NEP = No Energy Plan

In its continuing efforts to raise awareness about the issue of peak energy, energy security and energy policy for Toronto, and Canada, Post Carbon Toronto is adding itself to the fast burgeoning discussion landscape popularly known as the 'blogosphere'. In addition we will be joining the legion of 'Youtubers' in the hopes of being able to provide a voice to our organization and our members. We encourage all PCT members and devotees of the twin issues of peak energy and emissions to join us by making their own videos. Please alert us when you do and we will do our best to compile them into an archive. As 'Oily Cassandra' shows in the following highly engaging vid http://www.oilrelease.com/ there is more than one way to attract attention to this issue.

For those of you reading this who may be running across us for the first time a little history. PCT began meeting in 2004. For four years those of us who founded this initiative met on a weekly basis to discuss what we could do to help be part of the solution. One of the principle accomplishments that we have managed in these years is to create a public outreach lecture series. Next month will be our 52nd. On this night Glen Seale, a member of PCT's planning committee, will give a talk on electric vehicles and how they can be part of the mix for solving the transportation problems that liquid fuel prices and availability will force on our communities and nation.

PCT is made up of three parts. It's 7 member Executive, Chaired by Randy Park, it's 8 member planning committee, and it's membership. Our Peak Oil meet-up site http://oilawareness.meetup.com/70/ has 367 members and is where you can find out about how to attend our monthly session. The next one on electric vehicles promises to be exceptional. Our home site http://www.postcarbontoronto.org/ is where you can read more about us and contact us. We also manage a listserv discussion forum that anyone is free to join. torontopeakoil@yahoogroups.com

The most important thing to note as we begin our efforts in this direction is that you will hear a diversity of opinion from us on this forum. We will each of us be speaking from our individual perspective. Yes PCT will at times speak with one voice as an organization but on this forum it is the diversity of our opinions that we are looking to highlight. And on that note here are a few of mine.

Today's NEP: No Energy Plan?

It is true to say that Canada is very much behind the curve when it comes to energy. Our leaders proclaim us an "energy superpower" but is this true? For one Canada is the only Western Industrialized nation that has no Strategic Petroleum Reserve. For another we import half the oil that we use into this country even as we export over 60% of what we produce. Furthermore we are also the only nation in the world, that's right the one and only, that has guaranteed a foreign market the right of first access of the majority of our gas and oil regardless of scarcity. I kid you not. As they say in baseball you can look it up. I.e. NAFT Agreement, (bit of British humour for you there) Chapter 6. http://www.international.gc.ca/trade-agreements-accords-commerciaux/agr-acc/nafta-alena/texte/chap06.aspx?lang=en

This clause familiarly known as 'The Proportionality Clause' is unique in the world and poorly understood by most of our politicians and virtually unknown to most Canadians. What is invariably overlooked is the fact that this clause will only be invoked if our government attempts to change the dynamics of the marketplace. To some this makes it innocuous. As in, "Well as long as we can pay the going price we'll get the gas we need." What this view mistakes is that Canadian and U.S. consumers do not buy the gas they need directly from the producers. They buy it instead gas stations who buy it from the major oil companies who buy it from the producers. The vast majority of these oil companies are American. It is these corporations that will do the "competing" during a time of scarcity not the consumer. What would the effect of this be in a time of crisis? I leave you to be the judge of the patriotism of American corporations. For my part I think the last week's events on Wall Street are a very good indicator of the flexibility of the American government when it comes to market principles. Something of which Canadians in the beef and lumber industries need no reminding.

So who are we getting 50% of the oil we use from anyway? Of the countries that we import from that inspire less than abundant confidence are Iraq, Nigeria, Algeria and Venezuela. The U.K and Norway, while stable politically, are now seeing their production decline at rates that will impact their ability to continue exporting in the near future. Britain is already a net importer. Despite these obvious challenges we have failed to create the infrastructure in this country to that would allow half of our citizens to access Canadian oil should the need arise.

With all these challenges one would think that energy would be an issue equal to the economy or the environment this election. And yet here we are once again with a Canadian election that is coming and going with essentially zero talk about energy security for Canadians. This constitutes very real recklessness on the part of our government and blindness on the part of all of our party leaders.

NRCan is charged by law to engage in all aspects of our nations energy plan. Yet when the NRCan was asked directly by Gordon Laxer of Parkland what their plan was for supply disruptions he was told succinctly "There isn't one." The same response was given to Doug Munroe, National Farmers Union and PCT member, when he made the same inquiry. I urge all of you reading this posting to ask the same question. You can do so at the following link. http://www.nrcan-rncan.gc.ca/com/concon/concon-eng.php#frm I have done so and so far have received no reply. I will follow up soon with a phone call and report the results.

