• You will need to login or register before you can post a message. If you already have an Agriville account login by clicking the login icon on the top right corner of the page. If you are a new user you will need to Register.

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Renewables pose little threat to agriculture, environment: report

Collapse
X
Collapse
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    Renewables pose little threat to agriculture, environment: report

    Renewables pose little threat to agriculture, environment: report

    The Alberta Utilities Commission found renewable power is much less of a threat to the province's farmland than other forms of energy development and urban spread.
    Author of the article:
    CP, The Canadian Press
    Bob Weber


    Published Mar 14, 2024 • Last updated 3 hours ago • 3 minute read

    ([url]https://calgaryherald.com/business/energy/alberta-commission-renewables-little-threat-agriculture-environment#comments-area[/url])

    Alberta’s utilities regulator has released a report saying the province’s booming renewables industry poses little threat to its agriculture or the environment.

    Assuming all renewable development locates on (some of Alberta’s best) land, the percentage of (such) agricultural land loss is estimated to be less than one per cent by 2041,” says the Alberta Utilities Commission report, released Wednesday.

    The commission takes a similar view of concerns that solar and wind facilities could leave landowners and the public with big bills for reclamation at the end of their lives.

    “Compared to some other forms of industrial development, renewable power plant projects have well-understood and relatively contained reclamation risks,” it says. “The risks associated with groundwater and off-site contamination are generally low.”

    The report is the first of two the United Conservative government asked the commission to produce as part of its inquiry into the province’s booming solar and wind power industry. The release of the report comes shortly after the government removed its six-month moratorium on approvals for new renewables generation

    The current report deals with agricultural and environmental impacts, as well as funding for reclamation and effects on what the government has called “pristine viewscapes.”

    It found that renewable power is much less of a threat to the province’s farmland than other forms of energy development and urban spread.

    From 2019 to 2021, the largest driver of agricultural land loss was expansion of pipelines and industrial sites,” it says. “Other key drivers . . . include urban residential development, mines and wells, and roads.”
    The report said the proliferation of wind and solar projects will likely be more concentrated in some parts of the province than others.

    The report notes that the vast majority of wind and solar sites are located on poorer land. It also points out that wind farms use about five per cent of their lease area, leaving the rest available for grazing or suitable crops.

    It calls for more research on combining agriculture and renewable energy.

    The commission concludes that current rules are adequate to ensure reclamation, although there could be more clarity around the point at which developers need to pony up reclamation surety.

    “Existing power plant reclamation requirements are sufficiently defined to ensure effective reclamation, but no timing trigger exists to initiate reclamation,” it says.

    It notes there was wide disagreement about when that financial backstop should be required, in what form it should be provided and who should hold it.

    The commission said there’s no consensus on what landscapes should be protected for their scenic value.

    “It is very difficult to define pristine viewscape in a manner that satisfies all stakeholders, and that doing so may not be desirable because the value of a viewscape is subjective,” the report says. “There are circumstances where a view that contains existing development may be of greater value to Albertans than a pristine view.”

    The commission suggests those concerns could be handled on a case-by-case basis during the application process.

    Martin Olszynski, a resource law professor at the University of Calgary, said the report dismantles the government’s expressed concerns about the booming growth of renewable power in the province.

    It’s an evidence- and reason-based wrecking ball that smashes the government’s talking points and policies with respect to renewables,” he said.

    In February, as it lifted the moratorium on approvals, Premier Danielle Smith’s government announced new restrictions on renewables development ([url]https://calgaryherald.com/opinion/columnists/varcoe-alberta-renewable-energy-projects-new-rules-agriculculture-landscape[/url]).

    It said it would rule out wind and solar on Alberta’s best farmland. It would also impose a 35-kilometre buffer zone around protected areas and so-called “pristine viewscapes” — a move that some estimate would rule out development over about two-thirds of the province, especially in the south, where wind and sun are strongest. Advertisement 5

    Others have estimated the restrictions would affect 42 wind and solar projects ([url]https://calgaryherald.com/business/energy/agriculture-first-regulations-could-impact-seven-solar-projects-in-alberta[/url]) representing about $11 billion in investment.

    Affordability and Utilities Minister Nathan Neudorf was not immediately available for comment.

    Olszynski said the commission’s approach makes sense. He said the commission seems to be saying most of the tools needed to regulate the industry already exist. Problems can be dealt with as they arise, he said.

