Summary: Is the government of British Columbia signalling its opposition to the Northern Gateway pipeline the beginning of the end for Keystone? All this and more in this week's edition of the Climate Minute. Good morning and welcome to the MCAN Climate Minute. Ted and Rob are coming to you (relatively live) from the Pink and Orange coffeehouse talking about items from Keystone to divestment to The Fugitive... rather, fugitive emissions, and whether we get all our news the echo chamber of pro-climate news sites. Here are your weekly links, and thanks for tuning in! The Government of British Columbia announced its opposition to the Northern Gateway pipeline proposed by Enbridge which would have brought tar sands west over the Canadian Rockies. What does this mean? Well, it makes it much harder for tar sands to go west, and makes our comment: The State Department DSEIS “passed” the pipeline in part on the basis that the tar sands would be exploited even if Keystone XL wasn’t built – but that’s not necessarily the case. Pipelines to the west from Alberta are stalled, and there are economic and environmental limits to non-pipeline transmission of the tar sands. If the XL pipeline is not built the draw-down of the tar sands would continue, but likely at a much slower rate, providing valuable time to pursue other energy sources. Look all the more prescient. The possibility that the Northern Gateway pipeline will not be built gives lie to the SDEIS supposition that the impact of the carbon in the tar sands doesn't matter because the oil will just be exploited anyway. So the news is encouraging for foes of Keystone, but issue is not over, There are, of course, other pipelines in the pipeline... Enbridge is proposing a number of pipelines which would import as much tar sands as Keystone would. In other Keystone news, the public comments made on the SDEIS are being put online, you can search by name. The comments are being made available over time, ours aren't up yet, but you can see the comment of 29 prominent scientists including James Hansen, Michael Mann, and Tuft's own Bill Moomaw. Keystone leads to talk of divestment. Locally five New England colleges have met the challenge and are divesting their portfolios of carbon stocks. Here's an interesting point / counterpoint on whether divestment is the vital approach, or whether using shareholder advocacy is a more fruitful path. In other words is it more useful to be inside the tent arguing for improvement, or on the outside? Dr. Richard Kimble was accused of a crime he did not commit... Sorry, wrong fugitive. Fugitive emissions is the new phrase of the day. In today's podcast we talk about how the emissions from natural gas pipelines may make natural gas as bad an emitter as coal burning. The Guardian has a story about new studies that suggest the emissions benefits of the natural gas boom will be offset by the climate impact of pipeline leaks. This corresponds with a report issued by the Conservation Law Foundation earlier this year that estimates 4% of all natural gas transported through pipelines in New England is lost. Methane is just one of several greenhouse gasses, and a potent one at that. MIT professor Ron Prinn notes that counting all the various greenhouse gases the CO2 equivalent would be about 478ppm, rather than the 400ppm figure recently noted. In political news, President Obama is to appoint three judges to the DC circuit court, which has huge climate implications as appeals of EPA regulations go there. Slate's gabfest podcast has an interesting conversation here. (Listen to the whole thing for an interesting conversation of new Secretary of Energy Ernest Moniz's hair...) In great news, the federal government is about to auction of tens of thousands of acres of space for offshore wind power, enough space for up to 3,400 megawatts of wind power. As we mentioned, a new fossil discovery fou