This is what Sheila Fraser had to say about this highly untenable situation.
Sheila Fraser, Auditor General, November 3, 2005:

"...operating sectors did not use a coherent framework for assessing risk, and the Department did not have appropriate emergency plans in place for all its responsibility areas."
"Mr. Chairman, NRCan's responsibilities for emergency preparedness are spelled out in the Emergency Preparedness Act, and the government has had a policy in place since 1995 on NRCan's lead role. The Department informed us that the policy is outdated. However, Canadians cannot wait for further changes to the policy to have appropriate plans. Our audit recommended that the Department, in collaboration with other stakeholders, should ensure that appropriate plans are completed without delay." (to which I say "Amen to that!")

And yet still we delay. In a strictly legal sense if there were to be supply disruptions within the next few years these disruptions would occasion financial and human costs. Were this to occur I would not be surprised to find our government in a court of law being sued for negligence. What opposition parties would no doubt label "criminal recklessness". It of course bears noting the Liberals have held power many times since the first oil shock in 1973 and so share a significant part of the blame as well. In their defense their attempt to create a National Energy Program for Canada was exactly the right thing to do, and precisely what every oil producing nation outside of the Anglosphere has already done. Every last one. Unfortunately since the NEP's defeat by the kind of powerful financial interests that are eternally interested in enclosing the commons the Liberals have been AWOL. on the question of energy security.

As to the NDP while their hands are clean from the point of view of power they too have been largely absent from the point of view of offering comprehensive alternatives to the dangerous status quo. On the plus side the NDP is the only party so far to have convened a Parliamentary Committee to look at fossil fuel depletion. They did so on February 7, 2008. Their energy critic is Dennis Bevington, MP West High Artic, and he is very well informed on the issue of peak energy. Parkland's Gordon Laxer, Richard Heinberg and PCT were three of six invited to give expert testimony to the committee.
The Green Party of Canada has to date been the party who has engaged this issue most directly. During their recent policy review process the GPC drew up many very sensible measures to deal with energy policy as a whole as well as the issue of depletion and disruptions to supply. Unfortunately because of Harper's snap election call there has not yet been time for these policies to be officially ratified. Three members of PCT were an integral part of this process and PCT would be happy to do the same for any and all of the parties. We are in principle and in practice a non-partisan organization.

PCT GETS SOME TV TIME: The following media coverage of the issue of peak oil and energy security by no means balances the problems above described but it is at least a move in the right direction for creating the kind of public awareness that can translate into political pressure. http://www.citynews.ca/news/news_27572.aspx

This attempt to raise awareness has of course been going on for quite some time. Dr. Hubbert kicked it off over 50 years ago and Jean Laherre and Colin Campbell jumpstarted the moribund effort with their seminal National Geographic article in 1998, 'The End of Cheap Oil.' Since then groups like ASPO, the Post Carbon Institute and The Oil Drum have been leading the charge. More locally folks like Richard Gilbert, Jim Lemon and Greg Allen have dedicated enormous amounts of time and energy over the last ten years to try and both raise awareness as well as be professionally engaged in evolving solution sets at a high level. Another Torontonian who must be congratulated is Greg Greene for his films the End of Suburbia and Escape from Suburbia. In many significant ways EOS was at the centre of galvanizing a community of activists that did not yet know they were a community. Ontarian Barry Silverthorn must also be commended for having conceived and produced EOS. We at PCT owe a large thanks to the efforts of Rose Kudlac in starting the organization back in 2004 and to Kjel Oslund for the creation of our constitution.

At this time PCT would also like to thank the following people for the many hours they have cumulatively contributed to PCT and the issue of energy security for Toronto and Canada. Adriana Mugnatto-Hamu, Lee Boal, Judy Vellend, David Elfstrom, Anne Langdon, Paul Truman, Henry Warwick, Glean Seale, Claudia Davila, and of course our Chair Randy Park.

It is a brave new world of information out there today my friends and PCT hopes you will help us spread the word and build the movement that will better help us to better meet the enormous challenges that lie ahead. This election cycle it is the turn of the climate change and environmtal movements to try and turn the tide of laissez-faire business and government. To turn our leaders towards the responsibilities that they demonstrably owe to us all.

With your help we hope to find in the next election cycle 'A Made in Canada Energy Solution' as front and centre as the 'Green Shift' is today. With your help I have no doubt that at the very least the issue will be more clearly articulated.

ton confrere,

J.F. Berg
www.postcarbontoronto.org