If anyone has the slightest idea that drilling for natural gas trapped in shale rock 1,000+ meters below the Earth is safe or sustainable, please watch the documentary film Gasland, which premiered on HBO a few days ago.

From the film, you clearly see that drilling for shale gas destroys any livable space around it. Kills it. Pollutes it. Wastes it.

You can’t live there. You can’t farm there. And you certainly can’t drink the water as evidenced by the many cases of tap water being lit on fire. That’s right – tap water – that burns.

We Quebecers are right to stop this shale gas drilling. If the drilling is allowed to occur, it will destroy the land which has already occurred far too often south of the border.

The broader question, of course, which this article fails to address is: how will Quebec or anyone else get natural gas in the future? The challenging truth is that, like petroleum oil, the easy-to-find natural gas has been found and burned.

Now what? Will we destroy our natural resources (air, land and water) just to extract and burn the last available bubbles of natural gas? It’s insane and it looks like the road we’re on unless we stop it.

Source: Globe and Mail

Thousands of metres beneath Quebec’s fertile and heavily populated St. Lawrence River valley, geologists believe up to 50 trillion cubic feet of gas reserves may be locked in hard shale. The rough preliminary estimate would place the field on a short list of the largest of its kind in Canada.

Before Quebec has even drafted its first oil-and-gas law to regulate the industry, exploration companies have obtained 600 permits and are drilling a half dozen wells to test the viability of Quebec’s gas reserves.

Shale gas would be the first major foray into fossil fuels in a province where the industry mainly pierces public consciousness for high prices at the pump, pollution, greenhouse gases or some distant environmental disaster…

At Sunday’s unveiling of the province’s plan, Mr. Arcand and Ms. Normandeau were booed and shouted down by several dozen protesters. An aide was forced to plead for calm and respect.

“Citizens have expressed their concerns, and we’ve heard them,” Ms. Normandeau said over a chorus of catcalls. “We have the responsibility to exploit such potential wealth … but we will be putting primary emphasis on the environment and on ensuring the social acceptance of any development.”

Many of the protesters were residents of Saint-Marc-sur-Richelieu, a small town about a 40-minute drive south of Montreal, where a mix of recently landed commuters and farmers have successfully stalled an early attempt at exploration by an Australian company.

Pierre Batellier, a university lecturer and leader of the local anti-drilling movement, said the town’s 2,000 residents are divided between people who welcome lease payments from drilling companies and other potential economic development and those who say Quebec is rushing into the unknown.

“There’s not a lot of tension in town, but it’s starting to grow as houses become harder to sell,” said Mr. Batellier, who teaches sustainable development at HEC Montréal, a business school.

Any oil and gas exploration would likely cause controversy in Quebec, but the “unconventional” methods used to reach shale gas promise to fuel opposition.

Exploration companies reach the gas through a recent innovation in drilling known as hydraulic fracturing, or “fracking.” Thousands of litres of water, sand and chemicals are blasted into the rock to break it up and release the gas.

Several communities in Pennsylvania, where drilling is running a frenetic pace, have complained of severe water contamination while New York state has put a hold on drilling. The industry insists the problems are isolated.

Quebec environmental groups and municipal associations have asked for a moratorium on drilling until more questions are answered.

The Quebec Oil and Gas Association – created just last year and led by former Hydro-Québec president André Caillé – has predicted the industry could create thousands of jobs and drive down the price of natural gas, which is nearly twice as expensive in Quebec as it is in Alberta.

The province and industry have promised a major public-relations campaign this fall to tout the benefits of gas exploration while environmental groups say they will mobilize opposition.

Do you know where your oil and gasoline comes from? I didn’t until reading about a pipeline that runs from Portland, Maine to Montreal. It was created during WW2 to supply the province’s factories with oil while German U-boats patrolled the St. Lawrence seaway. It still provides Quebec with oil today.

Now, however, there is a movement to reverse the flow of oil in order to export Alberta tar-sands oil to the U.S. Communities in the Eastern townships, led by Bloc Quebecois, are protesting this plan and arguing that Quebec should not support the “dirty” business of tar-sands oil extraction.

While that is a noble cause, it doesn’t make sense. If the oil doesn’t go through Quebec, that “dirty” oil will find its way to hungry consumers in the U.S.  some other way. Besides, if you’re a reader of this Blog, you know that the real solution is to reduce demand for oil and gasoline while developing local and sustainable sources of energy for our transportation needs.

