the big energy a bridge to a sustainable -...

A Roundtable Discussion Hosted by National Geographic in Partnership with Shell

NATURAL GAS: A Bridge to a SustainableEnergy Future? BRITISH COLUMBIA &

THE BIGGER PICTURE

THE BIG ENERGY QUESTION

M A R C H 2 5 , 2 0 1 4 , AT T H E M O R R I S J . W O S K C E N T R E F O R D I A L O G U E S I M O N F R A S E R U N I V E R S I T Y, VA N C O U V E R

TABLE 3

JOSEPH ARVAIProfessor and Svare Chair in Applied Decision Research, Decision Research Lab, Department of Geography, University of Calgary

GREG HALSETHProfessor in the Geography Program, Canada Research Chair in Rural and Small Town Studies; Director, Community Development Institute, University of Northern British Columbia

ROBERT HORNUNGPresident, Canadian Wind Energy Association (CanWEA)

PAUL JEAKINSCommissioner and CEO, BC Oil and Gas Commission

DANIEL KAMMENClass of 1935 Distinguished Professor of Energy, University of California, Berkeley

CHIEF RAYMOND MORRISNee Tahi Buhn Band

GEOFF MORRISONManager, British Columbia Operations, Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers (CAPP)

ROB POWELLSenior Officer, Priority Conservation Programs, WWF Canada

RICHARD PROKOPANKODirector, Corporate and Government Affairs, Rio Tinto Alcan

ZOEY WALDENEnvironmental Researcher, Canadian Energy Research Institute (CERI)

TABLE 4

KIM BAIRDFounder and Owner, Kim Baird Strategic Consulting

DALE BUMSTEADMayor, Dawson Creek

ANDY CALITZCEO, LNG Canada

KEN COATESCanada Research Chair in Regional Innovation, Johnson-Shoyama Graduate School of Public Policy, University of Saskatchewan

MATT HORNEAssociate Regional Director, British Columbia, Pembina Institute

MARIANNE LAVELLESenior Energy Editor, National Geographic

NIGEL PROTTERExecutive Director and CEO, BC Sustainable Energy Association

TRIBAL CHIEF TERRY TEEGEECarrier Sekani Tribal Council (CSTC)

SEIICHI TSURUMIManager, Non-Technical JV & Issues, LNG Canada

TABLE 5

ROBERT BOTTERELLPartner, Botterell Law Corporation

DAVID BRAUNDirector of Outreach, National Geographic

MARK BROWNSTEINAssociate Vice President & Chief Counsel, US Climate and Energy Program, Environmental Defense Fund (EDF)

KAREN ETHERINGTONDirector, Environment & Regulatory Permitting, Coastal GasLink Pipeline Project, TransCanada Pipelines Limited

DAN GOLDBERGERExecutive Director, Energy Technology & Innovation Canada (ETIC)

AMBASSADOR KIE-CHEON LEEConsul General, Consulate General of the Republic of Korea

WALTER MÉRIDADirector, Clean Energy Research Centre (CERC), University of British Columbia

JEREMY MOORHOUSESenior Analyst, Clean Energy Canada at Tides Canada

CHIEF COUNCILOR ELLIS ROSSHaisla Nation

KREY STIRLANDCommercial Manager, LNG Canada

JONATHAN WHITWORTHCEO, Seaspan

TABLE 1

LORI ACKERMANMayor, Fort St. John JOHN ADAMS Vice President, Industry, Sustainable Development Technology Canada (SDTC)

JIM BURPEEPresident and Chief Executive Officer, Canadian Electricity Association (CEA)

ROBERT DENNISNatural Resource Department Head, Lead Negotiator, Wet'suwet'en First Nation

GREG KNOXExecutive Director, Skeena Wild Conservation Trust

ALEXANDER MOENVice President, Explorer Programs, National Geographic

THOMAS PEDERSEN Executive Director, Pacific Institute for Climate Solutions, University of Victoria

DAVE PORTERCEO, First Nations Energy and Mining Council

YUEN PAU WOOPresident and CEO, Asia Pacific Foundation of Canada

TABLE 2

WADE DAVISExplorer, National Geographic

DAVID LAYZELLProfessor and Director, Canadian Energy Systems Analysis Research (CESAR) Initiative, University of Calgary

JESSICA MCDONALDConsultant

DAN MCFADYENExecutive Fellow, The School of Public Policy, University of Calgary ZOHER MERATLACo-founder and Principal, CDS Research Ltd.

CHIEF KAREN OGENWet'suwet'en First Nation

JOTHAM PETERSManaging Partner, Navius Research

FRANK SESNODirector, School of Media and Public Affairs (SMPA), The George Washington University

PETER WOODDirector of Terrestrial Conservation, Canadian Parks and Wilderness Society (CPAWS)

Participants

2 Introduction

4 Setting the Scene

6 Opening Panel

12 The Table Debates

20 The Lightning Round

24 In Summary

2 THE BIG ENERGY QUESTION | NATURAL GAS: A BRIDGE TO A SUSTAINABLE ENERGY FUTURE? | BRITISH COLUMBIA & THE BIGGER PICTURE


As part of the Great Energy Challenge, a National Geographic initiative in partnership with Shell, a forum was convened on March 25, 2014, featuring key experts from academia, government, First Nations, industry and nonprofit organizations. The event, titled

NATURAL GAS: A Bridge to a Sustainable Energy Future?

BRITISH COLUMBIA & THE BIGGER PICTURE,

was designed to spark a meaningful and forward-thinking dialogue about the role of natural gas in our future energy mix. This was the fourth event in The Big Energy Question series, and it followed discussions on biofuels, the Arctic and sustainable cities.

