Newfoundland and Labrador are potentially worth billions of dollars in oil revenues.
It also then generates billions of pounds of greenhouse gases.
Despite this, politicians have repeatedly embraced the environmental virtues of local crude – a stance that has raised the stakes of a long-awaited federal government decision on the Bay du Nord, an ambitious project that will move the offshore oil industry deep into the countryside. not yet drilled off the east coast of Canada.
Bay du Nord oil, buried under more than a kilometer of seawater in an area of the Atlantic known as the Flemish Pass, is said to be “the cleanest in the world”, Liberal MP Ken McDonald told reporters at the end. of last month.
It is not the only one that frames crude as a good thing for the climate, a marketable substitute for the so-called dirtiest oils around the world. The provincial government also adopted a tough line on its oil resources last year, calling its offshore fields “low carbon” more than twelve times in a 35-page report on the oil and gas industry.
“It is not in the interest of Canada or the world to limit Canada’s production of low-carbon oil and to encourage the development of high-carbon oil in other parts of the world to meet energy demand,” the report said.
But how pure can the oil be?
“When they say the cleanest oil in the country or the greenest oil in the country, what they are really saying is that oil production will produce less greenhouse gas emissions,” said Jean Phillipe Sapinsky, an assistant professor. at the University of Moncton and a researcher on the Corporate Mapping Project, which follows the fossil fuel industry in Canada.
With water depths of approximately 1,200 meters, the Equinor’s Bay du Nord project will use a production, storage and unloading vessel, better known as the FPSO, such as the one shown here in this image. Equinor officials say the first oil is expected before the end of this decade. (Equinor)
“It is not oil production that is harmful, it is when we burn the oil. And the oil is extracted to burn,” Sapinsky added.
Mining “includes things like exploding, methane gasification in the air, correcting methane leaks,” explains Paasha Mahdavi, an assistant professor of political science at the University of California.
The oil obtained from the offshore areas of New Earth is, technically, “a green comparison, for example, with oil sands, which are very energy-intensive to produce and process.”
But like Sapinsky, Mahdavi explains that most greenhouse gases in a barrel of oil do not come from the extraction process. The whole process, from its removal to its extraction, represents only about 15 percent of the total emissions of a barrel.
“So you can have the purest production oil,” Mahdavi said, “and you can still absorb only one-sixth of the emission problem.”
The Bay du Nord project is located on the Flemish Pass 500 miles east of St. Louis. John’s, with recoverable reserves estimated at about 300 million barrels of oil. (Equinor)
Newfoundland oil is often considered a light, sweet crude, with consistency anywhere from maple syrup to water, according to the Canadian Petroleum Producers Association.
Unlike Alberta sand asphalt, it usually does not require additional treatment to pass through a pipeline.
So when politicians talk about “clean oil,” Mahdavi said, “there is a sense in it, in the sense of the carbon offset of the oil.”
These include geological components, he says: how much sulfur is in the oil, for example, or how “heavy” or thick the product is.
But when oil really burns for energy – as jet fuel, gasoline or furnace oil – the differences between types of crude oil evaporate.
According to the Carnegie Petroleum Climate Index, crude from one of Newfoundland offshore projects, Hibernia, emits 436 kilograms of carbon per barrel when burned, compared to 466 kilograms of carbon emitted from diluted Alberta sand.
This is a six percent difference.
The Bay du Nord project could produce 300 million barrels of oil, which, when burned, would release 130.8 billion kilograms of carbon into the atmosphere.
This graph from the Carnegie Oil-Climate Index shows that most of the greenhouse gas savings from Hibernia crude oil come from its extraction and processing and not from its combustion. (Carnegie Oil-Climate Index)
Does the Canadian climate plan keep us pumping oil?
No oil is really pure.
But when politicians talk about “clean oil,” says Jordan Kinder, they may also refer to Canada’s specific regulations: its greenhouse gas emission control policies, such as those contained in last month’s climate plan. .
“That’s true,” said Kinder, a postdoctoral fellow at McGill University. These policies “are better than many oil-producing areas. But the bar is low.”
Kinder has been following the greenwashing in the oil industry for over a decade. He cites Ezra Levant’s book in 2011, Ethical Oil, as the impetus for an argument in support of Canadian crude that has entered the prevailing trend today.
Levant’s was largely seen as a marginal position in the beginning.
Newfoundland and Labrador politicians regularly compare the province’s offshore industry to the carbon-intensive processing required by Alberta sand. (Todd Korol / Reuters)
“That is changing,” Kinder said.