By the way, Montreal gets most of it’s oil from three foreign countries, according to the Gazette article below: Algeria, Angola and the United Kingdom. That would make me uncomfortable if I depended on oil (which we all do). Algeria and Angola are both politically unstable while the UK’s oil supply is way past its peak year of 1999 and they already import oil just to send it over to us.

This presents a challenging political decision for the Liberals: cave in to local NIMBY pressure or secure longer-term sources of oil from a reliable, albeit dirty, source in Alberta. In this light, the government’s sustainability plans should be a larger priority.

Source: Montreal Gazette

Enbridge Inc. of Calgary, in partnership with Montreal Pipe Line, has put forward a proposal to reverse the flow direction in the 18-inch pipe in order to start exporting Alberta oil-sands crude to Portland and points beyond. The oil-sands crude, or bitumen crude, would arrive in Montreal by pipeline via transfer point in Sarnia, Ont., and be diverted in Montreal into the pipeline to Portland.

In Quebec, the provincial Parti Québécois and federal Bloc Québécois have jumped on Enbridge’s Trailbreaker project, as the flow-reversal project is called, and begun to mobilize political opposition at the municipal level.

The two political parties say Quebec should think twice about aiding the conveyance of oil-sands oil; at the very least, they say, the government of Quebec should hold public environmental hearings on the proposal.

Opponents of the Trailbreaker project say they fear the reversal of flow along the line of 18-inch pipe will create higher risks of leakage. But experts say flow direction doesn’t really matter, given that the pipes in question are fusion-welded, not connected by male-and-female sleeving like washer-dryer exhaust pipes.

Opponents also say higher pump pressures will be required to move heavier bitumen crude and the 60-year-old 18-inch pipe might not be able to withstand higher pressures.

I know this may sound strange considering that we live 1,300 miles from the Gulf, but we are responsible. If you drive a car, you are responsible. If you buy food imported from Mexico, California or South America, you are responsible. If you regularly take pharmaceutical medications, you are responsible.

You see, these habits, and many others, require oil and lots of it. All this oil is imported into Quebec one way or another. This demand for oil drives the hunger to find it, drill for it and extract it in places and situations that have eventually led to this disaster in the Gulf. It has the potential to kill vast quantities of life and food (I have heard possibly 68% of ocean life).

Ultimately, this disaster is not about oil or looking for energy sources. It is about our society and how we have organized ourselves to live a self-destructing, unsustainable way of life. The sooner we re-organize ourselves and take back the power to live autonomous, fulfilling lives, the better off we will be.

If a society cannot deal with resource depletion (which all societies are to some
degree designed to do) the truly interesting questions revolve around the
society, not the resource.

~Joseph Tainter, The Collapse of Complex Societies~

“Change” President Unwilling to Tackle US Oil Addiction

Source: Spiegel Online

And there is also a simple reason that BP and other oil companies are drilling at depths of up to 1,500 meters (4,900 feet), far from the coast. They are servicing a greed for cheap energy and resources that fuels 250 million automobiles on America’s roads, keeps the country’s countless air-conditioners running and provides water for fantasy cities in the middle of deserts. There are 300 million Americans — around 5 percent of the global population — but they consume around 25 percent of the world’s oil.

As long as this thirst for energy persists, there will be no end to the costly gamble that oil production has become. Shortly before the Gulf catastrophe, Obama himself loosened regulations for coastal drilling.

With his address on Tuesday, the president had an opportunity to initiate a rethink of America’s approach to oil. But he preferred to stay vague — probably in no small part because he doesn’t want to come across as haplessly as Jimmy Carter. In 1979, the former president gave a similar address from the Oval Office. At the time, the US was suffering from an acute shortage of oil, the economy was in crisis and Carter’s presidency was also wavering. “Why have we not been able to get together as a nation to resolve our serious energy problem?” Carter asked, pensively.

Americans Don’t Want to Change

That’s not the kind of thing Americans want to hear. In 1980, voters drove Carter out of office. In his speech, Carter called for 20 percent of the United States’ energy to come from solar power by 2000 and for an end to dependence on foreign oil. Today, only 1 percent of the energy America consumes comes from solar power, and two-thirds of its oil is imported from abroad.

From a survey performed in late 2009, the following list of Top 10 sustainable professions emerged. The responders of the survey had all been motivated to find or develop new skills in response to threats from Peak Oil.

