers work on ways to try to keep global warming within the two-degree limit of the Paris agreement, fears have been raised that carbon dioxide emissions won’t be cut fast enough. Some say carbon will have to be actively removed from the atmosphere.
And the second:

Quote:
Putting a price on carbon has been crucial to Carbon Engineering’s development, said Oldham.

“We would not be in business if carbon pricing did not exist.”
The reason they stand out to me is that simply relying on the carbon tax to adjust consumer spending to move to more environmentally friendly energy sources is not achievable to stay below 2 deg C, which I think some suggest. Which leads to developing such technologies, which Canada is certainly a leader in the world of doing already.


Wow... this is from 2018, I was on Financial Post and this story was on the front page with the date June 7... thinking it was June 7 2020, not 2018... I wonder where this technology is at today
Reply With Quote
     
     
This discussion thread continues

Use the page links to the lower-right to go to the next page for additional posts
 
 
Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 6:16 AM.

     
SkyscraperPage.com - Archive - Privacy Statement - Top

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.