} On behalf of National Geographic Vice President of Explorer Programs Alexander Moen welcomed partici -pants. Providing context for the event, he explained that National Geographic is at its core an educational and scientific organization supporting field -based research and science to better understand the world around us. For over 125 years it has shared its findings to inspire people to care about the planet, and now, through a series of initiatives, National Geographic is deepening its audience’s engagement with some of the world’s most important topics. A key program in this is the Great Energy Challenge launched in 2010 in partnership with Shell. Acknowledging that attendees were drawn primarily from North America, and especially from British Columbia, Moen expressed his

hope that the event would be the start of a broader global dialogue. Moen introduced the event’s moderator, Frank Sesno. He explained that Sesno is an Emmy Award-winning journalist and that while working for CNN he had served as White House correspondent, anchorman, and Washington bureau chief. He is now the director of the School of Media and Public Affairs at The George Washington University, where he leads a faculty of nearly two dozen world - class professors. Sesno is also the creator and host of Planet Forward, which highlights innovation in sustainability, and is the chief executive of Face the Facts USA, a nonpartisan, fact -based content hub dedicated to elevating the tone of national discourse. |

Natural Gas: A Bridge to a Sustainable Energy Future? British Columbia and the Bigger Picture—the fourth event in the Big Energy Question series—took place at the Morris J. Wosk Centre for Dialogue, Simon Fraser University in Vancouver on March 25th.

Ambassador Kie-Cheon Lee, Consul General, Consulate General of the Republic of Korea (bottom, left)

Setting the Scene} Sesno described the energy story as “a collision of imagination and intellect,” as well as at times “a collision of ignorance and misinformation.” He stressed the need to educate the young people who “own this century” in the sense that by 2050 the planet is projected to have nine billion people, requiring twice as much energy, 70% more food and 40% more water— all while dealing with urbanization and climate change. On this thoughtful note Sesno introduced Marianne Lavelle, Senior Energy Editor at National Geographic. She briefly outlined the story of natural gas, including its19th -century use for city lighting and subsequent replacement by coal for electric power and by oil for transportation. Here she highlighted the “physical reality that it’s more difficult to transport a gas than a solid or a liquid” as a major limiting factor until the construction of gas pipelines in the U.S. after World War II. Today “natural gas provides the heat for half the homes in Canada and the United States” but its biggest use is for electricity generation, being more efficient and less polluting than coal. With hydraulic fracturing set to ensure a long- term and steady supply, utility companies are switching from coal to gas as part of broader changes in the U.S. energy mix, resulting in “falling carbon emissions” there. Lavelle praised Canada’s positive energy mix, with “one

whether China’s access to imported LNG would replace or delay that country’s move to even lower carbon alternatives such as solar and wind. Here Lavelle stressed that natural gas offered a carbon advantage if burned instead of coal.

Turning to environmental concerns, Lavelle raised the need to protect communities and environments, considering that there may be some places where natural gas production would be particularly sensitive. She stated that “if you allow methane or natural gas to escape into the atmosphere, it’s a far worse greenhouse gas than carbon dioxide.” She called for more scientific study to both measure and minimize the impact of escaping methane. Here Lavelle highlighted the classic feedback loop of global warming melting permafrost, which releases trapped methane that further increases global warming. “The only way that we can curb these methane emissions and address all the other impacts of climate change is by changing the way we use energy,” Lavelle concluded, adding that the Great Energy Challenge was “beginning a dialogue on our shared energy future.” |

of the highest shares of hydroelectricity in the world and only 8% of your energy coming from coal,” a figure set to fall further under new government policy. This was contrasted with China’s 70% dependence on coal energy and its rapidly increasing coal consumption, which is resulting in a “devastating impact on health and rising global carbon emissions.” She stressed “the positive role that natural gas can play in attacking this problem—replacing coal for emerging economies.” Lavelle acknowledged China’s efforts to reduce its coal dependence and speculated that although “China probably has large natural gas reserves … its demand is growing more quickly than its domestic supplies of any fuel.” This raised the question of importing Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG) from countries like Canada. British Columbia will have 15 of the 40 proposed LNG export terminals in North America. These export terminals met the reality that North America has “a large supply of natural gas and demand for energy is high and growing elsewhere.” This includes Japan, the world’s leading LNG importer, which has paid five times the U.S. price. However, Lavelle cautioned that Japan’s natural gas program was replacing nuclear power, so “that’s not going to be beneficial from a climate change standpoint.” An important question, therefore, was

Participants listen to the keynote by Marianne Lavelle, Senior Energy Editor, National Geographic (below)


Paul Jeakins, Commissioner and CEO, BC Oil and Gas Commission; Andy Calitz, CEO, LNG Canada; Mark Brownstein, Associate Vice President & Chief Counsel, US Climate and Energy Program, Environmental Defense Fund (EDF) (below left to right)

Opening Panel


} Sesno now invited three stakeholder panelists to debate the question “How can we ensure that natural gas hastens the world’s transition to a low-carbon energy future?”