Top 10 Sustainable Professions:

1. Farming
2. Activism/Volunteerism
3. Renewable Energy/Energy Audits
4. Teaching
5. Small Business Owner
6. Permaculture Design/Teaching
7. Sustainability consulting
8. Non-profit
9. Alternative health
10. Energy-efficient building/Architecture

Source: EcoWatch

Some survey findings that may help those working to accelerate awareness and action among the general public are:

• People are driven to act in the face of global threats largely by a sense of right and wrong – their conscience – with some encouragement and inspiration from books, movies, media programs and articles.
• Emphasizing the positive consequences of particular lifestyle changes, and focusing on health and wellness benefits and a simpler, more satisfying life may be more effective ways to encourage change than promoting financial savings.
• The lack of support from one’s community and family and lack of assistance with overcoming unhelpful personal habits and attitudes are more significant roadblocks to effective response than not having enough information on what actions to take.
• Growing one’s own food is a popular and transformative way to begin living a more sustainable lifestyle, and may lead to a new career opportunity and the development of more community support.
• Most people do not feel they need to measure the impact of their lifestyle changes, but some think such feedback would motivate and assist them with doing more. Setting goals, even without measurement, is extremely helpful.
• Nine out of ten people plan to make additional changes, including starting or expanding a garden, installing a renewable energy system, or working with others in their local community to make broader, more systemic changes.

Despite the laws and propaganda that come from city hall, wood is a clean, sustainable form of energy.

Source: Mother Earth News

Wood, the oldest fuel source known to humans, may be about to experience a renaissance, thanks to rising oil and gas costs combined with shrinking bank accounts. Ultra-efficient, ultra-clean advanced wood combustion technology and fast-growing “perpetual” fuel woods can, on the micro level, bring increased home heating security for landowners and, on the macro level, create a regenerative fuel source for electricity generation.

How does fuel wood combat climate change? Wood is often considered “carbon neutral,” because growing it pulls as much carbon dioxide out of the air as is released into the atmosphere when it’s burned. So, unlike gas or oil, it releases no net carbon. It is a closed-loop energy source, simply recirculating the carbon dioxide already within the Earth’s carbon cycle.

An analysis led by Daniel D. Richter, professor of soils and forest ecology at Duke University, proposes we are missing a key strategy in our search for sustainable energy solutions. Richter says we need to consider advanced wood combustion, which he defines as “automated, high-efficiency wood-fired energy generation systems with strict air pollution control.”

The analysis was detailed by Richter and a multidisciplinary team of experts in the March 13, 2009 issue of Science magazine, and points out that creating thermal and electrical energy with advanced wood combustion has been growing quickly throughout Europe. “These facilities release remarkably low quantities of air pollutants and have system-wide thermal efficiencies approaching 90 percent,” Richter says. According to the article, the cost of wood fuel is several times cheaper than fossil fuel costs (per unit of energy produced).

The authors of the Science article say the United States is well-suited for sustaining a wood-energy economy. Yet currently, energy from wood provides only about 2 to 3 percent of total U.S. energy consumption. This is about half of the potential annual sustainable wood supply available to us for power generation.

The report also identifies “waste” wood as an untapped asset, estimating that 30 million tons of urban wood per year can be safely burned for energy. For example, the District Energy program in St. Paul, Minn., burns 250,000 tons of waste wood and other biomass per year to provide heating, cooling and other energy to part of the city.

Continue reading this article…

This “plan”, whose goal is to have 9 billion people “living well, within the resource limitations of the planet”, was created by corporations in an effort to preserve their usefulness in the face of Peak Everything. While there are some good ideas here to be pursued, such as reducing our carbon footprint and doubling agricultural production, there is no mention of any practical ways to achieve these goals.

For example, in their executive summary they claim that the assets to achieve their ambitious goals already exist: “The participating companies strongly believe that the world already has the knowledge, science, technologies, skills and financial resources needed to achieve Vision 2050…”

Well, that’s great, but they didn’t mention how to provide the basics of life needed to sustain 9 billion people: energy, topsoil and water. Where will they come from? Another planet? The report basically says very little. How is that so much energy gets put into writing something so large that is so useless?

Source: Smart Planet

• How to talk about peak oil and convince others that this issue will impact us very soon?
• How to discuss climate change and its consequences for Montreal?
• What is the Transition Town movement, which offers a response to these issues – a movement created by citizens for their community? It is based on facts, focuses on concrete action, and most importantly, is also fun and inclusive!
• How can we find inspiration in the Transition Town movement to launch initiatives in various areas of Montreal, in order to reduce our dependence on oil and better resist the shocks of the near future?

