Atlantis gets EU cash for tidal push: By Darius Snieckus in Bristol Recharge News Thursday, February 20 2014

Atlantis gets EU cash for tidal push

FBIPP

London-headquartered Atlantis Resources has locked up €7.7m ($10.5m) from the European Commission (EC) to support roll-out of multiple tidal turbine arrays at its 400MW MeyGen development in the Pentland Firth off northern Scotland.

The funding, awarded under the Seventh Framework programme for research and technological development, will underpin design, installation and operation of the company’s 1.5MW AR1500 tidal energy turbines in the 3.5 sq km Inner Sound project site, where tidal current races through at over four metres per second.

“The award of this grant ... will help to catalyse the [tidal] industry’s development, providing a credible and robust transition pathway from single turbine demonstration units, to the deployment of multi-hundred turbine arrays in Europe and across the wider international market,” says Atlantis chief executive Tim Cornelius.

The EC grant comes on the heels of Atlantis entry onto the London Stock Exchange’s Alternative Investment Market and £12m initial public offering (IPO).

“Taken with the £12 million that we have raised through IPO, this grant means that the business is in a strong financial position to deliver its projects,” Cornelius adds

The capital raised through the IPO is earmarked for the delivery of the first stage of MeyGen – a lead-off 9MW pilot project, planned as a stepping stone to an 86MW array – as well as for final detailed design of the AR1500 turbine and a demonstrator project planned off China.

Installation of the first six Atlantis turbines at MeyGen would begin early next year, with switch-on expected to follow “in late 2015 or early 2016”.

Last September, US military industrial giant Lockheed Martin inked a global partnership deal with Atlantis to bring the latter’s new 1.5MW turbine system to market, with an eye on deliveries to MeyGen, at the Force centre on Canada’s Bay of Fundy and India’s Gulf of Kutch.

Atlantis’ 1MW AR1000 turbine, a three-bladed machine standing 22.5 metres tall, weighing 1,500 tonnes and outfitted with an 18-metre-diameter rotor and permanent-magnet generator, has been put through its paces at the European Marine Energy Centre in the Scottish Orkney Islands and test-bench trialled at the National Renewable Energy Centre at Blyth.

Fossil Fuel Priests: Jeremy Leggett Recharge News Nov 4, 2013

By Jeremy Leggett Recharge News 

 Monday, November 04 2013

Five thousand delegates from more than 100 countries file into a cavernous convention centre in Daegu, South Korea, for the World Energy Congress 2013.

A huge screen above them in the foyer is filled with a spinning globe, that blue pearl in space that we call planet Earth, along with some writing: “Nature has provided our energy needs for thousands of years. As we make the choices to meet our future energy needs” — the camera dives in to pan across sweeping rainforests — “nature is relying on us.”

Readers of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change report by hundreds of the world’s best climate scientists would know for sure what nature is relying on us to do. Cut out the burning of fossil fuels, all the way to zero, by 2050 at the latest, beginning well within this decade. Otherwise we risk destabilising the climate, ending access to clean water and viable agriculture for most of us, collapsing civilisation in the process.

But most people at this congress share a deeply entrenched belief system. They are essentially priests within a kind of religion that is built around the burning of fossil fuel.

The first speaker, Saudi Aramco chief executive Khalid Al-Falih, is typical of many who will follow him over the week. “The Earth is blessed with a colossal endowment of fossil fuels,” he intones. Fossil fuels are the “crown jewels” of the world’s energy mix. We have 50 years of oil supply and 250 years of gas. And we must let market forces decide how much of it we use. He does not mention climate change, or the message on the giant screen outside.

Others are less comfortable ignoring the message, and so invent a mythology around it, in the way religions so often do.

A relaxed GDF Suez boss, Gérard Mestrallet, sits on a stage, being interviewed by a journalist who is unprepared to ask any hard questions. Mestrallet explains why he wants the US shale-gas boom exported across Europe, including to his own country, France, which has foolishly banned it. In parallel, he and the chief executives of nine other European utilities want to see subsidies for renewables ended. Why do they want this? “We are for the security of Europe,” he says. “We are for the climate.”

The journalist does not ask how he thinks such a proliferation of gas can lead to the end of fossil-fuel burning less than four decades from now. He does not ask how cutting renewables subsidies can be “for the climate”.

