Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Edmonton's Energy Transition Strategy

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Edmonton's Energy Transition Strategy

    Originally posted by Edmonton Journal

    January 27, 2015

    City hopes new energy plan will help environment while creating $2.5 billion in savings

    The city wants to reduce reliance on private vehicles as part of an energy saving plan.
    Photograph by: Bruce Edwards , Bruce Edwards

    A new Edmonton energy plan calls for big reductions in fossil fuel consumption that would fight climate change and save billions of dollars.

    By 2035, the proposed community energy transition strategy wants to cut local emissions of greenhouse gases linked to global warming by 35 per cent from 2005 levels.

    While the scheme requires the city to spend an initial $100 million over four years and possibly more later, this is a fraction of the expected benefits.

    After all costs are factored in, building, industry and vehicle owners are anticipated to save $2.5 billion over the next 20 years from lower energy bills.

    Those savings jump to $3.4 billion when the social costs of lower greenhouse gas emissions are considered.

    “In Edmonton, even if we didn’t reduce one molecule of CO2, the community would still see a $2.5-billion benefit,” Jim Andrais, environmental policy program manager, said Monday.

    “It’s valuable. We’re saying there is a strong business case in the numbers we have modelled.”

    Officials have been working on the energy blueprint since 2012, including receiving input from a 56-member citizen panel.

    (...)
    http://www.edmontonjournal.com/news/...790/story.html

    [email protected]
    © Copyright (c) The Edmonton Journal

    Copyright & Permissions
    © 2010 - 2015 Postmedia Network Inc. All rights reserved.
    Last edited by Admin; 28-01-2015, 11:45 AM. Reason: removed full article. Full article is available on the Journal site.


    Ottawa-Edmonton-Vancouver-Edmonton

  • #2
    "Reduce energy consumption by 25 per cent per person from 2009 levels by 2035"

    I wonder if this is net or gross energy consumption? For example, if you install solar PV on your roof, your net energy consumption will go down and you'll pull less from the grid, but unless you change the appliances and lifestyle, your gross consumption isn't going to change.

    Do these goals assume the annexation of Sherwood Park in this time frame? All those plants and refineries use quite a bit of energy.

    Comment


    • #3
      Also, the goals seem awfully lofty. How much of this does the City actually control, versus the province? Why is the city sepending money researching this stuff, to the tune of $100m over four years? That would almost pay for a recreation center or a new hockey rink somewhere, wouldn't that be a better investment rather than all this David Suzuki stuff? If you want that in your life, login to his website, no $100m over four years needed. I'm cool with city recycling plans, and Biowaste and stuff, and more infill, but the big picture / wish list here seems a bit extreme. Take for example this one:

      - Change behaviour by introducing financial incentives that will eventually be replaced by regulations or market forces. The incentives would push for such moves as better energy efficiency in homes and other buildings, increased use of renewable energy and increased purchases of electric vehicles;
      Seriously, the city is going to use rates they collect from people to subsidize / provide financial incentives to buy electric vehicles (which, in Central / Northern Alberta, are powered by mostly coal and some natural gas)?
      Last edited by moahunter; 27-01-2015, 05:18 PM.

      Comment


      • #4
        "Reduce energy consumption by 25 per cent per person from 2009 levels by 2035"
        How?
        This looks like a goal, not an action.

        Comment


        • #5
          "The city missed its previous target of cutting emissions 20 per cent below 1990 levels by 2008, seeing them instead rise about 17 per cent."

          Population grew about 20-25% and emissions rose 17%. IMHO, most of the per capita savings of about 3-6% were probably a result from increased insulation in homes, more efficient furnaces and more efficient cars & trucks. Little. if any of the improvements were created by the COE initiatives other than newer fleet vehicles etc.

          They talk NOW about the fixing the fences and closing the gates a decade after the entire herd of horses have bolted. The unrestrained urban sprawl and slow growth of infill housing are the direct result of the COE not ensuring the past goals of reducing emissions. The AHD should have been the expansion limit of the city with a 2 or 3 kilometer wide greenbelt. More initiatives like the hugely successful Railtown tax subsidies that resulted in ~15,000 infill units spin-offs in downtown should have been offered years ago. Let's not even talk about the stupidity of destroying our 127km electric trolley network.
          Advocating a better Edmonton through effective, efficient and economical transit.