The panelists were:

Paul Jeakins, Commissioner and CEO of the BC Oil and Gas Commission

Andy Calitz, CEO, LNG Canada

Mark Brownstein, Associate Vice President & Chief Counsel of the US Climate and Energy Program, Environmental Defense Fund (EDF)

Sesno began by posing the question of timescales for transition. Andy Calitz responded that the International Energy Agency (IEA) had calculated that a 200-year supply of gas remained, placing “an upper bound on how long this transition can take.” This urgency was reinforced by his belief that Asia was extremely enthusiastic about natural gas because Japan and Korea are so deficient in energy resources and China “is in such dire

emissions. However, “that remarkable progress has come at the expense of the safety and security of communities where gas development takes place,” said Brownstein, adding, “we can’t trade one problem for another.” Questioned on whether he saw natural gas as a substantial net positive Brownstein raised three points. The first was that “we have to do a much better job of reducing risk to public health and the environment associated with producing this product.” Here Brownstein felt “we can do better but we’re not necessarily doing as well as we could.” His second point reiterated that “natural gas is methane and methane is a powerful greenhouse gas pollutant.” This means that “even small leaks, either at the well site or through the transportation network, can undo much of the benefit we think we’re getting when we’re substituting gas for coal.” Finally, Brownstein urged the need to continue improving renewables and energy efficiency, ensuring that gas is “a complement to greater renewable energy deploy -ment as opposed to crowding out new renewables.”

need to clean up the environment.” Here Calitz lamented the nuclear disaster at Fukushima “because it removed one of the [energy] options … So for nuclear and for world energy, that was a tragedy and a big setback.” He believed that we now need to do everything we can through global policy and working together to deal with carbon and hasten the transition to sustainable energy sources.

For Paul Jeakins, transition in British Columbia was the rapid three -year process whereby “we went from 80% conventional production in British Columbia (BC) to probably 85% unconventional, from just shale.” He added that “for us in BC the natural gas conversation is a global conversation.”

Mark Brownstein affirmed the role of natural gas “in helping to move coal out of the U.S. energy mix.” He said that historically 50% of U.S. electricity came from coal “and last year we were down below 40%,” resulting in a real drop in U.S. CO2

Calitz agreed, adding that safety in communities must be a “foremost” concern. He continued with a reminder that “last year, according to the World Health Organization, seven million people died as a result of environmental and air pollution, and so much of it comes from coal.” Recognizing how comparably clean natural gas is, he agreed that local safety is vital, but we must also view its use “at the macro level.”

Considering the environmental issue, Jeakins noted that British Columbia is “a very environmentally sensitive province” and that “as a regulator we’ve got to work on strategies … with the government as they develop policy.” Here Brownstein highlighted that EDF had recently worked with Colorado’s three largest oil and gas producers to “develop a set of recommendations that ultimately became regulation.” This

made Colorado the first U.S. state to “regulate all hydrocarbon emissions” and demand that companies deploy new equipment at sites and improve leak detection and repair. Brownstein underlined the importance of this, as most emissions in the field “come simply from inadequate operation and maintenance practices.” He felt this was “good news, because there’s so much that we can do that is cost -effective.”

Bringing this home to British Columbia, Calitz noted that it would take natural gas about one and a half days to flow from the wells in northeast British Columbia to the proposed LNG Canada facility on the coast. He confirmed that the energy companies fully understood that methane is a “very significant greenhouse gas” and agreed that no leaks must be allowed. He was certain that “safe operations, safety to environment and safety to

people” are foremost in the licensing of any gas facility.

In characterizing “safe” Jeakins noted that “what’s right for one group is different for another group ... so we define it through legislation and through policy, which involves taking in a lot of information from other jurisdictions.” Jeakins stated that British Columbia’s goal is to be “best in class, to be the safest,” and that legislation was in place to shut down operations if there’s a leak. Furthermore, the BC Oil and Gas Commission has invested in equipment to help with “monitoring and establishing a baseline” for greenhouse gases and air quality. This was picked up by Brownstein, who cited EDF’s involvement in 16 different scientific studies that repeatedly reinforced the fact that “people can’t manage what they don’t measure.” He noted that the lack of good field data “not only prevented citizens from holding producers accountable,” but also prevented “producers from knowing that there’s a problem and being able to take corrective action before it becomes an even bigger problem.”

In answer to Sesno’s question of whether it was possible to quickly do away with fossil fuels altogether, Calitz stressed that cutting the carbon intensity of produced energy was the first step because “it is not possible to [change] immediately. World society will react against the cost.”

Brownstein responded that “we can’t lose sight of the fact that for all of the value that natural gas can play in the short to medium term, it’s a fossil fuel.” He noted that studies suggest that using more than 25% of our known hydrocarbon reserves would carry us beyond a tipping point “at which the climate becomes altered in a way that none of us would recognize.” To further reinforce the urgency of

Frank Sesno, Director of the School of Media and Public Affairs (SMPA) at The George Washington University, moderates the discussion (above)



transition, he reminded participants that the Mauna Loa Observatory had just recorded a “probably sustained 400 ppm threshold,” and that we were fast approaching a time when it would be “very difficult” to undo the impact. “So yes, natural gas helps us in a transition,” concluded Brownstein, “but it is by no means the destination for our energy economy. It can’t be.”

Calitz pointed to the widely accepted projection of a nine billion population, which would place a “huge stress on our planet.” He felt the only options were to increase energy efficiency and decrease carbon intensity. He praised China’s efforts in “doing its utmost to effect the transformation,” acknowledging that “CNOOC of China has taken a stake at Grassy Point,” and that China was trying to bring gas in from Canada to combat its emissions. He added: “The two tonnes per Chinese citizen they currently emit per year is really, really admirable and the fight is really to be congratulated.” Sesno suggested that in China “their fight is one of sheer numbers and magnitude at this point.”