Had the uninquisitive journalist asked about the climate implications of all this gas, Mestrallet would doubtless have responded that burning gas creates fewer emissions than burning coal, which would have been true. But he would have omitted the worries about fugitive emissions of gas all the way from the well head to the home that cancel out the advantage of gas over coal. Big Energy bosses usually do. He would have dodged the issue of all the investment flowing to gas depressing the development of renewables. Big Energy bosses are good at that too.

The World Energy Council’s latest scenarios, published during the congress, offer a window on the dysfunctional group-think at work.

The “Jazz” scenario envisages total primary energy increasing by 61% to 2050, amid little multilateral effort to co-ordinate fossil-fuel reductions. The “Symphony” scenario envisages an increase of 27%, with a degree of policy co-ordination. In 2010, fossil fuels provided 79% of the world’s primary energy. Their share by 2050, by which time climate scientists tell us they must be phased out, would be 77% in the Jazz scenario and 59% in the Symphony scenario. In both scenarios, gas expands significantly from its current share.

And the climate implications? The target set by the EU is a 2°C temperature increase. A likely chance of staying below that requires returning CO2 equivalent concentrations below 400 parts per million (ppm). At present the figure is more than 420ppm. The Jazz scenario would take us to 590-710ppm of CO2 equivalent. The Symphony scenario would take us to 490-535ppm. Both would torpedo civilisation.

The top 20 European utilities, including GDF Suez, were worth $1trn in 2008. Today they are worth half that. The growing success of renewables, plus their own mistakes and oversights, have done this to them.

These are dying companies, with unworkable business plans. They should be embracing renewables with open arms, but instead seem set on a last ferocious assault on them. Their inculturated, institutionalised belief system compels them to do this.

All the evidence for this article can be found at www.jeremyleggett.net

Jeremy Leggett is founder and non-executive chairman of international PV company Solarcentury. His new book, The Energy of Nations: Risk Blindness and the Road to Renaissance , is published by Routledge

320MW UK tidal lagoon advances: Recharge News Feb 7, 2014

How the lagoon could look

TLP

By Darius Snieckus Recharge News in Bristol Friday, February 07 2014

Ambitious plans for the world first tidal lagoon power plant have moved ahead, with project consortium lead Tidal Lagoon Power (TLP) handing in its development application to the UK authorities.

The 320MW Swansea Bay project, which would generate energy using an 11.5km2 walled coastal inlet in which incoming water is trapped and later released through turbines, would be the largest tidal power plant in the world, supplying power for over 120,000 homes.

“Until now, tidal energy has been heavily promoted by governments and environmentalists as an intuitive source of clean and reliable energy for our island nation, but the business response has focused on relatively small-scale tidal stream devices,” says TLP chief executive Mark Shorrock.

“Tidal lagoons offer renewable energy at nuclear scale and thus the investment of hundreds of millions of pounds in UK industries and coastal communities.”

The £750m project, which could be online by 2018 flowing baseload electricity for up to 16 hours each day using ebb and flood tides, would also save more than 200,000 tonnes of CO2 annually over its 100-year design life.

TLP, based in Cheltenham, UK, has the backing of a consortium made up of international power technology giants GE, Alstom, Andritz and Voith, along with engineering consultancy Atkins Global, Dutch offshore dredging specialist Van Oord, textile technologist TenCate and UK construction contractor Costain.

Infrastructure conglomerate Macquarie has signed up to lead the capital financing of the Swansea Bay project.

Atkins Europe chief executive David Tonkin states: “The tidal lagoon concept represents a bold new addition to the energy mix. It is a great example of how innovative engineering could be used to harness our natural resources and provide clean, sustainable and predictable power for thousands of homes.

Swansea Bay is seen as well-suited to a tidal lagoon project, as the site is in shallow water but with a tidal range of more than ten metres. It is also close to several population centres in England and Wales, minimising electricity transmission losses during export.

TLP’s longer-term plan is to construct five or more tidal lagoon power plants inside the next decade, with a view to supplying 10% of the UK’s domestic energy.

“Economies of scale bring immediate advantage.  A second lagoon will require a lower level of support than offshore wind, for a renewable power supply that is both long-lived and certain,” states Shorrrock. “A third lagoon will be competitive with the support received by new nuclear, but comes without the decommissioning costs and safety concerns.

“Had we invested in tidal lagoons in the 1980s, by now, and into the next century, we would be generating cheaper power than any other form of supply.”

A decision from the UK government on the project is expected in 2015.

Large-scale tidal-range power plants are in operation at La Rance in France (240MW); Sihwa in Korea (254MW); and Annapolis in Canada’s Bay of Fundy (30MW).