Free entrance – Donations welcome
Bring your mug!

While 100% electric vehicles are positive, an extension of the Montreal Metro system and the creation of high-speed rail service to Toronto and Dorval airport would make me more excited.

Source: CNW Group

In collaboration with the City of Boucherville, Hydro-Québec will test the performance of up to 50 all-electric Mitsubishi i-MiEVs on the road under a variety of circumstances, notably winter conditions. The project, which is evaluated at $4.5 million, is the first of its kind to include the participation of a car manufacturer, a public utility, a municipality and local businesses that will integrate the vehicles into their existing fleets. The trial is designed to study the vehicles’ charging behavior, the driving experience and overall driver satisfaction.

“This new pilot project is part of our action plan for the electrification of vehicles,” noted Thierry Vandal, Hydro-Québec’s President and CEO. “It will allow us to advance our knowledge of the technology and its integration into our grid, which in turn, will help us plan the necessary charging infrastructure for homes, offices and public places…”

i-MiEV, which stands for Mitsubishi Innovative Electric Vehicle, is an all-electric, highway-capable, charge-at-home commuter car. Because the battery, the motor and other items are mounted out of the way beneath the floor, the i-MiEV seats four adults and offers surprising interior room and cargo space. Other i-MiEV features include excellent low-speed acceleration and a very low centre of gravity, which contributes to superior handling and stability. Moreover, the i-MiEV is extremely quiet…

At the recent Tokyo International Motor Show (2009), the i-MiEV won the Japanese Car of the Year award for “Most Advanced Technology.”

Instead of the old debate over land use: development vs. farms; housing vs. green space, Agriburbia is a clever compromise.

Source: Denver Post

AgriBurbia - Denver CO

Six years ago, Matthew “Quint” Redmond suggested to Milliken planners that a corn farm north of Denver could increase its agricultural value and still anchor nearly a thousand homes.

“I got laughed out of the room,” Redmond said.

Today, Milliken’s 618-acre Platte River Village is ready for construction, with 944 planned homes surrounded by 108 acres of backyard farms and 152 acres of drip- irrigated community farms. The plan is for the farms to feed local residents and supply restaurants while paying for community upkeep. And Redmond, a 47-year-old planner-farmer, has 13 other Front Range projects mulling his “agriburbia” concept.

Redmond, co-founder of the Golden-based design firm TSR Group, travels the country preaching his urban farming and development idea. He envisions a future where the nation’s 31 million acres of lawn are converted to food production. He sees golf-course greens redefined with herbs; sand traps as “kale traps.” He sees retirement homes engulfed by farms and office buildings where workers escape cubicles on farming breaks.

Redmond, along with his born-on- a-farm biologist turned planner wife, Jennifer, sees an urban landscape like none before.

“This is where we are all going to go. We need this,” said Redmond. “Everyone thinks they are so smart by crafting a 2030 plan for the future. I say we need a $180-a-barrel plan, on how our communities can be self-sufficient when oil becomes too expensive to ship food across the country.”

Self-sufficient. Sustainable. Locally produced. Agriburbia incorporates all three concepts.

“Is there a better use of the land than growing your own food right where you are going to be eating it?” said Janie Lichtfuss, mayor of Milliken, which is positioned to become the first agriburbia community.

Perhaps, one day, Montreal might realize a version of Frank Lloyd Wright’s Broadacre City, a city of tall buildings surrounded by open space and farms.

I’m not sure why Montreal needs windmills given the enormous hydro electric resources in Quebec that already churn out some of the best sustainable energy in the world, but why not? It’s only taxpayer money, right?

Via: Montreal Gazette

St. Laurent will be getting one of the island’s first wind turbines, its whirling blades making enough power to light up a public sculpture and paths in one of the borough’s parks.

The borough council this month approved the $37,000 installation of the turbine at Philippe Laheurte Park.

“This is one illustration of our sustainable development plan,” said borough mayor Alan DeSousa.

A Laval company, Enseignes Valois, will install the 30-foot turbine in a wooded area in the park, which is on Ernest Hemingway Ave., west of Cavendish Blvd.

The turbine is expected to provide the borough with about 800 watts of lighting power. The park’s pedestrian and bike paths will be lit using energy from the turbine, DeSousa said.

Energy created by the turning blades will be stored in batteries which have a capacity of seven hours.