PART 5 of 5
Favored alternative energy sources as a long-term energy mix for Calgary and Alberta are: a) solar b) wind c) geothermal d) biomass and e) natural gas generation (both distributed generation and micro-generation). Danielle Smith, Leader of the Wildrose Alliance Party, believes that natural gas generation offers the most reliable and cost-effective source of energy considering the current prices and technologies. “I think coal gasification technology will ultimately allow us to make use of our vast coal reserves but with fewer harmful emissions, though it may take more time for this technology to develop to its fullest potential.”
The budget allocation for environmental needs has yet to be determined since the Wildrose Alliance Party is still developing their budget for 2010. “I think we need to look at the unmet needs and see if resources can be reallocated within the current funding envelope. I believe a strong regime of private property rights will encourage better long-term stewardship and reduce pollution. There are ways to protect the environment that go beyond government spending,” explains Danielle.
With respect to environmental standards and making oil companies accountable thereby creating a win/win result, Danielle describes how companies that operate in the oil sands are improving technology and environmental practices with every new project. “Tailing ponds are an essential part of the clean up process, as they redeposit silt into mined areas so they can be replanted and reclaimed. Air emissions in new plants are being greatly reduced. Improved radar technology has dramatically reduced the amount of bird kill. The actual area to be mined is actually quite small – only 3600 square km in total, less than the size of Los Angeles – and it will all ultimately be reclaimed. The vast majority of the resource will be developed in situ.”
She also claims that the heavy oil industry has made tremendous progress reducing its use of water and recycles most of the water it does use. “Obviously there are still areas for improvement, but we need to acknowledge the impressive progress that has already been made.”
Since clean fresh water (surface and subsurface) is already compromised in Northern Alberta due to the extensive oil sands project, she is not aware of the consequences by adding water intensive nuclear energy to the mix. “I do not know enough about the need for water use in nuclear facilities and the degree to which it can be recycled.”
Danielle wants to clear up one misnomer about the contamination of water in the oil sands area. She explains that much of the contamination of water in that area is naturally occurring. The geology of the regions shows that hydrocarbons are close to the surface so it is possible to see plumes of oil on the surface of the Athabasca River. “The industry should be using brackish water as much as possible for development. We may also need to consider how we categorize water as ‘saline’ versus ‘fresh’. As I understand it, there are many projects that use brackish water that does not have enough dissolved solids to be officially considered ‘saline,’ but it is also not clean enough to be potable.”
Danielle Smith has a definitive vision of the future for Alberta with respect to environmental standards and its relation to the economy. “I believe Albertans want government to address pressing environmental problems and do not want to waste time or money on marginal issues. It is possible to protect the environment and have a strong and healthy economy. One does not have to be, and should not be, sacrificed for the other.”
Assuredly, change is forthcoming in Alberta that is supported by a new attitude regarding the environment. As the Tory stranglehold weakens and the upstart Wildrose Alliance Party plots their strategy on an environmentally friendly Alberta, Bill 50, property rights, business and energy, the future appears to be bright. Only time will tell for sure how the people of Alberta embrace this dedicated party with its new vision that includes an environment worth saving. If elected, Danielle Smith, Leader of the Wildrose Alliance Party, will go down in history as the first female Premier of Alberta.
LINKS:
Environmental Indicators for Canada and the United States (1997) http://www.fraserinstitute.org/researchandpublications/publications/3006.aspx
Achieving Eco-Prosperity: SMEs Perspective on the Environment http://www.cfib.ca/research/reports/rr3039.pdf
PART 1 PART 2 PART 3 PART 4 PART 5
Comments
I skimmed this article during a break at work and will need to read it more closely when I have time. For now, I need to ask you - What is your relationship with Danielle Smith and the Wildrose Party? Again I detect in your writing a disturbing trend. At first glance you seem to have a definate and obvious boas for the organizations you write about.
New boss - same as the old boss?
No Chris, new boss wannabe has the benefit of the bandwagon effect and sympathetic writers...much different!
I am amazed Ms. Visconti consistently writes in a fashion that shows she is not an objective observer.
Jerome:
1) This is a profile because I like writing them. I have laid out what their plans are for the environment and what her opinion is on other topics, albeit briefly. I also interviewed the Liberal Leader David Swann so I thought that I would check in with an opposing side in the Wildrose Alliance Party...and you know what? They are pretty much similar.
2) Why do you keep reading them and checking for the articles I write if they bother you so much?
Watch out for my article on Bruce Power next Jerome. Maybe you will like that one since it is the other side of the story on nuclear. :-) Oh, and that is a profile too!
P.S. Jerome...this is the first time I have connected with Danielle Smith and the Wildrose Alliance Party. I asked her the questions and she responded in great detail and I was impressed with her answers.
I respect the people and groups I am interviewing Jerome so maybe that’s what you are picking up...the “sympathetic” side of me as you describe it.
I enjoy it when you ask me questions in return Grace! I always get the impression, basically you are telling me to shut the h*ll up.
To answer you question in point two, I read your articles because I think you are a fairly good writer and admire the effort you put into these articles. What bothers me is the amount of 'sympathy' you have for those you write about. I really think its this habit of tending top side with your interviewees that prevents you from writing great journalism and keeps you at the level you are currently at. Re-read your Danielle Smith article and ask yourself if you are being objective. Or get someone you can trust to read it and ask them the same question.
If you are going to write about important topics like the ones you have and sincerely hope to present to your audience a piece of journalism you need to think a little harder about how your present your findings. I think you have potential to be a great writer not just the average one you are now.
It gives me no pleasure to annoy anyone Grace and since I seem to p*ss you off so much this will be the last message. I would just hope you either try to be a little more objective, neutral and show your sympathies towards the interviewees less or tell your audience out right that you have sympathies towards to particular person or topic.
Jerome...when I ask questions, I am by no means telling you to shut up! LOL I am engaging you in a discussion.
Perhaps you perceive it as an editorial and I presume that you don’t like editorials.
I do have friends in journalism - one in particular who I know very well (we went to high school together) is an NBC Correspondent and he has applauded me on the articles, especially my first one for Examiner.com on Bill 50.:-)
Much of what I read here is very positive, except for the idea that any small community on a major river could choose to put it at risk with the introduction of a nuclear power plant. The rivers and lakes in Alberta that are capable of supporting the massive water consumption needs of a nuclear station are not the property of any single community and any such development should be subject to the approval of all Albertans, through a vote.
Chris I totally agree with you on that comment! I am originally from Ontario and know people who have lived near nuclear plants with leaks. I am also aware that they need a whole lot of water to operate nuclear.
Jerome...you are not upsetting me. I enjoy a healthy debate. It keeps the passion alive. :-)
Chris: How do you think they will handle this water issue with nuclear power plants in Alberta? With the water shortage already posing a problem for other industries, especially the cattle industry, how are they going to get around this? Why plan something if it is going to be problematic for other industries?
Got something to say?
Examiner.com is looking for writers, photographers, and videographers to join the fastest growing group of local insiders. If you are interested in growing your online rep apply to be an Examiner today!