Ottawa clarifies upstream emissions

The federal government has officially slapped a definition on upstream emissions, which are now factored into all environmental reviews for major oil and gas projects.

The Department of Environment and Climate Change quietly released its proposal Friday for what should be fall under the classification during environmental assessments of large energy projects — explaining the extraction, processing, handling and transportation of petroleum could all be factored into the equation.

“’Upstream’ includes all industrial activities from the point of resource extraction to the project under review,” the government said in a notice of the proposed regulations issued Friday in the Canada Gazette.

“The specific processes included as upstream activities will vary by resource and project type, but in general they include extraction, processing, handling and transportation.”

Environment Minister Catherine McKenna and Natural Resources Minister Jim Carr announced in late January the federal government would overhaul how it examines major energy projects, to put more focus on greenhouse gas emissions — including the assessment of so-called upstream emissions created by extracting or producing petroleum.

But what exactly would fall under that definition has been the subject of controversy, as the Liberal government prepares a panCanadian strategy for combating climate change.

Its proposed methodology says the assessment of upstream GHGs will consist of two parts.

The first will be a quantitative estimation of GHG emissions released as a result of upstream production associated with the project, “including those associated with the production of steam or hydrogen used by upstream facilities.”

The second will be a discussion of the project’s potential impact on Canadian and global GHG emissions.

Erin Flanagan, director of federal policy at the Pembina Institute environmental think-tank, said the government is asking the right questions and she’s pleased to see emissions from gas venting and flaring taken into account.

“I think that they’re getting a lot of it right,” she said.

But Flanagan said she’d like more clarity about how projects reviewed under the new rules would fit into the context of Canada’s current goal of reducing its emissions by 30 per cent below 2005 levels by 2030.

“Can we have the infrastructure conversation divorced from a conversation about our targets?” asked Flanagan.

Kathryn Harrison, a professor of political science at the University of British Columbia, said there are many unanswered questions that make it impossible to tell whether any given project would get the thumbs-up under the new rules.

Firstly, there is a lot of variation amongst oil and gas operators when it comes to their emissions performance.

“It’s not clear how specific how those emissions factors will be to a particular operation and to a particular operator,” she said.