“Some elements of this argument have been adopted as common sense. This is something you see in some of the discussions around [the Bay du Nord] task in particular, is that you can make statements about the purity of the oil without many qualifications, when it requires qualification “.
Expansion of fossil fuels is then justified, he explains, according to these plans and climate regulations: if, for example, carbon is captured or some profits are invested in renewable energy sources, then it is considered politically acceptable to continue oil extraction.
“There is a commitment to a specific kind of future that is being integrated into these new projects,” says Kinder, “which says we will continue to rely on oil.”
“I do not think they understand”
In Sapinsky’s view, investing in oil and gas alongside renewable energy, as the province intends in the coming years, is not the answer. “We have very little time now to avoid the worst effects of global warming,” Sapinsky said. The International Energy Agency also says that in order to avoid the worst costs of climate change, no country can start new coal mining projects. “So no Bay du Nord, no White Rose, no fracking, nothing. No expansion,” he said. “What we need is to eliminate industry. It is critical at the moment and the economic impact, especially on New Earth, will be catastrophic … Therefore, it is not balanced to say that we will make money from oil extraction, where we will be hit. “Climate change and the economy will collapse. Because that ‘s what we’re looking at.” Oil prices are volatile. demand, uncertain. According to Sapinsky, the profit for the province, or even the blow, from the project led by Equinor is not guaranteed at all. “I do not think they understand,” Sapinsky said bluntly, pointing to repeated lobbies by oil and gas companies, citing a study by the Canadian Center for Policy Alternatives that found that industry players met with Canadian politicians more than 11,000 times between 2011 and 2018. . In these perpetual meetings, politicians “continue to hear that he will bring money. It is good for business,” Sapinski said. Mahdavi also believes that governments are following the path of minimal resistance. “Right now it’s easier to transport oil from an offshore oil rig. This is a process we know how to do,” he said. “But if you’re planning for the future, saying, ‘OK, we have this untapped resource, a very stormy place that can provide electricity not only for everyone there but for people elsewhere – why not do it? And why not “Do we support it with investment in transportation or storage? We have all this technology. It just requires government support.” Read more from CBC Newfoundland and Labrador
title: “This Is What Politicians Mean When They Talk About Clean Oil From Newfoundland S Offshore " ShowToc: true date: “2022-12-13” author: “Barbara Cathey”
Newfoundland and Labrador are potentially worth billions of dollars in oil revenues.
It also then produces billions of pounds of greenhouse gases.
Despite this, politicians have repeatedly embraced the environmental virtues of the province’s crude oil – a stance that has raised the stakes of a long-awaited federal government decision on the Bay du Nord, an ambitious project that will move the offshore oil industry deep waters. boreholes off the east coast of Canada.
Bay du Nord oil, buried under more than a kilometer of seawater in an area of the Atlantic known as the Flemish Pass, is said to be “the cleanest in the world”, Liberal MP Ken McDonald told reporters at the end. of last month.
It is not the only one that frames crude as a good thing for the climate, a marketable substitute for the so-called dirtiest oils around the world. The provincial government also adopted a tough line on its oil resources last year, calling its offshore fields “low carbon” more than twelve times in a 35-page report on the oil and gas industry.
“It is not in the interest of Canada or the world to limit Canada’s production of low-carbon oil and to encourage the development of high-carbon oil in other parts of the world to meet energy demand,” the report said.
But how pure can the oil be?
“When they say the cleanest oil in the country or the greenest oil in the country, what they are really saying is that oil production will produce less greenhouse gas emissions,” said Jean Phillipe Sapinsky, an assistant professor. at the University of Moncton and a researcher on the Corporate Mapping Project, which monitors the fossil fuel industry in Canada.
“It is not the production of oil that is harmful, it is when we burn the oil. And the oil is extracted to burn.”
With water depths of approximately 1,200 meters, the Equinor’s Bay du Nord project will use a production, storage and landing vessel, better known as the FPSO, such as the one pictured here. Equinor officials say the first oil is expected before the end of this decade. (Equinor)
Mining “includes things like exploding, methane depletion in the air, correcting methane leaks,” explained Paasha Mahdavi, an assistant professor of political science at the University of California.
The oil obtained from the offshore areas of the New Earth is, technically, “a green comparison with, for example, shipyards, which are very energy-intensive to produce and process.”
But like Sapinsky, Mahdavi explains that most greenhouse gases in a barrel of oil do not come from the extraction process. The whole process, from its removal to its extraction, represents only about 15 percent of the total emissions of a barrel.