The discussion now turned to community and cooperation, asking what the world can learn from British Columbia. Jeakins responded that for him community was about the pace, “How much activity in a given time frame … that’s something we look very closely at.” Because British Columbia is new to the global stage with LNG, Jeakins felt that there was space to have conversations with the communities. He noted that the government was very focused on “what that [conversation] should look like,” and they were trying to pull together all of the data “whether it’s for caribou or water quality.” Jeakins continued, “We do consult on each and every application. What we want to do is elevate that conversation from just the individual application … and look at more of a tactical level.” He observed that “our shale basins are about a

million to three million hectares in size. We want to have a conversation at that level rather than just talking about an individual well.” The hardest part for British Columbia was “trying to get all of the information into a small room … it’s a lot of information.” In terms of the public’s role and influence on regulation, Jeakins said that “the conversation at the public level for us is less about the strategic—that’s more government and policy setting—but more about the tactical, what’s going to happen in a given area.” As a regulator, the government has been trying to open up tactical level conversations, engaging with the public “at the basin level or even the entire northeast of the province.” At the operational level “we’re making decisions on individual applications … dealing with a local First Nation, in some cases a trapper, on specific issues.”

Calitz picked up the discussion, expressing his belief that British Columbia was set apart by “the quality and the intensity of the debate about energy.” He felt the daily newspaper coverage and the number of participants demonstrated “a very vigorous and healthy debate.” This debate was addressing the fundamental question: “Do British Columbians want energy to flow from British Columbia to Asia?” Pointing out that LNG was simply super - chilled natural gas, he said that gas from Dawson Creek could reach China in twelve and a half days. He believed that allowing this “will have a profound impact, in a positive way, on the industrial, societal, community and economic development of British Columbia.” With this he acknowledged that “everywhere a pipeline is built, where a well is drilled, where a new facility is built … it will have an environmental impact.” Asking “Which way does the balance scale tip?” Calitz believed that exporting gas to

Panelists discuss the role of natural gas with moderator Frank Sesno (above)

Seiichi Tsurumi, Manager, Non Technical JV & Issues, LNG Canada; Dale Bumstead, Mayor, Dawson Creek; Terry Teegee, Tribal Chief, Carrier Sekani Tribal Council (CSTC) (opposite, left to right)



Asia was “without any doubt in British Columbia’s overall interest … but that’s a decision that British Columbians can, will and should take.”

Brownstein noted that, “It’s hard enough to ask a community to run the risk that water or air will be contaminated for domestic use,” so when “the benefits of that energy production are going to go somewhere else, that’s another question entirely.” Indeed, Brownstein felt that in the United States “you’re beginning to see people pushing back on that.” He proposed two possibilities: keeping the gas at home or committing to producing gas much more safely. Brownstein called for communities to be given the information necessary to independently verify that processes are being properly observed, although “in the U.S. that’s a big challenge.”

The panel now considered the geopolitics of energy. Brownstein noted the dichotomy that many U.S. congressmen were “falling over themselves to get natural gas over to Europe,” yet gas was still being flared. “This is such a powerful and important strategic resource that we’ll move heaven and earth to try to deliver it to allies,” he said, “yet we’ll flare off producing in one of the biggest basins [Bakken] in the U.S.” Calitz immediately agreed that flaring in the Bakken should stop. Noting the importance of energy to Russian diplomacy, Calitz expressed his belief that recent events in Crimea have increased the probability of natural gas exports from the U.S. and Canada, which will give Asia the option of an energy security independent of Russia.

The panel was now asked to define “low carbon.” Jeakins replied that regulators “don’t get into those types of conversations ... it’s a global conversation. It’s not about British Columbia,” although he noted the province’s exceptional record of hydro- power was a “generational legacy” and “that’s why we’re looking at LNG now as a generational opportunity.” He went on to note that British Columbia only uses 15–20% of its produced gas, therefore a natural gas economy would have to go global, “so when we talk low carbon, it is low carbon probably somewhere else.”

For Brownstein low carbon meant not only low CO2 but also low methane emissions because “a molecule of methane is 84 times

more powerful than CO2 in the first 20 years in the atmosphere.” Minimizing methane emissions was both good for the environment and the economy, “because this is a product that’s otherwise being wasted.” He urged the design of electricity systems to “make smart use of the gas” with “power plants that can ramp up and down quickly and therefore complement renewable energy deployment, as opposed to competing with it.” For this Brownstein called on those issuing power plant permits to ensure “the right operating characteristics to work seamlessly with our renewable energy future.” He expressed concern that “cheap natural gas may mean that we lose the focus on the policies that have been so successful in helping us to deploy renewable energy and

ultimately make renewable energy cheaper.” Brownstein concluded that positive policies for renewables remained a priority across the world.

Questioned on the opportunities and challenges of natural gas, Calitz saw British Columbia’s big opportunity as diversifying its markets into Asia to compensate for declining U.S. demand. This is the result of the United States’ transition to unconventional sources, which Calitz described as “the biggest energy phenomenon in the past decade.” Working with the government, First Nations communities and project proponents to safely produce that gas, build the pipelines and then explore and develop the markets was for Calitz, “the challenge that lies ahead for us.” |

The Table Debates} Sesno now introduced the table debates. Each table featured a National Geographic moderator who guided 40 minutes of discussion on three themes, after which the following key findings were presented: Power Generation in a Low-Carbon Future

This theme was discussed in the context of growing population and energy demand. It was noted that natural gas offers immediate benefits and many short - term opportunities, especially in terms of flexibility and moving away from coal, but it is still a carbon-emitting fuel. Therefore seizing it may be a long- term liability, as expensive infrastructure would “lock in” users to natural gas. That said, it could still play an important role in the move to global energy sustainability, but should be seen as a first transition that enables a full transition to clean energy. To this end, we must not emphasize LNG at the expense of the clean tech sector and energy efficiency. There is still a strong need to focus on carbon sequestration and renewables—including nuclear. It was suggested that natural gas offers a reliable energy supply in a way some other sources can’t, and it was also noted that renewables can only generate electricity. There was belief that natural