THE EUROPEAN POLICY REVIEW ON 2030 GREENHOUSE GAS, RENEWABLE ENERGY AND ENERGY EFFICIENCY TARGETS

This article is dedicated to 1) the achievements and progress of the European Union (EU) on greenhouse gas (GHG) reductions and clean energy; 2) ongoing EU deliberations on 2030 emissions, renewables and energy efficiency targets; and 3) what this means for Canada. 

Specifically, the EU being the global leaders on a migration to a green economy, with its Emissions Trading System (cap and trade scheme) having been launched as far back as 2005, Canada has much to learn from the current and future EU debates on 2030 targets.  These EU discussions are particularly pertinent for Canada in light of a need to review Canadian fast forward green economy catch-up options following the next federal election in 2015.

2020 Targets and Progress on the Migration to a Green Economy

To begin, the foundations for the discussions on 2030 targets are the binding EU 2020 targets.  These targets entail:

·        -  a 20% reduction in EU greenhouse gas emissions from 1990 levels;

·        -  raising the share of EU energy consumption produced from renewables to 20%; and

·        -  a 20% improvement in the EU's energy efficiency.

Under this system, each country has its own binding national targets based on its relative capacities to contribute to EU-wide goals. 

In the case of Germany, for example, it had already reduced its emissions by 25% in 2012, thereby exceeding its Kyoto 2012 target of a 21%, all while being one of the world's strongest economies.  These facts are contrary to what Stephen Harper would have us believe to the effect that the economic development and sustainable development are opposing forces for which there can be no reconciliation.

Indeed, measured in terms of economic impacts, the EU progress to-date is staggering, especially with respect to job creation.  There are presently 3.5M people employed in the EU green sectors and the sector's job growth, for the 1999 to 2008 period, was 180,000 new jobs/year.  Even during the worst of the EU economic crisis, most of these jobs were retained and many more were created.

The EU renewable energy related jobs comes in at 1.2M in 2012 and the projection for 2020 is  2.7M.  With the right policies, this could reach 4M jobs by 2030.

The European Commission's White Paper

Against this backdrop, to initiate EU discussions on 2030 targets and build on the momentum of the 2020 goals, the very conservative and corporate friendly European Commission took up the task of producing a White Paper for release on January 22, 2014.  

In the months preceding the publication of the White Paper, a major debate arose among EU member nations as to whether 1) there should be 2030 binding triple targets, EU-wide and nation-specific, and in keeping with the precedent set with the 2020 triple goals or 2) simply have a stand-alone binding GHG reduction target to eventually be accompanied by state-specific GHG targets.  In its White Paper of January 22nd, the European Commission came down in favour of the second option.

The White Paper called for a 40% GHG reduction target with binding requirements for EU member states and an "at least" 27% renewables goal that would be binding on the EU but not binding on the Member States individually. 

Under the European Commission's formula, not only would an EU-wide binding renewable energy target be difficult to enforce in the absence of a binding renewables target for each nation, but also the 27% renewables target would reduce by one third the momentum set by the 2020 goals.  That is, modeling of the 40% GHG reduction target suggests that the 27% renewables portion of the EU-wide energy supply would be achieved anyway without the Commission's renewables target.

Debates within the EU: 8 Countries Favour Nation-specific Binding Clean Energy Goals While the UK and Poland Resist

The aforementioned Commission's position went against the recommendations submitted in letter dated January 2014, from the energy ministers of Austria, Belgium, Denmark, France, Germany, Ireland, Italy and Portugal, written to commissioners Connie Hedegaard,  the commissioner for climate action, and Gunther Oettinger, the commissioner for energy, in support of a binding clean energy goals for every EU nation.  The letter stated that such an approach is essential to providing the renewable sector with the certainty it needs for long term cost-effective investments.  Sigmar Gabriel, the German Minister of Economics and Energy, indicated that the extraordinary progress achieved to-date, and as alluded to above, would have not been possible without the combination of nation-specific binding GHG and renewable energy targets.

Particularly on the minds of those supporting binding renewables target is the fact that the EU is the part of the world which is most dependent on imported fossil fuels.  In 2012, EU spent $740B on importing these fuels.  Accordingly, the International Energy Agency has described the path to reducing this dependency as being that of greater reliance on domestically produced clean energy and greater energy efficiency.

In this confrontation of positions, it is the UK, in particular, that has been very vocal in opposing a renwables target because it wants to have the flexibility to include nuclear;  carbon capture and sequestration (CCS); and fracking technologies in its energy strategy.   Consequently, the UK has been advocating a 50% GHG target without renewables targets. 

