Redford hoping fifth trip to Washington does trick

If at first you don’t succeed, try, try again.

If you’re Premier Alison Redford lobbying American politicians to approve the Keystone XL pipeline, it’s try, try, try, try, try again. Today, Redford makes her fifth trip to Washington, D.C., since becoming premier, hoping to convince American legislators to approve the pipeline because Alberta is a bastion of environmental leadership and protection. Please stifle the urge to guffaw, for now.

Environmental protection is key to the U.S. government’s Keystone decisionmaking process, of course, because President Barack Obama declared in June that “our national interest will be served only if this project does not significantly exacerbate the problem of carbon pollution.”

With that in mind, Redford is trying to convince the Americans that Alberta, the source of the bitumen to be transported through the pipeline, is not the climate change culprit as portrayed by that other Redford, Robert, who released a video in September saying the oilsands are producing “enough carbon pollution to wreak havoc with our cli- mate for decades to come.”

Movie actor Redford’s attack is over-the-top hyperbole. But then politician Redford’s defence is just as misleading.

Let’s look at the pitch Redford is making, as outlined in the government’s official news release on today’s trip.

“The Premier will discuss the leading environmental actions Alberta has taken, including clean technology investments aimed at significantly reducing environmental impacts.”

This is a reference to Alberta’s $2-billion plan to build four projects to capture carbon dioxide emissions from industrial projects, compress the CO2 into a fluid and inject the fluid underground. Oh, wait, make that $1.3 billion for two projects. The government’s plans for carbon capture and storage have hit a series of obstacles since being announced in 2008. For one, companies are realizing CCS is simply uneconomical, even with government help. For another, getting a full scale CCS project to work is exceptionally difficult.

The result is that Alberta is having a heck of a time coming up with a way to significantly reduce its greenhouse gas emissions. The oilsands are the fastest growing source of emissions in Canada, increasing from 90 million tonnes in 2008 to 110 million tonnes in 2012 — and we don’t know yet how we’ll reverse that trend. Industry was making progress in reducing the intensity of emissions produced per barrel of bitumen, but the Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers has discovered that the intensity of emissions is actually growing again. It would seem the fastest growing source of emissions in Canada is actually growing faster.

Here’s another part of Redford’s pitch to the Americans today: “Alberta has also established a worldleading oilsands monitoring program and put in place a comprehensive land-use plan for the oilsands region that sets out vast swaths of protected lands.”

Indeed, the government has introduced the Protecting Alberta’s Environment Act, which will set up the Alberta Environmental Monitoring, Evaluation and Reporting Agency. It will concentrate at first on monitoring emissions from the oilsands before expanding to the whole province. It’s a step in the right direction, but the government only started moving in this direction after being shamed by independent scientists such as world-leading aquatics expert David Schindler, who presented evidence that the oilsands industry was in fact adversely affecting the environment.

But even then, getting a “world-leading” monitoring program up and running remains a work in progress. Bitumen in January moves more quickly.

And there are questions about the independence of an environmental agency that will be appointed by the government and report back to the environment minister.

As for the “vast swaths of protected lands,” the government has indeed set aside five million acres of boreal forest for conservation. What the government doesn’t trumpet is the land was chosen pretty much because it’s the bits of northern Alberta the oilsands companies don’t want.

You’d think the policymakers in Washington know Alberta’s environmental record, good and bad. And you wonder what difference Redford can make by popping in for another visit before Obama makes a decision, expected later this year or early next. But Redford is caught in a dilemma. If she didn’t go, she’d be criticized by the opposition for not defending Alberta’s interests.

On the other hand, by going five times in two years, opposition critics are happily calling her trips ineffective. “Albertans want to see the premier promote Alberta to the world, but they expect to see results,” said Wildrose Leader Danielle Smith last week in the legislature.

So, Redford is in Washington today doing what she can to run Alberta’s tattered environmental flag up the pole. She shouldn’t expect Obama to salute. She should just be happy nobody breaks into guffaws.