Industry itself recognized the need to be more proactive in acquiring community consent before moving projects forward. To achieve this, communities should be meaningfully involved in a dialogue—not just communicated at. Consultation and accommodation were required at a high level, including discussions on taxation, royalties and benefits. It was stated that First Nations had huge concerns over revenue sharing and that trust needed to be built. For this to happen, conversations must be open and transparent, with an appreciation of the local community’s history and particular issues. It was widely held that literacy around energy was poor; there was an urgent need for more and better information, with consistency in terminology and facts. Along with a need to talk about the cumulative impacts of multiple projects, there was a call to elevate discussions from a provincial to a continental strategy level. There were also suggestions that conversations need to be systems -based and that everything was underpinned by ensuring that governance and foundations remain uninfluenced by industry.

gas wells will inevitably be developed, so we need to manage the benefits and the costs. Technology would have a prominent role in managing emissions at a local level and stimulating broader innovation, perhaps through clean tech funds. It was also felt that governments need to manage multiple objectives, and that a systematic approach is required, as energy involves inter -connected industries on a global scale.

Community and Cooperation

On this theme it was understood that developing natural gas brings economic benefits and costs for local communities. In British Columbia indigenous peoples have been especially affected because a lot of the gas development occurs within their traditional territories. Impacts have included environmental and safety concerns, as well as rising house prices and other externalities, along with strains on everything from sewers to schools— conditions which local communities had little capacity to manage. But with good management and equitable sharing it was thought development could improve quality of life. It was therefore crucial to engage with communities, including First Nations, at an early stage. It was noted that many decisions were made without community input, and though proponents wanted immediate decisions, more time was needed for consultation.


Roundtable discussion (below)



Ellis Ross, Chief Councilor, Haisla Nation; Robert Dennis, Natural Resource Department Head and Lead Negotiator, Wet'suwet'en First Nation; David Layzell, Professor and Director, Canadian Energy Systems Analysis Research (CESAR) Initiative, University of Calgary; Daniel Kammen, Class of 1935 Distinguished Professor of Energy, University of California, Berkeley (Left column, top to bottom)

Terry Teegee, Tribal Chief, Carrier Sekani Tribal Council (CSTC); Dale Bumstead, Mayor, Dawson Creek; Rob Powell, Senior Officer, Priority Conservation Programs, WWF Canada; Kim Baird, Founder and Owner, Kim Baird Strategic Consulting (Right column, top to bottom)

Natural Gas and the Environment

Addressing this theme, the tables felt there was an urgent need to define the role of natural gas in an energy transition: Is it enabling or competing with the crucially needed transition to a low-carbon future? Here context was everything. Though natural gas can be used to retire less efficient fuels like coal, its deployment in predominantly clean- air societies (nuclear, hydroelectricity) may move us in the wrong direction. It was suggested that decisions on natural gas were based on economic rather than environmental considerations. Technology development was deemed central to making natural gas more environmentally responsible and more efficient. More broadly it was felt that everybody should contribute to reducing emissions, and that more information and encouragement was required for consumers to reduce consumption. It was widely agreed that there is a need for

both improved data and increased regulation, with suggestions including enforced flaring bans; sequestration; using renewable energy to produce LNG; judging companies on environ -mental not economic performance; and full -cycle Life Cycle Accounting of all fuels.

Comments from the Floor

The table debates prompted a lively discussion, as Sesno opened the session to comments from the floor.

Chief Councilor Ellis Ross, elected Chief Councilor of the Haisla Nation, raised the question of First Nation inclusion. He pointed out that 200 court cases in Canada had stopped resource export and development projects, saying, “Canada’s got to wake up” to the fact that First Nations must be included across the board. “If you include them, they’re actually lobbying for you and your project. If you don’t include them, if you’re not open and transparent about it, your project is dead.” Terry Teegee, Tribal Chief of the Carrier Sekani Tribal Council, added that small communities were left with the legacy of these projects. “From a western perspective, sure, there’s money and there’s all these things that we need … it’s costing [our people] the way we live, and our land and the animals that are on it.” This different kind of cost -benefit analysis was “never considered adequately in an environmental assessment process,” despite the United Nations Declaration for the Rights of Indigenous People “to have free, prior and informed consent of any project within our traditional territories.”

Dale Bumstead, Mayor of Dawson Creek, called for more information to help British Columbians really understand the development of the natural gas industry and how it will affect them. “We need to ensure

at the provincial level that we try to engage the province, understand the industry and provide that information.” Robert Dennis, Natural Resource Department Head and Lead Negotiator, Wet'suwet'en First Nation, stressed the need for “consultation and accom-modation,” as this was what most British Columbia court rulings had addressed. He agreed that by fairly compensating First Nations for impacts and infringe-ments, “I believe you’ll have them on board. But if industry and government don’t do that, that could be the thing that holds things up.” He added that negotiations based on population size were not reasonable, citing British Columbia court cases that had instead ordered compensation based on the level of infringement. “I don’t think the gas industry has entered into that type of dialogue yet with any of the First Nations, at least not in a meaningful way.”

Jim Burpee, President and Chief Executive Officer, Canadian Electricity Association, agreed that much develop-ment could not be done “without the involvement of the First Nations.” He cited the success of the Lower Mattagami extension in Ontario, “where Moose Cree First Nation can have up to 25% equity interest—that’s how things are getting done.” He added that the First Nations were also an essential potential workforce “which ties you back to the need for education, skill development [and] capacity building … We need the development for a much broader, even corporate and commercial benefit.” Expanding the conversation further, Burpee announced the release of a document called “Vision 2050,” which highlights that “decisions made in the next ten years will determine what the energy system in 2050 looks like.” He acknowledged that as a transition fuel natural gas may not form a major part of Canada’s energy mix, but it still plays a critical role as a backup, because in times of crisis “you’re going to go to gas for dependency.”

