Yesterday in the BC Legislature I rose during Question Period to ask the Minister of Environment and Climate Change Strategy about the inconsistency between British Columbia’s CleanBC plan to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and the fact that the Deputy Minister of  Energy, Mines and Petroleum Resources recently went to Japan to tout the idea of even more LNG development in B.C.

Below I reproduce the video and text of our exchange. The BC Liberals were quite boisterous in heckling the Environment Minister as he tried to respond to my question.

Video of Exchange

Question

A. Weaver: It’s been troubling to hear some B.C. organizations recently push the false narrative that by exporting LNG we are somehow helping to reduce global greenhouse gas emissions. It’s not surprising to see them puppet the LNG rhetoric from the previous government, since the signals being sent by this government are often in conflict with one another. For example, we know that increasing an LNG export capacity is inconsistent with CleanBC and our goal of reducing greenhouse gas emissions by 40 percent by 2030. Yet despite this, earlier this month the Deputy Minister for Energy, Mines and Petroleum Resources went to Japan to tout the idea of even more LNG development in B.C.

My question is to the Minister of Environment and Climate Change Strategy. How can British Columbians have confidence that this government is serious about being a climate leader when a deputy minister is travelling abroad stumping for further fossil fuel development?

Answer

Hon. G. Heyman: Thank you to the Leader of the Third Party for the question.

As the Leader of the Third Party knows well, both his party and our party on the government side were convinced going into the last election that we had a serious climate credibility problem in British Columbia, despite the fact that B.C. was the first jurisdiction in North America to introduce a carbon tax. We felt that way because we had seen a complete reversal of intention to do anything whatsoever about reducing…

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

Hon. G. Heyman: …emissions in B.C.

In fact, don’t take my word for it. Even former Premier Gordon Campbell expressed disappointment with his party’s approach under Christy Clark. That led to the Green Party caucus and our caucus agreeing that it was important to have a serious, quantifiable climate action plan in British Columbia, and we set about to do exactly that together. That resulted in CleanBC.

Interjections.

Mr. Speaker: Members.

Hon. G. Heyman: That resulted in a plan that’s measurable to meet our climate targets.

I’m pleased to have worked with the Leader of the Third Party and their caucus on putting in place a robust accountability framework so British Columbians won’t have to take our word for it. They will be able to rely on regular reporting and verification that we are on a path to do what we say we will do. What we have said we will do is reduce emissions, and what we have said we will do is that the development of LNG must fit within our CleanBC plan.

The BC NDP government released the 2017 greenhouse gas emissions data today. To no one’s surprise, BC’s 2017 GHG emissions increased by 1.2% from 2016 to 2017 to a total 64.5 million tonnes (Mt) of carbon dioxide-equivalent (CO2e), or roughly 13.1t CO2e per capita. Leading the way was a year-over-year 29% increase in emissions from natural gas flaring. Of course, this too is unsurprising as there is a glut of natural gas in the market and the predominant value from the drilling activity in the northeastern BC’s Montney Formation is in the liquids. A significant fraction of these liquids are shipped to Alberta where they are mixed with bitumen to form dilbit, the less viscous substance that can flow through pipelines. The gas, for which there is no market (and for which we have slashed royalty payments to the province and so literally give away), can be pumped back underground or burnt on site (flaring). And all of these activities are subsidized by the BC taxpayer to the tune of billions of dollars.

As I’ve outlined numerous times over the years on this blog site, with BC’s expansion into LNG, I do not believe the BC NDP government will be able to deliver a plan that will cut GHG emissions to 40% below 2007 levels by 2030. The premier claims that he will. I remain unconvinced.

Nevertheless, I remain very supportive of the CleanBC economic plan, which the BC Greens played an integral role in developing. However, I fear that it may be all for naught. As you will see in the above graph, the trend in emissions from the natural gas sector is on the rise, even without a single LNG facility in place. The trend in emissions from residential buildings is on the decline as we would hope.

Do we believe that it is fair for British Columbians to be burdened with the requirements and cost of reducing GHG emissions while we continue to offer subsidies and corporate welfare to the oil and gas sector? I think not for we have to work even harder as individuals to curb our emissions to account for the continued growth of emissions in the oil and gas sector.

Below I reproduce the media statement that I issued in response to government’s release of these new greenhouse gas emissions data.

Media Release

BC’s greenhouse gas emissions continue to climb
For immediate release
September 9, 2019

VICTORIA, B.C. – At a time when citizens are calling on their governments to ambitiously decarbonize – and every international panel has stated doing so is the only way to meet our agreed upon international climate targets- the provincial government’s recently released greenhouse gas data  shows that BC, as of 2017, has failed to correct its emissions trajectory.