“So you can have the purest production oil,” Mahdavi said, “and you can still absorb only one-sixth of the emission problem.”
The Bay du Nord project is located on Flemish Pass. 500 kilometers east of St. John, with recoverable reserves estimated at 300 million barrels of oil. (Equinor)
Newfoundland oil is often considered a light, sweet crude, with consistency anywhere from maple syrup to water, according to the Canadian Petroleum Producers Association.
Unlike Alberta sand asphalt, it usually does not require additional treatment to pass through a pipeline.
So when politicians talk about “clean oil,” Mahdavi said, “there is a sense in it, in the sense of the carbon offset of the oil.”
These include geological components, he says: how much sulfur is in the oil, for example, or how “heavy” or thick the product is.
But when oil really burns for energy – as jet fuel, gasoline or furnace oil – the differences between types of crude oil evaporate.
According to the Carnegie Petroleum Climate Index, crude from one of Newfoundland offshore projects, Hibernia, emits 436 kilograms of carbon per barrel when burned, compared with 466 kilograms of carbon from diluted asphalt from Alberta sand.
This is a six percent difference.
The Bay du Nord project could produce 300 million barrels of oil, which, when burned, would release 130.8 billion kilograms of carbon into the atmosphere.
This graph from the Carnegie Oil-Climate Index shows that most of the greenhouse gas savings from Hibernia crude oil come from its extraction and processing and not from its combustion. (Carnegie Oil-Climate Index)
Does the Canadian climate plan keep us pumping oil?
No oil is really pure.
But when politicians talk about “clean oil,” says Jordan Kinder, they may also refer to Canada’s specific regulations: its greenhouse gas emission control policies, such as those contained in last month’s climate plan. .
Kinder, a postdoctoral fellow at McGill University, said it was true that these policies were better than many oil-producing areas.
“But the bar is low.”
Kinder has been following the greenwashing in the oil industry for over a decade. He cites Ezra Levant’s book in 2011, Ethical Oil, as the impetus for an argument in support of Canadian crude that has entered the prevailing trend today.
Levant’s was largely seen as a marginal position in the beginning.
Newfoundland and Labrador politicians regularly compare the province’s offshore industry to the carbon-intensive processing required by Alberta sand. (Todd Korol / Reuters)
“That is changing,” Kinder said.
“Some elements of this argument have been adopted as common sense. This is something you see in some of the discussions around [the Bay du Nord] task in particular, is that you can make statements about the purity of the oil without many qualifications, when it requires qualification “.
The expansion of fossil fuels is then justified, he explains, on the basis of these climate plans and regulations. If, for example, coal is seized or some profits are invested in renewable energy sources, then it is considered politically acceptable to continue oil extraction.
“There is a commitment to a specific kind of future that is being integrated into these new projects,” Kinder said, “which means we will continue to rely on oil.”
“I think they do not understand”
In Sapinsky’s view, investing in oil and gas alongside renewable energy, as the province intends in the coming years, is not the answer. “We have very little time now to avoid the worst effects of global warming,” Sapinsky said. The International Energy Agency also says that in order to avoid the worst costs of climate change, no country can start new coal mining projects. “So no Bay du Nord, no White Rose, no fracking, nothing. No expansion,” he said. “What we need is to eliminate industry. It is critical at the moment, and the economic impact, especially on New Earth, will be catastrophic … Therefore, it is not balanced to say that we will make money from oil extraction, where “We will be hit by climate change and the economy will collapse. Because that is what we are looking at.” Oil prices are volatile. demand, uncertain. According to Sapinsky, the profit for the province, or even the blow, from the project led by Equinor is not guaranteed at all. “I do not think they understand,” Sapinski said bluntly, pointing to repeated pressure from oil and gas companies, citing a study by the Canadian Center for Alternative Policy that found that industry players met with Canadian politicians more than 11,000 times between 2011 and 2018. . In these perpetual meetings, politicians “continue to hear that he will bring money. It is good for business,” Sapinski said. Mahdavi also says governments are following the path of minimal resistance. “Right now it’s easier to transport oil from an offshore oil rig. This is a process we know how to do,” he said. “But if you’re planning for the future, saying, ‘OK, we have this untapped resource, a very stormy place that can provide electricity not only for everyone there but for people elsewhere – why not do it? And why not “Do we support it with investment in transportation or storage? We have all this technology. It just requires government support.” Read more from CBC Newfoundland and Labrador
