Lisa Mullins speaks with Shawn McCarthy of The Globe and Mail newspaper, about Canada's plans to phase out traditional coal-fired electricity plants.
This text below is a phonetic transcript of a radio story broadcast by PRI's THE WORLD. It has been created on deadline by a contractor for PRI. The transcript is included here to facilitate internet searches for audio content. Please report any transcribing errors to theworld@pri.org. This transcript may not be in its final form, and it may be updated. Please be aware that the authoritative record of material distributed by PRI's THE WORLD is the program audio.
LISA MULLINS: Back to Canada now, where the news might be a bit better for the atmosphere. The country's environment minister says dirty coal-fired power plants will soon be history, or at minimum no new plants will be built unless they include cutting-edge anti-pollution technology. Environment Minister Jim Prentice revealed the move in an interview with Toronto's Globe and Mail newspaper. Reporter Shawn McCarthy says the policy would require what's called “carbon capture†technology for all new coal-fired power plants.
SHAWN MCCARTHY: That would capture the emissions, the carbon dioxide emissions and instead of emitting them into the air, it would capture them and then pump them underground. And the idea is they would be stored there permanently so they would not be released into the atmosphere.
MULLINS: Does the technology exist right now to do that? That's the frustration.
MCCARTHY: The technology exists, but not really at a commercial level. A lot of places both in the United States, in Canada, and around the world are building demonstration plants, but at this point, it just costs too much.
MULLINS: The initiative for this is what? I mean, I guess the government, if it really wanted to clamp down hard, it could say that all coal-fired electricity plants in Canada – and maybe you can tell us how many there are – but they could say that they would be closed down instantly, but instead they are being allowed to live out their full lives. Is anyone there considering this as a half-measure?
MCCARTHY: Well, the province of Ontario, which relies on coal for about a quarter of its electricity, has said it will close its coal-fired power plants by 2014, so within 5 years. In provinces Alberta, Saschatewan, Nova Scotia, as much as 70 percent of their electricity comes from coal – so they can't shut it down right now. They don't have anything to replace it. So it will be phased out. And it's a long phase out. A coal plant might last 40 years more if you invest in retooling it, so it's going to be a long time to see the effect of this.
MULLINS: Is there an eye on what the United States is doing or not doing? The Canadians look to the United States –
MCCARTHY: Very much so. Very much so.
MULLINS: How so?
MCCARTHY: A couple of things. One is the Canadian government is very much aware that the US is finally going to be embracing climate change legislation, and is very worried about how that is going to effect Canada. It wants to be seen to be out ahead, doing some things of its own so they're not accused of being laggers. So they're looking to be out ahead, they're looking to maybe even sell technology. The United States is far more reliant on coal for its electricity than Canada is, and we'll be looking for clean coal technology. The Obama Administration has endorsed the idea of clean coal and talked about the need to go in that direction. So Canada is trying to provide a good story to the American audience. Right now when you talk climate change in Canada, a lot of people think oil sands. And that is not a good story because it's such a huge source of emissions. So they're trying to change the subject a little bit to one where they have a better story to tell.
MULLINS: Speaking to us from Ottawa, Shawn McCarthy of the Globe and Mail newspaper. The World's Peter Thomson is with us now. He's The World's Environment editor, and he's going to put some of these developments in Canada and Australia into perspective. So Peter, as we just heard, Canada is pledging to take a significant move forward by phasing out a major source of greenhouse gas emissions – that's coal-fired power plants. Australia is backtracking from its pledge to limit carbon emissions. The bottom line for you is how significant are both of these moves in the overall effort to try and reduce greenhouse gas emissions?
PETER THOMSON: Well, let's go to Canada first. As far as I've been able to tell, if Canada follows through on this, it would be the first time that a government has actually implemented such a project, to phase out old dirty coal plants. So it's quite a move if only from a purely symbolic perspective. Coal is public enemy number one for many people concerned about climate change. The US gets roughly half of its electricity from coal, and of course it's also very dirty. Now, in practical terms, Canada is much less reliant on coal than the US. It's also much smaller economy than the US or China or some other heavy coal users. But it is a very large and modern economy, so I think the example they set could be quite powerful.
MULLINS: All right. Now, what about the trouble that Australia is facing, on the other hand – having to delay the start of this new program to limit emissions because of the recession? For economic reasons?
THOMSON: Well, it's essentially the same argument that is taking place here in Washington; they're just further down the road. They had made these commitments, and here in Washington, we're talking about making these commitments. Australia is backtracking a little bit. They're saying it's going to be another year before they start implementing these. We haven't even gotten to the point of making the commitment yet, and while the conversation is much farther ahead now than it was in the Bush years, it's still a big fight in Washington.
MULLINS: So what's the overall lay of the land? In the lead up to the major Copenhagen talks coming up this Fall, the next treaty beyond the Kyoto Agreement, what's the field of play right now?
THOMSON: Well, Europe obviously has been a big leader on climate change policy, and they have at least begun a sort of nascent market in carbon credits, which has had a lot of problems over the last few years, but they say that they're working out the kinks and figuring out what works and what doesn't work. But in order to really make a leap into a new era, beyond Kyoto, the United States really is going to have to take a lead, because the rest of the world has been sitting back, waiting for us to do this for a long time. That's one of the reasons that the Obama Administration has really been pushing this climate legislation in Washington – they're calling it a cap-and-trade system. They want to be able to go to Copenhagen in the fall with a commitment on the part of the United States to take significant action to lead the world, and they really feel that those talks could fail if the United States doesn't bring that to the table. So there's a lot on the line in Washington right now. There's a big fight coming.
MULLINS: Thank you very much. The World's Environment editor, Peter Thomson. Thanks.
transcript