Fittingly, Oliver Krischer, German MP from the opposition Green Party, said proposals to scrap binding renewable energy and energy efficiency targets for 2030 are intended to initiate a renaissance of nuclear power and push through fracking and CCS activities through the back door.

Another big obstacle to a renewables binding target at national levels, is Poland for which coal represents 90% of electrical its power generation.

The European Parliament Votes in Favour of Triple and Binding 2030 Targets

Consistent with the aforementioned debates within the EU, on February 4, 2014 Members of the  European Parliament in a plenary non-binding vote, voted 347 to 308  in favour three binding targets on national levels, a 40% reduction in GHGs; a 30% target pertaining of energy to come from renewables; and a 40% improvement in energy efficiency.  This MEP February 2014 vote is consistent with the recommendations of the European Parliament's Environment and Industry Committees on a three-targets binding approach.

According to the European Wind Energy Association, the 30% binding renewables targets for EU member states could provide 570,000 new jobs and save $818B in imports of fossil fuels, all while lowering energy costs for energy-intensive industries.

Next Steps

The MEP vote notwithstanding, it is just one step in a very lengthy process leading up to final legislation in 2017.   Moreover, the vote in the European Parliament does not require that member states to approve national binding targets.

On February 19, 2014, there will be a Franco-German summit on energy cooperation.  On March 4, 2014 the EU energy ministers will meet.  This will be followed by a European Council meeting of heads of state on March 8-9, 2014.

Further down the road, European Commission commissioners will be replaced in 2014 and firm legislative proposals are not expected before 2015, after the European parliamentary elections.  Subsequently, it may take about two years before the final policies become EU law.

Adding to the cocktail of views that will contribute to the above-described debates are the positions of clean tech sector stakeholders adamantly in favour of national binding renewables targets.

Taken together, the EU discussions on the pros and cons of different 2030 options could prove to be enlightening for Canadians reviewing options to catch up to the Europeans, who are already way ahead of Canada on the migration to a green economy.  As well, their successes and failures to-date in advancing their respective countries offer models for consideration for Canada.   Accordingly, as a contributor to The Common Sense Canadian, I will continue to provide articles on new EU green economy developments.

Lastly, it is worth noting that the February meeting of the European Parliament included a vote in favour of extending the EU Fuel Quality Directive beyond 2020, thus banning tar sands imports to the EU indefinitely, likely to the great displeasure of Stephen Harper with respect to his free trade objectives with Europe.

Coalition for Responsible and Sustainable Navigation: Update

About Us

While the environmental and community-specific challenges vary from one waterway to another -- from concerns about oil tankers on the coasts; to wake boats on lakes; to jet boats on salmon rivers -- the legislative challenges are the same.  That is, the current federal legislative framework concerning motor boat activities on Canadian navigable waters is ineffective and out-of-date.  

Firstly, the Canada Shipping Act, which applies to the surface of navigable waters is primarily about protecting navigation rights and minimizing barriers to navigation. As such, it is ill-suited for protecting the environment.  

Particularly frustrating for communities across Canada, is the fact that Transport Canada requires that a community exploit all non-regulatory options prior to making a request for a new regulation.  In this regard, Transport Canada requires that a community attempt a voluntary code of conduct with near 100% adherence.  The result is eternal irresolvable community conflicts, from coast to coast.

With respect to the federal legislation that protects waterways environments, or the marine habitat, of the same waters, but below the surface, this is where The Fisheries Act comes in.  But the two Acts do not connect. Unfortunately at the request of the pipeline industry, this Act has been reduced to an empty shell.

http://www.nature.com/news/changes-to-canada-s-fisheries-law-alarm-biologists-1.14234 

Accordingly, the Coalition aims to modify the two Acts and link them in way so that it is possible to impose restrictions on certain types of boats based on impacts on the marine habitat.

Recognizing that no single municipality or region can hope to have sufficient influence to convince the Government of Canada to make the necessary changes, the Coalition offers the option of creating a nation-wide common effort, too big to ignore.

The Coalition time line for innovative legislative recommendations is 2015, for the next federal government.

Update

The Coalition for Responsible and Sustainable Navigation is now registered as a non-profit corporation and a web site is currently under construction.  This update will serve as a online reference document until the web site is in operation.

To date several regions of Quebec and BC are involved in the Coalition.

During the Fall 2013, I met and communicated with different groups and people concerning the Coalition.  The idea is to create a network behind the Coalition once the web site construction is completed. 

