Category Archives: The Mitigation Battle

PLEA Network

26 July 2015, DeSmog, Senators Call For End To Arctic Drilling As Shell Gets Permits To Begin Work In Chukchi Sea: Shell received the final permits it needed to begin drilling exploratory wells in the Chukchi Sea last Wednesday, but a group of Senators led by Oregon’s Jeff Merkley is calling for a ban on Arctic drilling altogether. According to the Associated Press, the permits are somewhat conditional: In granting the company the green light, the Department of the Interior said Shell can only drill the top sections of wells, or to about a depth of 1,300 feet, because critical emergency response gear, including a well-capping device in the event of a blowout or leak, will not be present for the foreseeable future. The capping stack and other emergency gear is on board the MSV Fennica, which is in Portland, Oregon for repairs after Shell opted to send the ship out of Dutch Harbor, Alaska on July 3 via a shallow and evidently treacherous route, choosing speed over safety. The Fennica is an icebreaker — a ship literally designed to break through ice, one of two such ships in Shell’s Arctic fleet meant to protect its drill rigs from unsafe ice conditions. But the Fennica somehow suffered a gash in its hull more than 3 feet long before even leaving the harbor and was forced to head immediately back to port. There is no word on how long the repairs will take. When the capping stack is available to be deployed within 24 hours, aDOI spokesperson told the Associated Press, Shell can apply for an amended permit that would allow the company to drill deeper. That is cold comfort to critics of Shell’s Arctic drilling plans, who have repeatedly pointed out that the remote Arctic waters of the Chukchi Sea, where the company plans to drill, will make cleanup of any spill extremely difficult even if Shell has all of its emergency gear on hand. An oil spill would be devastating, environmentalists argue, but any drilling activities are likely to be incredibly disruptive in the fragile Arctic ecosystem. Read More here

PLEA Network

26 July, The Economist, The global addition to energy subsidies: Energy prices have been falling for a year. Over the last month that trend has accelerated. On July 24th, the price of a barrel of oil in America reached a low of $48. In spite of this, governments are still splurging on subsidies to prop up production. Fossil fuels are reaping support of $550 billion annually, according the International Energy Agency (IEA), an organisation that represents oil- and gas-consuming countries, more than four times those given for renewable energy. The International Monetary Fund’s estimates are substantially higher. It said in May that countries will spend $5.3 trillion subsiding oil, gas and coal in 2015, versus $2 trillion in 2011. That is equivalent to 6.5% of global GDP, and is more than what governments across the world spend on healthcare. At a time of low energy prices, high government debt and rising concern over emissions there is scant justification for such spending. So why is the world addicted to energy subsidies? Read More here

PLEA Network

23 July 2015, The Conversation, Native forests can help hit emissions targets – if we leave them alone: The debate over native forest logging has been sparked once again, partly by the government’s successful push for wood burning to be included in the revamped Renewable Energy Target. However, the disagreement over the best way to manage Australia’s 9.4 million hectares of public native forest is thrown into sharp relief by analysis showing that ending native forest logging, and completing the the industry’s shift into plantations instead, would get Australia much of the way to its greenhouse gas emissions reductions target. Analysis done using the Australian government’s public native forest model suggests that stopping all harvesting in the public native forest estate would generate in the order of 38 million tonnes of potential credits (that is, the equivalent of 38 million tonnes of carbon dioxide emissions avoided) each year in the short to medium term.

While this is the technical capacity, the Kyoto Protocol’s rules cap credits from forest management at 3.5% of base-year emissions, or around 15 million tonnes of CO2 equivalent per year. So if Australia ratifies the second commitment period of the Protocol, which runs from 2013 to 2020, the cap would limit forest management credits to 120 million tonnes of CO2 equivalent over the commitment period. The Australian government’s latest emissions projections estimate that, in order to meet its 5% emissions-reduction target in 2020, Australia has to reduce its emissions by 236 million tonnes of CO2 equivalent over the second commitment period. This means stopping harvesting in public native forests could provide 51% of the abatement task to 2020. Read More here

 

PLEA Network

22 July 2015, The Guardian, Victorian farmers and green groups firm on CSG fracking ban as inquiry fires up. As parliamentary inquiry into ramifications of drilling gets under way, farmers fear state’s moratorium on coal seam gas may be lifted. Farmers and environmental groups have lined up against the oil and gas industry to oppose fracking of unconventional gas in Victoria, as a parliamentary inquiry into its potential benefits gets under way. A parliamentary committee began hearings in Melbourne on Wednesday morning into the economic, social and environmental ramifications of allowing Victoria to be opened up for gas drilling. Victoria has banned unconventional gas exploration, which includes coal seam gas and tight gas, since 2012. Since then, the expansion of coal seam gas in New South Wales and Queensland has sparked fierce protests from green groups and some local residents. In January, Victoria’s Labor government extended the ban until the committee handed down its findings. A review conducted by the former Coalition government recommended that regulations around fracking for gas be relaxed. Advocates for gas drilling claim Victoria would benefit financially and households would enjoy lower gas prices if supply were increased. Read More here