I don't have a lot of respect for Alberta Premier Danielle Smith. Her brand of populist conservatism exemplifies all that is wrong with Canadian politics. But her stance on Alberta's liquid natural gas (LNG) exports seems particularly wrong-headed.
Smith claims that LNG is better than coal, and so Alberta (and Canada) should get credits for reducing global carbon emissions under Article 6 of the Paris Agreement. She is saying that Alberta should receive credits and plaudits for producing the second-worst energy product rather than the worst. (Although even that claim is somewhat suspect - a recent study shows that, if you take leaks into account, gas-powered energy may be just as bad a coal.)
Unfortunately, that is not how the carbon accounting numbers game of Article 6 works. Importers can claim credits for using gas instead of coal (a rather suspect concept in itself), but producers and exporters can not also claim credits for the same transaction (that would be double-counting).
Actually, I'm pretty sure Smith must know this - she can't be that clueless can she? - but persists in claiming it anyway, in a vain attempt to make Alberta's horrible economy look slightly less horrible. Don't be fooled. Unless you are an Alberta conservative, in which case it is probably an article of faith, and truth and common sense do not come into it.
No comments:
Post a Comment