In November 2013, a meeting was held with the Association des propriétaires du Lac Sept-Îles in Quebec City. They will be promoting the Coalition in their region once the site is online.  The following video from the Association illustrates quite well the impacts of motorized watercraft on lakes, in particular, minutes 11:00 to 16:50 on the stirring up of sediments, and accumulation of sediments on the lake bottom, all caused by powerful motor boats.  http://youtu.be/UWVj6dqh37A

In December 2013, I worked with Jean Clark, Director of BC's Lower Shuswap Stewardship Society on a Common Sense Canadian article that blends BC salmon river challenges and Coalition legislative considerations.

http://commonsensecanadian.ca/motorized-boats-stir-problems-bcs-salmon-rivers/

In February 2014, a meeting will take place with a representative of stakeholders in Nova Scotia.

Lastly, the site once completed will be used as a primary tool to engage other stakeholders from elsewhere in Canada.

Germany: A World Leader in the Migration to a Green Economy

GERMANY:  A WORLD LEADER IN THE MIGRATION TO A GREEN ECONOMY

The New Economic Paradigm: Impressive Emissions Reductions and Economic Performance

When Prime Minister Harper is challenged on his environmental record, one of his standard replies is that between economic development and sustainable development, he must give priority to the economy.   While it suits Harper's ideological agenda to imply that economic and environmental objectives are opposing forces, the facts suggest otherwise.  Indeed, as indicated in my previous Common Sense Canadian articles, the clean technology sectors are among the world's fastest growing and highest job creation sectors of our times.  Unfortunately, each year of the Conservative rule represents a rapidly expanding green jobs gap between Canada and its competitors.

Among nation-specific models that disprove the Harper economic paradigm to the effect that a natural resources based economy is the best vehicle for prosperity, Germany is a case in point.  That is, Germany, while rising to become one of the globe's strongest national economies, reduced its emissions 25% below 1990 levels by 2012 thus exceeding its Kyoto Protocol commitment to reduce its emissions by 21% below 1990 levels for the 2008 to 2012 period.  This is an especially remarkable achievement in light of the economic troubles in much of Europe and in the world at-large.

Components of the German Success Story

This German success story is a result of numerous factors, one might say a holistic approach.

One of the important pillars of this success story is the 2001 German Renewable Energy Act, which introduced the concept of a Feed-in-tariff (FIT) and right to connect (RTC) formula to the world, a concept entailing 1) the paying of a technology-specific guaranteed premium remuneration above market rates for renewable energy sources over a specified time period, combined with 2) a requirement that all sources of renewable energy production within a given utility's region must be connected to, and given priority within, the network.  

This concept makes sense economically in that all new sources of energy cost more than existing sources that were developed some time ago and may be fully paid for.  Over time, the plan calls for a reduction of FIT rates for new renewable power entries on the grid, thus providing incentives for manufactures to invest in innovation to lower costs.

Testimony to the success of the formula is the fact that the German model has since been emulated by 19 of the 27 EU states and 40 jurisdictions around the globe, including China.  Up until recently, Ontario offered such a system.

The success synergies resulting from the aforementioned FIT/RTC model and the rapid take up of renewables also comprise attractive terms of engagement for community and individual ownership of renewable energy production.  To this effect, in 2013, 50% of the entire Germany production of renewables is owned by individuals, communities and cooperatives with the sources ranging from home roof top solar panels to wind power and biogas production on agricultural land.   With regard to the latter point, farmers account for 11% of total German renewables production. http://www.ilsr.org/half-germanys-53000-megawatts-renewable-energy-locally-owned/

In effect, the individual homeowner take-up has been so successful than a March 2013 survey showed that 60% of homeowners are considering adding rooftop solar for heating or electricity generation. 

An equally significant symptom of success, in May 2013, a €50m ($66.5M) program was introduced for power-storage systems for owners of small and medium-sized PV solar installations in order to kick-start the storage sector and take pressure off grids.  This became necessary because grids are increasingly struggling with rising amounts of home-made renewable energy flooding the system at midday, creating an imbalance in supply and demand and having a distorting effect on the market.

As for the role of the utilities in the clean energy high local ownership landscape, only 13.5% of the nation's renewable power is produced by Germany's 4 major utilities and regional and municipal utilities.

Few countries have outdone Germany on this score other than Denmark where 83% of the renewable power sources are owned by individuals and communities.

