Mark Jaccard will present on Canadian oil sands and emissions
The European Parliament has invited SFU professor Mark Jaccard to Brussels to debate the merits of the Fuel Quality Directive (FQD), a policy that would classify global fuel sources by the emissions caused by their production and transportation. The FQD would single out crude from Canada’s oil sands as the most harmful to the planet’s climate.
Jaccard, a professor in the School of Resource and Environmental Management at SFU, argued for an end of the expansion of the Alberta oilsands.
The FQD is part of the European Union’s commitment to reduce carbon emissions from transportation by 20 per cent between now and 2020. Its policies aim to help European countries reach greenhouse gas emission targets by classifying global fuel sources by their level of emissions and encouraging the use of cleaner and lower-carbon fuels.
Different fuels are produced from different raw materials, and depending on extraction, refining processes and associated energy needs, these materials can differ greatly in their Greenhouse Gas (GHG) emissions.
The FQD distinguishes between these by labeling them as conventional oil (less dense or less viscous crude oils), gas-to-liquid, or natural bitumen (more dense, in a sense heavier, and more viscous), shale oil, and coal-to-liquid. Natural bitumen, like the oil sands, emits greater amounts of carbon dioxide per megajoule of energy used to transport them than conventional oil.
According to Jaccard, Canada is not on a path to meet the 2020 target, and points to oil sands as the reason: “Sadly, Canada’s oil sands continue to make a name for our country, for all the wrong reasons.”
In a study commissioned by the government of Alberta, it was found that oil extracted from the oil sands emitted 12 percent more emissions than oil produced in Europe, with some studies estimating that the oil sands pollute up to 23 per cent more than other sources. The Canadian government has been engaged in a lobbying campaign to stop the EU from adopting these fuel standards, which they claim could hurt oil sands exports to Europe.
The FQD has been opposed by the Canadian government, who are concerned that if the oil sands were labelled ‘dirty’, this designation could greatly impact future markets for Canada’s oil sands products.
“By treating oil sands crude as a unique high GHG-intensive ‘feedstock,’ it is effectively shutting oil sands crude, and products derived therefrom, out of the EU market,” reads the Natural Resources Canada website. “Canada will not hesitate to defend its interests should FQD single out oil sands crude in a disproportionate, arbitrary, and unscientific way.”
Canadian officials are also worried that if the FQD is passed, Canada’s largest oil sands importer, the US, might quickly follow suit. With this in mind, Natural Resource Minister Joe Oliver recently said in Brussels that Canada would consider filing a complaint with the World Trade Organization if the EU goes ahead with the directive.
Jaccard’s role in deciding the fate of the FQD is to share his economic and environmental insights to the European Parliament. Also a member of the 2007 Nobel Prize winning Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, Jaccard and climatologist James Hansen, from NASA’s Goddard Institute, will make presentations in Brussels, at The Hague in the Netherlands, and at a public event at the London School of Economics.
“Dr. Hansen and I are honoured to be asked to provide guidance to the European Union on such a critical policy decision.” said Jaccard. “We hope to provide clarity not only on the current detrimental impacts and implications of allowing oil sands growth to continue unchecked, but how continuing to say yes, regardless of geography to our country’s dirty, energy-intensive products will have global implications for others, long-term.”