He added that “a really important perspective” was to focus on energy because it is an integrated grid. Burpee also expressed his belief that alongside technological innovation the consumer also has an important role to play in the changing energy system.

Daniel Kammen, Class of 1935 Distinguished Professor of Energy, University of California, Berkeley, noted that California and British Columbia were “the two places on the [Pacific] coast that have carbon price right now.” Acknowledging that the benefit of natural gas varies based on where you are, he said, “If we’re going to achieve this deep decarbonization, we’re going to have to look at projects that involve gas, that financially and equality -wise pay off much quicker than projects in the past.” Having just 37 years until 2050, the widely held deadline for transitioning from fossil fuels in order to avoid irreparable climate change, “puts a whole new economic spin on big projects, big developments,” and that if we held true to all the IPCC targets, he felt that “some natural gas projects that look good on paper wouldn’t look good if you used that lens.” Zoher Meratla, Co - founder and Principal of CDS Research, argued that there were limited options for transition fuels, and he believed that natural gas was “the best option we have as a transition fuel to lead us to a combination of options that will provide us with a greener future.” He believed that British Columbia should produce energy and send it to Asia with the condition that it was “done the right way.”

Responding to a question about leadership, Ellis Ross asserted that “it should be a combination of First Nations and industry. I don’t think it should be British Columbia or Canada. I don’t think they have the ability to do it.” For Mark Brownstein leadership “begins with credibility and credibility



Chief Raymond Morris, Nee Tahi Buhn Band; Greg Halseth, Professor in the Geography Program, Canada Research Chair in Rural and Small Town Studies and Director, Community Development Institute, University of Northern British Columbia; Robert Hornung, President, Canadian Wind Energy Association (CanWEA) (above, left to right)

Lori Ackerman, Mayor, Fort St. John; Thomas Pedersen, Executive Director, Pacific Institute for Climate Solutions, University of Victoria (opposite)

begins with admitting what you know and what you don’t know.” He continued that industry often used unsupported assertions; sometimes “we don’t know what all the impacts are going to be” and that “we have to be honest with ourselves that whatever we do there’s always going to be residual risk.” He felt that communities deserved this level of honesty to make informed choices and to avoid feeling betrayed “when something bad does happen.” Greg Halseth, Professor in the Geology Program and Director, Community Development Institute, University of Northern British Columbia, noted that “one of the great challenges for com-munities is that they are not the ones who decide if a project happens, but they are the ones who have to manage if a project goes ahead.” This made local capacity for dialogue and planning important. “When we talk with industry they often tell us it

takes up to a decade to plan a significant project … [communities] don’t have the capacity to do that.”

Greg Knox, Executive Director, Skeena Wild Conservation Trust, called for “leadership at a North American scale,” because he believed that “if natural gas is going to be a bridge to a sustainable energy future then we have to use it domestically within North America.” Knox argued that through the process of liquefying and shipping natural gas “we’re losing all the benefits of lower carbon emissions.” Instead, Knox presented the case for “transitioning North American coal generation to natural gas as fast as we can” while Asia develops its own domestic gas supplies for its transition. Robert Hornung, President, Canadian Wind Energy Association, agreed that leadership needs to “look outside [its] own box,” and facilitate greater

collaboration and cooperation between different jurisdictions such as stakeholders or provinces. “We have a tendency to address these issues in small pieces often defined by jurisdictions,” leading to “suboptimal results” because cooperation and collaboration between jurisdictions could produce more options and more opportunities. Hornung used his own sector as an example, saying that in Canadian electricity “we don’t look to optimize electricity outcomes, whether economic, environmental or anything, on a regional or national basis.” Instead it was conducted on a jurisdiction by jurisdiction or province by province basis. Though all provinces were equally committed to finding the best outcome for their province, Hornung believed it meant “we miss a lot of opportunities for collaboration which could ultimately benefit more than one jurisdiction.”

Daniel Kammen considered what was needed to make dialogues work. “What are some of the languages that we use to talk about different projects, whether it’s around carbon or water or land or cultural issues?” He came back to the idea that “if we don’t measure it, we’re not going to do a very good job in assessing it.” Acknowledging that carbon emission pricing was not “the be all and end all,” he felt it was one component of the strategy that looks at the costs of sending natural gas to Asia in terms of “do we use it locally, do we value fishing rights, do we value local air quality? And if we’re not going to start to put a price on some of these things, we keep this story local as opposed to getting to that global picture.” Sesno noted the challenge of a “connection or disconnection” between local and global components. “People rightly look at this issue in a very parochial way. What does this

do to my community? And yet this conversation continually comes back to China, for example.” Yet when you have the conversation at a global level “you may lose a lot of folks in the process.” The challenge is to engage everyone at every level. Burpee commented on the difficulty of getting people to look at energy regionally, let alone continentally or globally. He felt that because people don’t understand the energy network, “they don’t see that moving to a more sustainable energy system and building the right infrastructure for it … is in their best interest.” Doing this regionally had proved a real challenge “and now you’re going to the next step—globally, we should be supporting it because globally all the people are better off … I’m not sure how you get there.” To illustrate his point he cited the proposed Site C dam for a hydro -power plant in British Columbia, saying “It’s renewable...but there are people who feel a real

impact from that, and it’s a whole bunch of other people that are getting the real benefit from it.”