The data released today show total emissions in British Columbia increased 1.2 per cent from 2016 to 2017 to a total 64.5 million tonnes (Mt) of carbon dioxide-equivalent (CO2e), roughly 13.1t CO2e per capita. Emissions are now back up to 2007 levels when 64.8 Mt of CO2e was emitted, despite the BC NDP government last year committing to reduce emissions by 40% from this amount by the year 2030.

“We designed the CleanBC economic plan to start to tackle this challenge. Now that it is being implemented I expect we’ll start to see some slight emissions reductions, but it is clear we have a long way to go and we need to remain diligent in our commitment to our reduction targets,” said Dr. Andrew Weaver, leader of the B.C. Greens. “The timing of the release of these new emissions numbers is also particularly ironic as it comes on the heels of British Columbia announcing it’s sending a delegation to Japan to tout the potential export of highly subsidized LNG. As I’ve identified numerous times in the past, we cannot expand investment in the fossil fuel sector and hope to reduce our domestic emissions to promised levels.”

“British Columbians say they want to fight climate change. Looking at this data, they should be enraged that the lack of regulations in the oil and gas sectors means their footprint is two to three times larger than that of the average person living in the UK, Norway, New Zealand, Denmark and Sweden. The average British Columbia emits about 29 times the CO2e compared to an average citizen in Bangladesh.

“Our individual carbon footprint per British Columbian barely come in under our neighbours to the south, by a measly 12%. These numbers show us that we are not the concerned environmental stewards that we think we are, and it is because we have had governments that fail to regulate industry and fail to implement a vision for a new, green economy rooted in sustainable practices.”

This summer, government released its strategic climate risk assessment for British Columbia . Analyzing the climate risks likely to face British Columbia between 2040 and 2059, the report stated:

“British Columbia is already experiencing the effects of global climate change: average temperatures are increasing, sea levels are rising, and variable and extreme weather is becoming more frequent. Scientists expect these changes to accelerate and intensify in the years ahead, creating risks to society, natural resources, and ecosystems.”

British Columbia is contributing to global emissions rising when they need to be falling dramatically. The UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) has repeatedly reported that carbon pollution needs to be cut by 45 percent by 2030 if we are to stay below 1.5C warming, beyond which even half a degree will significantly worsen climate change impacts and drag hundreds of millions of people into poverty.

“Now is not the time to protect the status quo or invest billions in expanding the oil and gas sector,” Weaver said.  “Now is the time to rise to the challenge before us. Climate change is an immense risk if we don’t do anything about it. But it is also an incredible opportunity if we act. We can- and must- build cleaner and healthier communities and vibrant, resilient, sustainable economies.”

CleanBC was developed in collaboration with the BC NDP government and supports the commitment in the Confidence and Supply Agreement to implement climate action to meet B.C.’s emission targets.

Quick Facts

In 2016, the most recent global data available from the International Energy Agency, the United Kingdom’s per capita emissions were 5.65t CO2e, New Zealand’s were 6.45t CO2e, Norway’s were 6.78t CO2e, Denmark’s were 5.84t CO2e and Sweden’s were 3.83t CO2e. For comparison, per capita emissions in Bangladesh were 0.45t CO2e and in the United States were 14.95t CO2e.

This puts the average British Columbian’s carbon footprint 2.3, 2.0,1.9, 2.2 and 3.4 times larger than that of the average person living in the UK, Norway, New Zealand, Denmark and Sweden, respectively.

-30-

Media contact
Macon L.C.  McGinley, Press Secretary
B.C. Green Caucus
+1 250-882-6187 |macon.mcginley@leg.bc.ca

Yesterday the Premier and Prime Minister made a joint announcement promising another $680 million subsidy of the BC natural gas sector. In this, the latest example of corporate welfare for the fossil fuel sector, the BC NDP government promised substantive taxpayer-funded handouts aimed at electrifying upstream natural gas activities.

Of course, investing in electrification infrastructure that moves our province to a greener economy must be a priority, but it is a missed opportunity when it is only to potentially offset future emitters, and the rest of the economy- and our emissions targets- are left treading water. The government could, and should, have simply required electrification through regulation. Instead, this latest announcement expands upon the litany of previous subsidies doled out by the BC NDP government to try and and deliver what the previous BC Liberal government couldn’t — a single LNG export facility,

Below I reproduce the media statement we released in response to this announcement.

Media Statement

B.C., federal governments announce $680 million to support future fossil fuel development in the province
For immediate release
Aug. 29, 2019

VICTORIA, B.C. – Provincial and federal governments announced today they will subsidize fossil fuel development further by committing $680 million to electrify natural gas facilities that have yet to be built.