Perhaps the most significant bottom line pointing to the success of the German holistic approach is the job numbers, once more demonstrating that the Harper economic paradigm is dated.  In 2011, there were 372,000 working in the nation's clean energy sectors and the projections are such that these numbers are expected to be in the 400,000 to 500,000 range by 2020.

Fukushima and Energiewende (The Energy Transition): Accelerating the Migration to Renewables

A major acceleration to the German migration to a green economy occurred by way of the German response to the Fukushima melt down in 2011, -- the German Energiewende (the energy transition) --which 1) saw 8 of its oldest nuclear power plants shut down immediately after the disaster struck and 2) includes plans for the shutting down of the remaining 9 plants by 2022.

Contributing to the assessment of options to compensate for these shutdowns, a BEW study concluded that onshore wind could replace all nuclear plants with backup from other renewable sources.

 

Accordingly, among other things, the new Energiewende package comprised 1) an increase in the Feed-in-Tariff (FIT) -- a price add on --  for offshore wind 2) a commitment from kfw, the state development bank, for $7.2B of investments in offshore wind development and 3) a plan to cut electricity consumption by 10% by 2020.

 

To be eligible for the premium for offshore wind, originally Energiewende projects were to be completed by 2017, but given delays in the construction of the underwater offshore TenneT cable and 30 year project lifecycles, the offshore wind industry's lobbying efforts were rewarded by the newly re-elected Merkel-led government with a November 2013 decision to extend the completion date requirement to the end of 2019.

On longer term Energiewende objectives, the 2050 goal is ambitious, calling for a reduction of emissions by 80% with 80% of its electricity derived from renewable sources by then.  Not bad considering that only 23% of the nation's electricity was attributable to renewables in 2012.  Interim renewable electricity targets are set at 35% by 2020 and 50% by 2030. 

With there being a strong renewables lobby in the country -- unlike Canada where the fossil fuel industry plays a dominant role among energy lobbies -- German renewables industry is exercising its clout to suggest a 47% renewables target for 2020.

In this regard, the results of the September 2013 German federal elections may in fact mean that the interim goals could become more stringent because 1) at the time of the writing of this article in November 2013, Merkel Christian Democrats (CDU) were still in negotiations with the Social Democrats (SPD) regarding the formation of a coalition government and 2) the SPD had campaigned for a 40-45% target for renewable electricity sources by 2020 and 75% for 2030. The SPD campaign also included a 25% target by 2020 for co-generation, the combining of heat and power generation.

Whatever the final outcome of the CDU-SPD negotiations, it is clear that the Energiewende will be high on the political agenda because it was a component of the Merkel election platform.

 

Notwithstanding the impressive speed of the energy transition away from nuclear, for much of the German public, the abandoning of nuclear power is not going fast enough.  A March 2013 poll by  Infratest Dimap showed that 57% of Germans believe the shift away from nuclear is going too slowly while only 30% feel it’s advancing too fast.

This same poll also illustrated another big difference between the energy and climate change debates in Germany versus Canada.  The poll had 39% indicating that environmental protection should be among the main criteria for political decisions.

Lastly, consistent with the Energiewende goals, Germany will be building 4400km of new transmission lines by 2022, the year of the shutdown of all of the remaining nuclear plants.  This includes connecting offshore wind resources in the North and Baltic Seas.

Clean Energy versus Fossil Fuels for Electrical Power: The Economics

Contrary to appearances, the premium rate for renewables does not involve subsidies as the costs are passed on to consumers.  As one would expect, the German fossil fuel industry has complained that the surcharge to consumers for renewables gives renewables an unfair competitive advantage in the marketplace.

 

But a Greenpeace study showed that the exact opposite is true.  Specifically while renewables received €17B ($22.7B) in aid via the surcharge in 2012, the fossil and nuclear sectors actually represented a staggering €40B ($54B) in hidden costs.  The hidden costs are composed of direct state aid and tax breaks as well as external damage costs associated with climate change impacts and costs resulting from nuclear accidents– all of which are borne by taxpayers. But -- unlike the renewables surcharge-- these costs don’t appear on electricity bills and aren’t transparent.   If these hidden costs were slapped on electricity bills, consumers would be burdened with a surcharge of €0.102/kWh (14₵/kWh). 

 Based on these calculations, currently wind solar and hydro are the cheapest sources of electricity supply.  According to a Nov 2013 Fraunhofer ISE study, with innovation driving down production costs, actual production costs for wind are now lower than coal and gas.  Solar production costs are still higher than fossil sources but the ratio is expected to favour solar by 2030.

