Letters in the Ottawa Citizen, 2023 August 26
Electric vehicles part of net-zero solution
Re: Net-zero plan laughably impossible, Aug. 22
Adam Pankratz joins a recent parade of authors
on opinion pages of the Ottawa Citizen and National Post who heap scorn on the government’s
declared goal of transforming electrical generation in Canada to become net-zero by 2035.
Typically, arguments against the net-zero grid
goal are economic arguments: “It’s too expensive to become net-zero due to all the generating plants we need to build.” Invariably, electricity demand by EVS is mentioned as contributing to an increase of electrical generation required,
and continued burning of fossil fuels is concluded to be necessary.
These arguments are, in fact, riddled with fundamental misunderstandings. Studies have shown
that total electrical energy supply could be
nearly doubled using only existing generation
facilities, simply by filling in the “demand
troughs” with scheduled demand, such as that
from EVS. All EVS today are capable of scheduling their at-home charging to off-peak times,
when the electrical grid is delivering a fraction
of its present peak capability. Far from being
part of the problem, EVS are actually part of the
solution to using our existing resources better.
In fact, if all Canadian vehicle-miles were travelled in EVS, their combined electrical energy
demand would be about 87 TWH, or 14 per
cent of existing total Canadian electrical demand, and well within the capability of existing
generation plants to provide during off peak
hours. And this would save the burning of nearly
all motor vehicle fuel, with consequent huge reductions in carbon and pollution footprints.
Pankratz performs some ridiculous calculations
leading to claims of needing to dam 44 rivers to
provide electricity for EVS. This is entirely fallacious, and in reality, the most significant reason
to build new electrical generating facilities is to
supply growing on-peak demand from an increasing population.
Paraphrasing his own words, Pankratz’s own argument is “driven by ideology and ignorance of
technical implications” — ideology of the oil and
gas industry and ignorance of electrical grid demand and supply.
Andy Weirich, Ottawa
Federal policies must go beyond economics
Re: Why `net zero’ is a policy failure, Aug. 19
It’s not just a failure, it’s a scam. It’s a way for fossil-fuel vendors to carry on their business as
usual and for the federal government to pretend
that it is dealing with an issue that has been understood by science, but generally ignored by
politics, for more than a century. Until Canada
caught fire in an exceptional way this year.
A fundamental problem is that the breadth of
federal policy thinking is far too narrow, being
limited mainly to economics. Since the dawn of
powerful computers, the analysis of energy sysems in technological detail has been possible.
That’s appropriate because the current issue
stems from the invention of the steam engine by
James Watt in 1776, the dawn of the Industrial
Revolution. The International Energy Agency
fostered collaborative research by its member
countries in the analysis of energy systems starting in 1977. Canada participated in the research
for a couple of decades, but the federal government has not yet used it to develop sound policy and programs. It is high time that this tool
was added to its policy tool box.
John G. Hollins (past chair of the IEA energy
technology systems analysis program), Gloucester
Feds’ tree-planting math doesn’t add up
Regarding the recent comments on net-zero
and the historic planting of 10 million trees, the
government promised two billion trees in 10
years. Then, assuming 200 million trees per year
and 200 planting days at 50 trees per person
per day requires a workforce of 20,000.
Does anyone in government understand the
number of zeros in a billion?
David Russell, Kanata
We should all take on Suzuki’s challenge
• Ottawa Citizen
• 26 Aug 2023
•
Re: Why `net zero’ is a policy failure, Aug. 19
This lengthy opinion piece could have been
more aptly titled “How to promote climate denialism without saying climate denialism.” This appeared immediately after two pages describing
the wildfire tragedies unfolding in the Northwest Territories and British Columbia. The article in part suggests “miraculous technological
breakthroughs that don’t presently exist” will
not be available any time before 2050. Obviously the author has little faith in science, progress and human ingenuity (not to mention reason and reality).
And an argument that Canada should do nothing because Canada only represents a tiny portion of total global emissions doesn’t pass muser in these challenging times. Canada has always pulled its weight and more on the global
stage. Canada is a leader in the world because
Canada recognizes that climate change is real,
present and an existential threat.
David Suzuki, in his book Sacred Balance, wrote:
“In such an interdependent universe, human bengs hold enormous responsibility; each individual is accountable.” Let us, as intelligent, caring
and aware Canadians, take up Suzuki’s
challenge of personal responsibility and contribute to addressing the climate realities, rather
than sticking our heads in the sand and pretending that everything is and will be OK.
Kim Elliott, Ottawa
Leave a Reply