          Comment


          • #6
            Edmonton's Energy Transition Strategy.

            http://edmonton.ca/city_government/e...ransition.aspx


            Ottawa-Edmonton-Vancouver-Edmonton

            Comment


            • #7
              Before the city gets ahead of itself, it's gotta get funding from the province (HA!), which isn't gonna happen & we'll need a huge shift in power generation in this province before ANYTHING is powered with "clean electricity".

              As of 2pm today, here's the current state of power generation in the province. Apologies for the width, resizing makes it too hard to read the tiny text. MC is Maximum Capacity, TNG is Total Net Generation and DCR is Dispatched Contingency Reserve.

              Last edited by noodle; 06-02-2015, 02:09 PM.
              Giving less of a damn than ever… Can't laugh at the ignorant if you ignore them!

              Comment


              • #8
                Edmonton's Energy Transition Strategy

                Initial outlay of $100 million over 4 years.
                Oh pleeeeeeeeeeeze, slap those councillors and mayor up the side of the head. Another hare brained scheme brought to you buy Edmonton City Admin. Leave this to the Feds, see how far they get with it. Leave it to car manufactures to come out with fuel efficient vehicles. It should not be a municipal initiative of that magnitude.
                Last edited by Gemini; 06-02-2015, 02:37 PM.
                Gone............................and very quickly forgotten may I add.

                Comment


                • #9
                  City councillors want to make certain Edmonton’s energy plan isn’t full of hot air


                  BY GORDON KENT, EDMONTON JOURNAL

                  EDMONTON - City councillors insisted Wednesday a new plan to cut Edmonton greenhouse gas emissions and energy use must show exactly how much has been saved.

                  “This is something that’s going to cost us a lot of money, so it better not be symbolic,” Coun. Michael Oshry said.

                  “If we’re going to spend tens of millions of dollars on environmental issues, we better be able to show the citizens they’re getting value for their money.”

                  By 2035, the community energy transition strategy aims to reduce Edmonton greenhouse gases 35 per cent and energy consumption per person 25 per cent, compared to 2005.

                  http://www.edmontonjournal.com/news/...693/story.html


                  Ottawa-Edmonton-Vancouver-Edmonton

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    So if we annex the airport do those emissions count?? I would hate to see the carbon footprint of 100+ commerical planes taking off.

                    As Gemini said leave a program like this to the feds. You areo nly going to drive away more industry with tough 'policiies' like this.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Energy plan passed unanimously. Let the Co2 cuts begin - soon. #ejlive #yegcc #yeg


                      Ottawa-Edmonton-Vancouver-Edmonton

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by noodle View Post
                        Before the city gets ahead of itself, it's gotta get funding from the province (HA!), which isn't gonna happen & we'll need a huge shift in power generation in this province before ANYTHING is powered with "clean electricity".

                        As of 2pm today, here's the current state of power generation in the province. Apologies for the width, resizing makes it too hard to read the tiny text. MC is Maximum Capacity, TNG is Total Net Generation and DCR is Dispatched Contingency Reserve.


                        Having worked in the Power Generation industry this IS a huge shift in Cleaner energy production, there was a day not very long ago that roughly 15 percent of the production was from Natural Gas, looking now its over 50%, still fossil fuel yes, but a way cleaner version. and don't even get started on wind power as you can see, it's very little of the generation and CAN NOT be relied on for the amount of energy this province requires on a regular basis, it's just not reliable enough, next up is Coal gasification to take all the readily available coal in Alberta and turn it into cleaner burning NG. we can't create energy from something we don't have and we HAVE coal and Natural Gas(some of it waste gas)
                        Excellence is a continual Journey up a staircase where there is NO top step...

                        Comment


                        • #13

                          edmonton.ca


                          Ottawa-Edmonton-Vancouver-Edmonton

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Seriously, one full time communication person in a department of four. Seems to be a little heavy reliance on that.
                            My antidepressent drug of choice is running. Cheaper with less side effects!

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Unfortunately Alberta government is focusing in wrong direction regarding CO2 emissions and envirnonment.

                              UN has released their report several years ago, claiming that cars, trucks, ships, airplanes, trains and everything that is powered by fossil fuels etc combined together do not produce more than 25% of world CO2 emissions.
                              On the other side, animal agriculture is the main pollutant with producing more than 50% of CO2 emissions.

                              Is this government supported by "environmental" companies who actually don't care about planet and its future, but rather money...or people in government are just dumb and they just follows what it says in the news I wouldn't know...

                              But it's sad they are "focusing" to help reduce emission in wrong sector.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X