    “We can be nuanced and thoughtful about it,” he said. “If you impose blanket restrictions, as the government seems to want to do, then you can’t be nuanced and thoughtful.”​

    #2
    Renewables pose little threat to agriculture, environment: report

    ​No shit sherlock!

    Now what will Danny and the UCP say?

    The Alberta Utilities Commission report contradicts everything they said.

    But we all knew it was a political decision to make up crap arguments to throw a roadblock in front of a booming renewable energy market!

    And at the same time ignore the much bigger and more serious environmental and unfunded reclamation problems with the oil and gas industries!

    What a bunch of two faced hypocrites and liars.

    But we knew that already.

    Danny and the UCP gatekeepers gettin in the way of renewable energy in the free market. Pickin winners and losers. So much for Alberta, land of free enterprise!

    They are looking even more foolish on this file! And will come out the losers! Which is fitting.

    No doubt the Agrisilly climate change deniers will continue to tell us how bad renewables are and how more CO2 is good for us!








    Comment


      #3
      Hahaha i was going to post this , this am, but youre alot better at it ( i honestly have trouble copy and pasting website material rather than just the website link?)

      honestly chuck i think you missed the point of the moratorium ( and rules put in place). Essentially the rules are put in place to ( hopefully) protect the landowner and the municipalities so that some sort of ridiculous bankruptcy by a renewable build company doesnt cause taxpayer issues or leave the people of the county/ city left holding the bag.

      There is definitely some mud to slog through with some of the UCP rulings moving forward, but i really dont see a major problem with them ( other than the extreme discrepancy one could find between what is deemed a pristine landscape)

      The commission findings brought up some good points that i hadnt really thought of...especially in that renewable projects have a much more defined and known reclamation requirement ( just think of tailings ponds leaking.... there isnt a renewable resource that has such an issue).

      here in alberta we have 2 of the best requirements for renewable energy
      ... wind and sun. The builds will.continue coming....
      so what the problem is here?

      Are the anti oil and gas crowd more angry that rules were put in place... or that there arent similiar rules for oil and gaz? ( which continues to be a huge oversight and wont ever be touched because O+G is too entrenched in alberta and lobbying the govt)

      i have no problem with the rules put in place or the commissions findings. What normal person would? Wheres the fire here?

      Comment


        #4
        Originally posted by goalieguy847 View Post
        Hahaha i was going to post this , this am, but youre alot better at it ( i honestly have trouble copy and pasting website material rather than just the website link?)

        honestly chuck i think you missed the point of the moratorium ( and rules put in place). Essentially the rules are put in place to ( hopefully) protect the landowner and the municipalities so that some sort of ridiculous bankruptcy by a renewable build company doesnt cause taxpayer issues or leave the people of the county/ city left holding the bag.

        There is definitely some mud to slog through with some of the UCP rulings moving forward, but i really dont see a major problem with them ( other than the extreme discrepancy one could find between what is deemed a pristine landscape)

        The commission findings brought up some good points that i hadnt really thought of...especially in that renewable projects have a much more defined and known reclamation requirement ( just think of tailings ponds leaking.... there isnt a renewable resource that has such an issue).

        here in alberta we have 2 of the best requirements for renewable energy
        ... wind and sun. The builds will.continue coming....
        so what the problem is here?

        Are the anti oil and gas crowd more angry that rules were put in place... or that there arent similiar rules for oil and gaz? ( which continues to be a huge oversight and wont ever be touched because O+G is too entrenched in alberta and lobbying the govt)

        i have no problem with the rules put in place or the commissions findings. What normal person would? Wheres the fire here?
        I don’t always agree with your outlook Goalieguy, but in this case you are quite correct, what reasonable person would have a problem with these rules?

        Comment


          #5
          Originally posted by Hamloc View Post

          I don’t always agree with your outlook Goalieguy, but in this case you are quite correct, what reasonable person would have a problem with these rules?
          See the second post in this thread to answer that question.
          The post with three emoji's, countless nicknames, swearwords, slang and other juvenile behaviour.

          Comment


            #6
            Swearwords, emojis, nicknames and slang? Oh my goodness A5, Cue the fake an outrage! LOL

            What part of the commissions report dont you guys understand:

            Assuming all renewable development locates on (some of Alberta’s best) land, the percentage of (such) agricultural land loss is estimated to be less than one per cent by 2041,” says the Alberta Utilities Commission report, released Wednesday.​

            It found that renewable power is much less of a threat to the province’s farmland than other forms of energy development and urban spread.