Agreeing with Kammen, Thomas Pedersen, Executive Director, Pacific Institute for Climate Solutions, University of Victoria, commented that “the great leveler is a tax on carbon emissions.” He firmly believed that “if you apply a progressively accelerating tax on carbon emissions over a period of time, like we did in British Columbia, all of these things that we want to see happen, start to happen because it pushes our economic system toward the right end point.” With this in mind Pedersen recommended consideration of “multilateral agreements to impose a carbon price which escalates over time.” He noted this was already on the agenda for COP 21, the 21st Conference of the Parties on Climate Change, in 2015 in Paris, and he

believed that “if they can do that, a lot of what we have been discussing today will start to evolve in the right way.” This needed to be done quickly, as “we don’t have an awful lot of room left in our carbon budget if we want to hold the world to two degrees as a global average temperature [increase],” adding that “two degrees is a pretty serious increase.”

Matt Horne, Associate Regional Director, British Columbia, Pembina Institute, reinforced the call for “better information across the board,” adding the requirement for “venues and opportunities to provide that information into the decision -making process.” In terms of leadership he agreed about “the need for First Nations and industry leadership” and also pointed to “the role of the provincial government in showing more leadership on this.” With so many difficult conversations and trade-



Matt Horne, Associate Regional Director, British Columbia, Pembina Institute (right)

Daniel Kammen, Class of 1935 Distinguished Professor of Energy, University of California, Berkeley; Zoey Walden, Environmental Researcher, Canadian Energy Research Institute (CERI) (opposite)

offs around LNG and gas, “I think there are a number of opportunities where the provincial government in British Columbia could be doing more to invite those conversations and bring those perspectives into the decision -making process. To date, that hasn’t really been happening to a great degree.” Here Ellis Ross qualified his earlier statement, saying the province’s role was to “rubber - stamp the final solution that’s put together by us [First Nations] and the industry.” He continued, saying that regulation on reserve lands was a big issue, which is why the First Nations Industrial and Commercial Development Act was introduced. He illustrated his point saying, “What does the proponent do when the Department of Fisheries doesn’t allow them to dump 3.2 million cubic meters of clay into the ocean or in front of ancestral fishing grounds? They don’t have an answer. We do. So we bring

the answer to the proponent and say okay, let’s put this together. On the ground, this is what we’re doing on every single referral with the proponent. We’re actually doing the proponent’s job for them in terms of getting the referral and the permit through as well as accommodating the actual infringe-ment that’s within that permit … And we’ve been doing it for the last ten years.” In response to a question on best practices for conversations and achieving community consensus, Joseph Arvai, Professor and Svare Chair in Applied Decision Research, Decision Research Lab, Department of Geography, University of Calgary, explained that there was a science of decision -making. In dealing with multiple stakeholders, multiple objectives, conflicting objectives and necessary trade -offs, “there’s an entire field of scholarly inquiry and practical application around best practices and decision -making,” which we ignore

“to our detriment.” Arvai continued by explaining the need to carefully define problems, constrain them, recognize that there is no single solution, provide better alternatives and consider how we operationalize objectives. “It’s one thing to say that we want to improve our economy. It’s something else entirely to talk about the measures we’re going to use to characterize economic improvements; it's the same with the environment.”

For Zoey Walden, Environmental Researcher, Canadian Energy Research Institute, it was a question of pace “because depending on your time frame you have very different consequences.” She explained that pushing through the environmental process in two years left less room for consultation that could lead to legal challenges’ accommodation. What’s more, Walden noted that the current time frames for LNG projects would “almost quintuple the amount of natural

gas produced in BC in less than a decade, and this is going to make the price go up.” She considered whether we should be “spacing out the development … trying to maximize the efficiency of natural gas systems to make them more profitable in the long run.”

Looking at the larger global picture, Ellis Ross said of China, “I can guarantee you, if they don’t get gas over there or clean energy, they will look at other opportunities for fuel, and it will probably be dirtier than natural gas.” He gave the example of proposals to burn dirty coal under -ground and collect its gas. Ross felt there was a real opportunity to help China address its situation. Although he doubted British Columbia alone could “quench their need for energy” he concluded that if somehow we don’t, “they’re going to continue down that dirty fuel path.” |


The Lightning Round

} Sesno now opened the floor to rapid -fire comments on the question, “Are we entering a global age of gas, and if so, what will we see change and where?”

Geoff Morrison, Manager, British Columbia Operations, Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers: “Yes, because the demand for energy is growing globally. The big question is, does Canada want to be part of that and how do we contribute? It’s not a question of if energy will be demanded, it’s what kind of energy and should North America take part in that.” Ken Coates, Canada Research Chair in Regional Innovation, Johnson-Shoyama Graduate School of Public Policy, University of Saskatchewan: “Yes. There are enormous amounts of money to be made, and money generates lots of

activity. People will do it because they’ll get rich. There are countries that have decided not to do this for environmental and other reasons. That will change … sooner rather than later.”

Greg Knox believed that gas was “okay” to “get us off of coal short term … but if it’s a long- term thing, then we’re headed for three and a half, four degrees, of global warming.” He asserted that we “need to transition off of fossil fuels almost altogether... and figure out some other solutions.” Of these he felt nuclear energy was crucial to avoid “catastrophe.” Nigel Protter, Executive Director and CEO, BC Sustainable Energy Association: “I think the mood is ‘yes,’ but I think ultimately ‘no.’” This was because he was optimistic about technological innovation and the

Marianne Lavelle, Senior Energy Editor, National Geographic; Nigel Protter, Executive Director and CEO, BC Sustainable Energy Association (above)

ability of industries to change “much quicker than people realize, and I think that’s going to keep happening.”

Rob Powell, Senior Officer, Priority Conservation Programs, WWF Canada, cited Fatih Birol, chief economist, IEA, saying “we really shouldn’t be building fossil fuel infrastructure, in particular pipeline infrastructure, because that generally has to last for 30-plus years to pay for itself and the associated production. And we can’t afford to be producing a significant amount of fossil fuels at that stage.” For him the question was “how can natural gas fit within the declining carbon envelope that we absolutely must have?”