More generally, the impact of the German energy model on the German electricity energy mix has been that of pushing of gas-fired plants out of the market, and the lowering of load factors for both coal and gas-fired plants, expected to decline to 33% by 2015.

Taking into account the popularity of the German model throughout Europe and the influence of the European cap and trade scheme, The European Trading System (ETS)(cap and trade system), E.ON, one of Germany's largest utilities, indicated it may close 11 GW of fossil fuel capacity across Europe by 2015.  In July 2013, EnBW another German utility announced plans to mothball 668 MW of fossil fuel production involving 4 power facilities.

Germany; the European Cap and Trade Experience; and Lessons for Canada

Germany's achievements mean that Germany will one of the most, if not the most, important contributor to achieving the EU-wide aggregated goal for a 20% reduction in GHG's by 2020.   (Note, to achieve the EU goal, member states have also taken on nation-specific targets related to national wealth for GHGs not covered by the EU ETS such as the housing, agriculture, waste and transport sectors, sectors representing 60% of total EU emissions.)

Particularly worthy of attention with regard to the potential that Canada may adopt cap and trade model at some future date concerns the ETS 1) being effective in putting EU nations on track for meeting their respective Kyoto targets and 2) having more recently become a less influential vector because of an excess of carbon credits on the market that drove down the price of carbon.   Indeed the price of carbon declined from €13.09/tonne in 2010 to a new record low of €2.63/tonne in April 2013.

The European Commission has recommended backloading 900 credits, that is temporarily removing them from the market.  In April 2013 the European Parliament narrowly voted against backloading but in a second vote on the matter, in ­­­­July 2013, the Parliament approved the measure.  The measure now must be ratified by the European Energy Ministers.

For Germany's part, the backloading details will largely be a funtion of the outcome of the CDU and SPD negotiations on a coalition government. The CDU wants backloading to be an integral part of a long term plan, while the SPD wants a onetime one-of solution.

Accordingly, the lesson for Canada here is that any cap and trade system that Canada sets up should include a mechanism for annual reviews of the supply and demand for emission credits to ensure no oversupply occurs that can drive down the price of credits. 

As well, for select sectors that may have difficulty in complying with Canada's cap and trade scheme,  a loan guarantee program, maximum one-loan/firm, may be in order.­­­­­­­­­­­ 

QUÉBEC UNDER A PQ GOVERNMENT: WHAT'S NOT EVIDENT IN THE ENGLISH CANADA MEDIA

The information contained in this article is common knowledge for francophone Québec but is rarely available in English and as such virtually unknown to English Canada.  This leads to many misunderstandings, often referred to as the two solitudes.

La Charte des valeurs: A Cocktail Which Appeals to Many Progressives and Feminists as well as Regressives, but for Different Reasons

Contrary to what many in English Canada may think, the debate in Quebec about La Charte des valeurs (Charter of Values) represents a cocktail of factors.

One of the main components of the cocktail has to do with the Québec dark years known as "la grande noirceur",  the years during which the Québec francophone community lived under draconian Catholic Church rule, a Church which censured music and films, sent women who had sexual relations prior marriage into the streets, and abducted children born outside marriage to be put in Church orphanages.  One might say that these dark years are now looked upon by the majority of Québécois as being as reprehensible as residential schools are for members of Canada's First Nations.

Accordingly, the sentiment to separate religion from the state is a several notches stronger in Quebec than in the rest of Canada.

Add to these elements of the cocktail, that, for women, these dark years included the classification of woman in a male controlled inferior zone.  Consequently, many in the feminist movement want to make sure that religious symbols of inferiorization, worn on one's body or otherwise, are banned from the public sector.

Yet another component of the cocktail is the Duplessis years, 1936-1039 and 1944-1959, the years during which late Premier Duplessis had a pact with the Catholic Church to control the people.  Under the pact, the Church would run the Catholic schools, the hospitals and civil society in general, as long as the Catholic Church kept the people docile under the Duplessis economic development formula entailing cheap labour and union/communist busting features.  In honour of this pact, in 1936 Premier Duplessis had a crucifix placed over the Speaker's chair in the National Assembly.

Pauline Marois Calculated Targeting of Markets, Similar to the Harper Model: The December 2013 Election Plan that Failed

Pauline Marois, like Stephen Harper, wants to be in full control and consequently detests minority governments -- her government is a minority government.  But because her first year in power has been one of a seemingly endless series of incoherent improvisations, she had lost control of public opinion. -- In that sense, her government is not all that different than the Charest Liberal government that preceded the PQ.