            From 2019 to 2021, the largest driver of agricultural land loss was expansion of pipelines and industrial sites,” it says. “Other key drivers . . . include urban residential development, mines and wells, and roads.”

            "The report notes that the vast majority of wind and solar sites are located on poorer land. It also points out that wind farms use about five per cent of their lease area, leaving the rest available for grazing or suitable crops.​"

            The commission concludes that current rules are adequate to ensure reclamation,​

            Martin Olszynski, a resource law professor at the University of Calgary, said the report dismantles the government’s expressed concerns about the booming growth of renewable power in the province.

            It’s an evidence- and reason-based wrecking ball that smashes the government’s talking points and policies with respect to renewables,”
            Last edited by chuckChuck; Mar 15, 2024, 06:29.

            Comment


              #7
              And Hamloc asks what reasonable person would have a problem with the rules for renewables? Are you serious?

              The Alberta Utilities Commission clearly stated they have a problem with the proposed rules! And said they are not needed.

              But of course the climate change deniers and renewable energy naysayers agree with all the misinformation and ignore the evidence that “From 2019 to 2021, the largest driver of agricultural land loss was expansion of pipelines and industrial sites,” it says. “Other key drivers . . . include urban residential development, mines and wells, and roads.”

              So the goal of Danny and the dumpster fire UCP is to put up road blocks, create political rules that scare away and slow down more renewable energy investment!

              The hypocritical sewage and irony runs deep in Alberta!

              Comment


                #8
                Originally posted by chuckChuck View Post
                And Hamloc asks what reasonable person would have a problem with the rules for renewables? Are you serious?

                The Alberta Utilities Commission clearly stated they have a problem with the proposed rules! And said they are not needed.

                But of course the climate change deniers and renewable energy naysayers agree with all the misinformation and ignore the evidence that “From 2019 to 2021, the largest driver of agricultural land loss was expansion of pipelines and industrial sites,” it says. “Other key drivers . . . include urban residential development, mines and wells, and roads.”

                So the goal of Danny and the dumpster fire UCP is to put up road blocks, create political rules that scare away and slow down more renewable energy investment!

                The hypocritical sewage and irony runs deep in Alberta!
                From 2019 to 2021. A lot of the solar farm construction ramped up in 2022 and 2023. But really all you want to do Chuck2 is hurl political vitriol at those that disagree with your agenda!!

                Comment


                  #9
                  Is that what the Alberta Utilities Commission report said?

                  Read it Hamloc. They said there was hardly a problem at all. Very little land loss from renewables compared to other industries! Very little environmental risk!

                  But you and Danny are going to ignore the much bigger unfunded problems with oil and gas? LOL


                  Comment


                    #10
                    I’m not sure Alberta utilities commission are reasonable people, the push for experimental unproven expensive electrical gizmos without providing adequate reliable base load doesn’t sound reasonable.

                    Comment


                      #11
                      Originally posted by chuckChuck View Post
                      Swearwords, emojis, nicknames and slang? Oh my goodness A5, Cue the fake an outrage! LOL
                      No outrage required.
                      only pity that you would continue to publicly embarrass yourself like this.
                      This was in response to the questions about what reasonable or normal person would have a problem with this.

                      I was pointing out the abnormalities and unreasonableness of the lone poster who seems to have a problem with this.

                      What normal reasonable person with an intellectual maturity higher than grade 3 talks like that?

                      The last time I heard someone utter "no shit sherlock", I was on the playground in elementary school. And it wasn't uttered by a kid with any intellectual abilities whatsoever.
                      Last edited by AlbertaFarmer5; Mar 15, 2024, 09:41.

                      Comment


                        #12
                        But chuck, this is my point. I know in an earlier thread a couple weeks ago i mentiones that urban sprawl surely must eat up more land than renewable builds or even oil and gas lease sites and builds.
                        you keep bringing up oil and gas into this conversation but it really doesnt belong ( other than a mention or 2 in the commission report)
                        i believe that both hamloc and i are agreeing with the report ( somewhat) and im saying... what does oil and gas have to do with these findings?
                        CC you just keep dragging them into this , and i dont quite understand your point. Are you saying that the govt didnt need to put these rules in place for renewables? That they should tighten the rules for O+ G ( they should)? Or that the ucp govt is being hypocritical here? Or all of the above?