“By prioritizing this $330 million to potentially reduce the future emissions from fossil fuel companies, the NDP government is not only providing more subsidies for the growth of the fossil fuel sector, but are also neglecting their responsibility to this province to be making the investments for an alternative future,”  B.C. Green Party Leader Dr. Andrew Weaver, MLA from Oak Bay- Gordon Head. ”Investing in electrification infrastructure that moves our province to a greener economy must be a priority, but it is a missed opportunity when it is only to potentially offset future emitters, and the rest of the economy- and our emissions targets- are left treading water.

“British Columbians are looking for leadership that is investing in their future by supporting the industries of tomorrow, not the dinosaurs of yesterday. With this massive subsidy, the NDP are investing in the very industries whose practices for the last many decades have contributed to the climate change crisis that is affecting British Columbians every single day- the heatwaves, droughts, wildfires, and species declines. Government’s own strategic risk assessment they released without so much as a statement last month contained clear warnings to this affect- again, warnings scientists have been making for decades.

“We should seize the opportunity to be a global leader in building a clean, vibrant economy based on new industries that aren’t the source of climate change. Instead, with today’s announcement we are asked to celebrate that we may slightly reduce the pollution coming from our oil and gas sector, even as it continues to grow. I know we can do better.”

-30-

Media contact
Macon L.C.  McGinley
Press Secretary, B.C. Green Caucus
+1 250-882-6187 |macon.mcginley@leg.bc.ca

Today in the legislature I rose during budget estimate debates for the Ministry of Finance to ask about the growing liability that British Columbia is incurring through the deep well royalty credit program. Last spring I extensively canvassed the Minister of Energy, Mines and Petroleum Resources on the same topic. It was revealed that that as of December 31, 2017 there are $3.1 billion in unclaimed credits. It turns out that another $383 million was added last year.

Below I reproduce the video and text of our exchange. The BC Green Caucus remains profoundly troubled by the generational sellout embodied in the BC NDP corporate welfare aimed at trying to attract LNG to BC.

Video of Exchange

Text of Exchange

A. Weaver: This is for the benefit of the children in the gallery from, I believe, Surrey Christian School. What we’re doing here in the Legislature is we’re debating estimates for the Ministry of Finance. It’s a time for opposition MLAs, the Liberals or the Greens here, to pose questions to the minister about various budgetary issues that are related to her file. I’ll be asking about some finance questions with respect to natural gas royalties.

The reason why I’m posing these to the minister is that I did ask last time: the deep-well royalty credit program is actually administered by the Ministry of Finance. The qualified wells receive these credits automatically, and they don’t need to apply separately.

The credit was first created in 2003, expanded in 2014, and in last year’s public accounts, the unclaimed balance of deep-well credits totalled $2.59 billion. A further $3.5 billion has already been cashed in to reduce royalties that would otherwise have been payable. This program has reduced gas producers’ existing and future royalty liability to the Crown by nearly $6 billion.

My questions in this area are this: how many deep-well credits were issued over the past year and to whom?

Hon. C. James: The member asked how many deep-well credits. We don’t have the information around the breakdown of which are new credits and which are continuing credits with us, but I’m happy to get that information for the member of which are new. We don’t have that breakdown with us, and we’ll get that information.

On page 120, it identifies the number for new, and that would be $383 million. Then the identifier — the member asked how many and who got them — is personal tax information so we can’t provide that. But we’re happy to get the information and get it back to the member around the number of new credits for this year.

A. Weaver: Further on…. I suspect I’ll get a similar answer, and I welcome the information at a later date. How many deep-well credits have been issued since 2014 and to whom?

Hon. C. James: We’ll add that to the information for the member. We don’t have that information with us.

A. Weaver: My question, then, is: why is there not a standard public disclosure of these credits and royalties that are received? There is, for example, for stumpage fees in the province, under the harvest billing system. Why are we not making public the royalty credits that are being claimed here?

Hon. C. James: This credit, the deep-well credit, fits under FOI, and under FOI, we can’t release taxpayer information. I can’t give an explanation around why it would be different, as the member talks about, in stumpage. But the requirement is under FOI to protect individual taxpayer information, which would include, of course, the names and the identifiers.

A. Weaver: The inconsistency, as was noted, is with respect to the harvest billing system, so perhaps we could explore that at some other date.

What’s the total value of deep-well credits that are still outstanding and that could be claimed against?

Hon. C. James: As the member pointed out, $2.6 billion in ’17-18. The ’18-19 numbers get reported out in Public Accounts. That tracking is just being done now, and they get reported out in Public Accounts.