While she had promised she would eliminate the heath tax during her election campaign, her first budget included a health tax of $200 for those earning $42,000 to $100,000.  Another election promise entailed addressing the absurdly low royalties and taxes paid by Quebec's mining industry, but once in power she backed down to the industry lobby.  She had promised to migrate Quebec to a green economy but so far she seems okay with the two pipeline proposals to transport tar sands oil into, and crossing over, Quebec, and is not ruling out exploiting potential local oil reserves.

All this added up to widespread dissatisfaction with the Marois government and poor prospects for pursuing a majority government.  This is where La Charte comes in.

In early Fall 2013, figuring her government could position the PQ for a majority government by creating a perceived crisis among québécois to the effect Quebec had an epidemic of new religious immigrants who were imposing religious accommodations on the majority population, Pauline Marois introduced the Charte.   

This Fall 2013 game plan entailed calling an election for December 2013, while La Charte was a hot topic, and cut into the Québec homogenous outlying regions' right wing nationalist vote -- a game plan to foster a migration of Coalition pour l'avenir du Québec (CAQ) vote over to the PQ.   That made "political sense" in that CAQ support is declining.

This election game plan also counted on the feminist movement.  Accordingly, as did Harper when he placed "correct thinking" people on the Board of Rights and Democracy, Marois appointed 4 new "correct thinking" members to the Conseil du statut de la femme (Council on the Status of Women).  But it backfired when the President of the Conseil, Julie Miville-Dechêne, publicly denounced this political interference.  The reality is that the woman's movement in Québec is divided on the issue.

Montreal Municipal Elections: November 3, 2013

During this same Fall 2013 period, all four of the main candidates for Mayor of Montreal  for the November 3, 2013 elections came out against the Charte. 

On November 3, Denis Coderre, former federal Liberal Cabinet minister, the very in the box unimaginative candidate for Mayor with a very sparse and vague platform - he actually thinks more parking spaces downtown is a solution for Montreal, Canada's most congested city- became the city's new Mayor with 32% of the vote.  On La Charte, Coderre had said in one of the election debates that he would contest La Charte in the courts if it included the ban on religious symbols in the public sector.

For those in BC, it may be also interesting to note that innovative visionary candidate for Mayor, Richard Bergeron of Projet Montréal, often referred to Vancouver as a model for urban densification and a green city.  He came in second with 25.6%.

  

Others Adding their Voices Against La Charte: Provincial Election Bluff Called Off

Concurrent with the municipal election campaigning, others condemning the La Charte elements pertaining to the wearing of religious symbols were Quebec's hospitals' association, universities, a teachers' union, a private daycare centres' association and many more. 

Adding his voice to this opposition, the President of La Commission des droits de la personne et des droits de la jeunesse  (human rights and youth rights commission), Jacques Frémont, went public to say La Charte would not pass the test of either the Quebec Charter of Rights or the Canadian Charter of Rights in the event of a legal challenge.   Either the PQ would have to modify the proposed Charte or revert to the "Notwithstanding clause."

In effect, it has become very clear that it would be impossible to apply La Charte in the Montreal Statistics Canada census area, which attracts 87% of Québec immigrants and which represents over 45% of the population of Québec.

But all these obstacles did not deter the PQ. 

Rather, the factor that changed Pauline Marois's mind about going into a December 2013 election with the highly emotional Charte as a wedge issue, was the fact that the polls did not deliver the hoped for support. As a result, as of October 27, 2013, the December 2013 election hype has been called off.

Swinging Further to the Right

Cultivating the right nationalist vote for La Charte, is not, unfortunately an isolated incident.

Shortly after coming into power, the Marois government appointed Pierre Karl Péladeau -- controlling shareholder of Quebecor and The Sun Media and well-known for his support of right wing causes -- to sit on the Board of Hydro-Québec.  Péladeau has since attended at least two Marois Cabinet meetings.

His spouse, Julie Snyder, host of the popular Star Académie (Québec equivalent to American Idol), is one of the members of the Janette movement, a women's movement in support of La Charte.  Julie Snyder is also involved in the development of a television production on a favourable portrait of Pauline Marois to be aired on TVA, a TV network owned by the Pierre Karl Péladeau media empire.

Which brings us back to what Pauline Marois said when she became the leader of the PQ.  At the time she said she would modernize social democracy.  She never explained what she meant, but after a year in power, it is becoming clearer as to what she had in mind -- go after the right wing nationalist vote to put sovereignty over the top.  Fortunately for Canada, the game plan is not working.