                        You seem to reaaaalllyy want to drag alot of stuff up here again and again..when i think all of albertans ( of which you arent one , i dont think?) Would look at these findings, like myself, and go " ok, great, now lets move on!"

                        And as for " scaring off renewable investment"...

                        I dont believe that for a single millisecond. Can anyone name a single project that was pulled after being approved? Who isnt moving forward with their builds?
                        i bet you cant.......

                        we HAVE wind and sun, which incredibly, are precisely what is needed for any renewable energy project that is either solar or wind energy. So.
                        uhhh.....

                        What the fudge are we still discussing here?

                        You think that if an small oil company goes tits up, their wells arent going to be bought up by someone else? The oil is still under there...maybe its just not as cost effective to dig it up at this moment ( or the defunct company was poorly run and oncredibly inefficient). The oil is still worth alot of money just as the sun and wind that our province receives.
                        As solar and wind becomes cheaper to harness, more projects will come online, just as if oil hit 140$/ barrel.

                        " if you build ( have) it....they will come" ( and hopefully not require govt subsidies in order to lure companies over to make a profit)

                        for instance. As of right now, looking at fall crop prices, i have pulled all my feed barley acres and will swing them into oats, malt or faba beans. Even if i can grow 130 bushel feed barley ( that would be just... a perfect year somehow) it still doesnt make alot of sense in the end.

                        Chuck..Lets move along and start debating your next Trevor Tombe article posted on cbc ( i do actually enjoy his writing...i think hes a smart kid)

                        Comment


                          #13
                          Originally posted by chuckChuck View Post

                          ​No shit sherlock!

                          But we all knew it was a political decision to make up crap arguments

                          What a bunch of two faced hypocrites and liars.
                          Have to agree with you 100% on this one Chuck.

                          Government policy is always all about politics and what will get them the most votes?

                          Voters who pay taxes are realizing who is going to pay and are getting some indication of what the new green initiative ia going to cost.

                          Mr Trudeau and company have spent all the money we send them and created the largest deficit in history but we still hear "Climate Emergency" like all those billions have gone down the drain producing no results.

                          Taxpayers are seeing a bleak future with governments spending more than they collect and causing huge inflation.

                          Canada should be a prosperous country with hard working people able to live in at least as good a lifestyle as their parents and grandparents.

                          Time for government to get get back to basic and get out of our wallets.

                          Taxpayers have had enough of paying for virtue signaling.

                          Comment


                            #14
                            [url]https://www.canada.ca/en/agriculture-agri-food/news/2022/02/the-government-of-canada-invests-in-clean-technology-to-support-sustainable-farming-practices.html[/url]

                            If someone can make this a hot link it is interesting how government can dole out a relatively small amount like the $170 million on this program and yet for those of us who are close to the situation it is so easy to see the scams and waste.

                            Few knew you could get $2 million for solar panels or over a million to install a new grain dryer?
                            Add the word digester or biomass and a million $$$ is a good place to start.

                            All to avoid a "Climate Emergency".

                            Hope you didn't miss out on the real money when you sent in you application for the subsidies Chuck?
                            When you told me to go see a solar installer did you mean they know how to scam the application?

                            Or maybe by the look of many of the home provinces you get your MP's office to help with getting the funding?
                            Last edited by shtferbrains; Mar 15, 2024, 21:47.

                            Comment


                              #15
                              Utility scale solar, wind and other renewables are close to providing approximately 20% of Alberta's electricity.

                              Danny and the UCP chose the independent Alberta Utility Commission (AUC) to study the impact of the renewable energy sector.

                              And Danny chose to ignore their findings with a plan to discourage renewable investment. But otherwise all the other land loss issues identified are ignored?

                              So what part of the following AUC report dont you understand?

                              Assuming all renewable development locates on (some of Alberta’s best) land, the percentage of (such) agricultural land loss is estimated to be less than one per cent by 2041,”

                              It found that renewable power is much less of a threat to the province’s farmland than other forms of energy development and urban spread.

                              From 2019 to 2021, the largest driver of agricultural land loss was expansion of pipelines and industrial sites,” it says. “Other key drivers . . . include urban residential development, mines and wells, and roads.”

                              The report notes that the vast majority of wind and solar sites are located on poorer land. It also points out that wind farms use about five per cent of their lease area, leaving the rest available for grazing or suitable crops.

                              The commission concludes that current rules are adequate to ensure reclamation."

                              Comment

                              • Reply to this Thread
                              • Return to Topic List
                              Working...