Dan Goldberger, Executive Director, Energy Technology & Innovation Canada: “Yes, it is an age for natural gas,” with the U.S. making “long- term decisions because of the availability

and abundance and price of naturalgas.” These included moving petro -chemicals, refineries, and fertilizer industries back from overseas. This example could be replicated around the world so “natural gas has tremendous opportunity to grow,” despite concerns about extraction, hydraulic fracking and use. Goldberger added that “transpor -tation is a perfect area [where natural gas] can displace dirty fuel.” Noting that about a third of our emissions come from transportation, he believed we had the technology and infrastructure potential to grow natural gas usage in heavy -duty trucks, marine and rail.

Mark Brownstein: “I think it may be the age of efficiency. We’re talking about a world where oil consumption in the United States and the developing world has essentially peaked and is actually on the decline. If you think about what’s changing the economics of the electric

industry in North America, it’s that demand for electricity is relatively flat … So I think that natural gas is playing a role in helping us to transition, but we have to look at some of the other dynamics that are taking place in the energy space as well.”

Jim Burpee: “I agree with that completely in terms of energy efficiency. I think our view of energy efficiency is not about end use. You start with a natural resource. You need heat, light, mode of force. And how do you get that in the most efficient way with the fewest energy losses in between? It’s not just gas; it’s a whole range of things that fits into that.”

Matt Horne: “I think we are entering an age of gas. The big question for me is whether that age of gas is going to be one that complements renewables and efficiency and other



climate solutions and gets us on track for two degrees, or if it’s one that competes and locks them out and gets us locked into three or four degrees. I don’t know what the outcome is, but I think those are the two big directions we can take.”

Concluding Comments

Frank Sesno thanked everyone for their insightful and honest comments, and called on Marianne Lavelle for a few closing remarks. “This is the opportunity to think globally and act locally,” Lavelle began. “When we try to write about stories at National Geographic, we’re writing about global stories, but always from the stories of people in the community. And that’s how this energy story really has to be told and how it has to be shaped—by the communities that are really there at the front line and that

have, in some cases, accumulative impacts from all of these projects. They really are the ones who are going to be shaping the direction we go in. I heard from a lot of people that there is a frustration that there’s such a time pressure, that decisions have to be made now, and there’s economic pressure to do it now. But I also heard from Dan [Kammen] and Tom [Pedersen] and others who are also under a lot of pressure because our time is running out to deal with climate change. I think there is nothing that we can do about that. We have to really hunker down and make these big and very difficult decisions now. It’s important to not think of natural gas in isolation but to remember that we, as consumers, are part of this equation. We have to look at the whole energy picture and how we can change the way we use energy.” |

Jeremy Moorhouse, Senior Analyst, Clean Energy Canada at Tides Canada; Karen Etherington, Director, Environment & Regulatory Permitting, Coastal GasLink Pipeline Project, TransCanada Pipelines Limited; Walter Mérida, Director, Clean Energy Research Centre (CERC), University of British Columbia (opposite, left to right)

Joseph Arvai, Professor and Svare Chair in Applied Decision Research, Decision Research Lab, Department of Geography, University of Calgary; Greg Knox, Executive Director, Skeena Wild Conservation Trust (below, left to right)

In Summary} With world population projected to reach nine billion by 2050, energy demand is expected to double. Yet to maintain a minimal rise in global temperatures we must transition away from high-carbon fossil fuels. Advances in technology have made natural gas an economically attractive low-carbon fuel. It heats half the homes of North America and has a primary role in electricity generation, which has resulted in decreasing U.S. CO2 emissions. It seems clear, therefore, that natural gas can play a major role in reducing CO2 emissions elsewhere, notably China. But is this enough? Natural gas is still a fossil fuel. It only provides a carbon benefit when replacing “dirtier” fossil fuels such as coal. The fear is that investing in gas infrastructure will lock in fossil

fuel dependence beyond the climate change tipping point. It may also compete with and distract from the development of zero -emission renew-ables such as wind, solar and nuclear.

Alongside these global concerns is the impact on local environments and communities—especially indigenous peoples, whose cost -benefit analysis extends beyond money. With good management, gas development could raise standards of living, though more is needed to be done to improve energy literacy and meaningful consultation and accommodation. Associated risks could also be minimized through improved legislation, monitoring and technology. Although it was deemed crucial to positively engage local communities, there were also calls to escalate energy conversations to regional,

continental and global levels. For British Columbia there was appreciation of the benefits for exporting LNG and a broad feeling that export would happen despite the challenges and impacts of production.

Opinions varied widely, but natural gas was generally acknowledged as decreasing carbon intensity though there remains the need to prioritize increased energy efficiency, decreased energy consumption and the develop-ment of clean, renewable energy sources. Caution was called for in considering natural gas as a transition fuel due to fears that it would be seen as the end rather than the means, resulting in a transition to a lower -carbon energy future rather than the zero -carbon energy future that was widely believed essential. |

For more information, visit the Natural Gas digital hub, with news stories, blog posts and features from The Great Energy Challenge.

Go to bigenergyquestion.com/ naturalgas


Dan Goldberger, Executive Director, Energy Technology & Innovation Canada (ETIC) (top, left)

Jonathan Whitworth, CEO, Seaspan (top, right)

Kim Baird, Founder and Owner, Kim Baird Strategic Consulting (left); Jessica McDonald, Consultant (center); Krey Stirland, Commercial Manager, LNG Canada (right) (bottom, right)

bigenergyquestion.com/naturalgas

THE BIG ENERGY QUESTION

A Bridge to a Sustainable

Energy Future?

NATURAL GAS:

the big energy a bridge to a sustainable -...

Documents