A. Weaver: My final question is with respect to FOI, freedom-of-information, requests that went to the Ministry of Finance. The file number, for reference, is FIN-2019-90584. This was a freedom-of-information request put in by an independent person outside of the Legislature. What was being requested there was a list showing the total royalty credits granted to each company that applied for such credits in the most recent fiscal year.

Now, the freedom-of-information requests from the Ministry of Energy and Mines and from the Ministry of Finance provided completely different answers. The Ministry of Energy and Mines had no issue and provided, actually, the detailed credits, by whom and to whom, whereas the Ministry of Finance withheld all information.

So my question to the minister is: why is there a discrepancy between information we’re getting from the Ministry of Energy and Mines versus the Ministry of Finance?

Hon. C. James: The FOI request that the member is referring to was asking about the infrastructure royalty credits. The infrastructure royalty credits actually have a provision where when someone applies for the credit, they give permission for their information to be shared. That’s why Energy and Mines was able to share the information, because the infrastructure royalty credits have that application for the individuals when they apply. So that’s, obviously, a different program than the deep-well credits

Yesterday during question period yesterday I rose to ask the Minister of Energy, Mines and Petroleum Resources questions about the ever increasing liability British Columbians are taking on as the number of orphan gas wells grows out of control. I remain deeply concerned about the Minister’s grasp of the file and profoundly troubled by the lack of substance in her answers to our questions.

Below I reproduce the video and text of our exchange

Video of Exchange

Question

A. Weaver: Yesterday my colleague from Cowichan Valley asked the Minister of Energy, Mines and Petroleum Resources how many gas wells in British Columbia are leaking, and she didn’t know. Well, here’s some information for her: out of the 134 wells in the province with confirmed gas migration — that’s leaking problems, as documented by the Oil and Gas Commission — almost half are owned by one company, the Shanghai Energy Corporation.

This company, which has strong links to the Communist Party of China, is buying up wells in our province at an alarming rate. They now own 1,128 wells, with 863 active, 184 inactive and 13 that are being decommissioned.

My question is to the Minister of Energy, Mines and Petroleum Resources: does she think that the Communist Party of China buying up stranded assets in B.C. is concerning, and does she think that the Shanghai Energy Corporation will be a good corporate citizen and clean up their activity and all their leaky wells when the time comes?

Answer

Hon. M. Mungall: We have an open marketplace for tenures and for gas wells. That means that companies from around the world are able to purchase these tenures as well as the wells and so on. They then have the duty to be good corporate citizens, no matter who they are, no matter where they come from. We have the Oil and Gas Commission, as well as this government, who is taking its role as a regulator very seriously to ensure that, again, no matter who they are, no matter where they’re from, that any corporation who’s doing business in British Columbia and business in our oil and gas sector is following the rules.

Supplementary Question

A. Weaver: I’m not sure I understood what the answer to the question was there, but nevertheless, let me try again.

Ranch Energy was one of three companies that became insolvent last year, leaving a forecasted $12.3 million deficit in the B.C. Oil and Gas Commission’s orphan reclamation fund. Currently — I know these facts are troubling to the minister — there are 310 sites designated as orphan sites, requiring further restoration. But there are 300 to 500 Ranch Energy wells that could be added to this, creating a further potential liability of $40 to $90 million.

Yesterday the minister told the chamber that things have gotten a lot better since her government was sworn in. Yet over the last two years, B.C.’s orphan well sites have increased by — get this — 48 percent. Bankrupt companies have left the province with massive cleanup bills.

Last month we heard from the Auditor General. There are more than 10,000 active wells, with a $3 billion price tag for decommissioning them. All the while, her ministry is giving massive handouts, corporate handouts. It’s not an open market. It’s a subsidized market by this government because the market would not exist in a free and open market, because it does not compete on the international scene.

What is the minister’s plan? Please, please, I beg you — no more non-answer, no more rhetoric, no more 16 years nonsense. Answer the question for a change.

What is the minister’s plan to ensure British Columbians are not on the hook for the cleanup costs of this industry? There is no excuse for not hearing an answer here.

Answer

Hon. M. Mungall: The member might recall that just over a year ago we passed legislation — it was Bill 15 at the time — to address the issue of orphaned wells. We have done a considerable amount of work. Part of that bill was to address how we are funding the orphaned well reclamation fund.

The previous government had it funded through a taxation on production. We have moved from that because that was not an effective way to fund this fund. We’ve moved away from that, and we have a liability levy so we’re actually able to get the financial resources so that we can start reclaiming the orphaned well sites.

We have a multi-year plan to reclaim all of these sites. It involves Treaty 8 First Nations, who are doing a wide array of work to do this reclamation, including having nurseries with the appropriate vegetation of native plants so that we can truly reclaim these sites and the land to the state that they need to be in for future generations