Significance + Greenhouse Gases in Impact Assessment Recent Experiences Mike Murphy Sandra Banholzer Julia Kun Sana Talebi IAIA 2017 – Montreal, Quebec April 5, 2017

Outline The Need to Consider GHGs in EIA Available Guidance Thresholds Experiences with GHGs in EIA The Way Forward Talk to the slide content

mid-20th century” (IPCC 2015). Introduction “…anthropogenic GHGs …. extremely likely to be dominant cause ….of observed warming since the mid-20th century” (IPCC 2015). …those releases of GHGs = a significant adverse environmental effect on Earth’s natural climate Any project that releases GHGs to the atmosphere needs to assess the potential impact in an EIA Talk to the slide content

Objective …to assess the potential effects of GHGs from a Project AND – help make a decision Talk to the slide content Hotel Industry Power Plant

Some Questions What is the environmental effect? What is the boundary of the effects assessment? Use both science + policy? What is “significant”? How does this work cumulatively? Talk to the slide content

Available Guidance United Kingdom “all new GHG emissions contribute to a significant negative environmental effect” “…significance should be based on its net GHG impact” IEMA Principle Series, 2009, 2010 Recommended: to develop guidelines change of behaviour of EIA practitioners Hands and Hudson, 2016 Talk to the slide content

Available Guidance USA Federal – CEQ Draft Guidance Memo 2011 Advises federal agencies: to reduce GHGs + adapt to CC Clean Power Plan – re coal reduction States Western Climate Initiative Have their own Is this all about to change? Talk to the slide content

Available Guidance Canada Effects of Project on Environment Effects of Environment on Project One project - cannot measure effect Develop sector profile Low, medium, high – re GHGs Quantities, thresholds - not defined Climate modeling - global + local (downscaling) Consider policies and regulations of each jurisdiction Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency (2003) Talk to the slide content

…What to use in impact assessment? Thresholds of GHGs Wide range Reporting Verification Scientific Government Practitioners …What to use in impact assessment? Talk to the slide content

On Thresholds of GHG Emissions Canada Large final emitters: > 100 kt/y CO2e Low, medium, high = ?? USA USEPA CFR Part 98: > 25 kt/y CO2e - reporting South Coast AQMD: 10 kt/y CO2e is significant California, CEQ Act: 7 kt/y CO2e …significant (based on 10 million Btu/hr boiler on natural gas) There is very little formal guidance on thresholds of GHG emissions, …have not identified any legal thresholds for example - how should the assessment be done, if the GHG emissions are a specific value. But there are tidbits in the government guidance, some clear – some not so. Here we show thresholds from USA and Canada as an example.

Thresholds - Canada Jurisdiction Emission Targets Report and Verify (kt/y) Canada 30% below 2005 levels by 2030 Report – 50 Change ? – 10 British Columbia 80% below 2007 levels by 2050 LNG – 0.16 t / t LNG Report – 10 Verify – 25 Alberta Methane reductions from oil / gas by 45%, by 2025 Report – 50 Verify – 50 Ontario 37% below 1990 levels by 2030 Cap + trade – 25 Quebec 20% below 1990 levels by 2020 37.5% below 1990 levels by 2030 New Brunswick 35% below 1990 levels by 2030 Manage – 25 Talk to the slide content

Experiences Mining Hydroelectric Dams Petroleum Refining Transmission Lines – Electrical LNG Production, Pipeline Upstream – Linear Facility Talk to the slide content

Experiences Sector Valued Component Boundaries Thresholds used in EIA Significant ? Mining Atmospheric Environment Source – project development area Effects – region, global Low, medium, high 50 – 500 kt/y No – in EIA Govt ok Hydroelectric Dams GHGs Source – watershed 100 – 1,000 kt/y Yes in EIA… but the Panel said No Petroleum Refining Source – project development area or well to wheel Yes in EIA Electrical Transmission Lines No interaction between Project and Environment Sources - none None No statement in EIA Liquefied Natural Gas – LNG Source – project development area, + Upstream Low, medium, high Industry profile provincial targets Yes – in EIA provincial agency agreed Talk to the slide content

Experiences - Summary Assessment of GHGs in EIA: Not clear cut The “effect” is not clear Need to use both Science and Policy New reduction targets are emerging How to do it and the end result depends on: the nature of the Project the jurisdiction The public, the Panel Struggle – industry, public, government Talk to the slide content

The Way Forward – in any Project the environmental effects of the Project on its own = rated not significant [Science] …and, Project acting cumulatively = rated as significant [Science] In both cases, still need to consider policies [Policy] (and regulations) of country, state, province Talk to the slide content

The Way Forward - Thresholds In light of above, practical thresholds are recommended to be: Ranking Project GHGs (kt/y) Low* 0 – 25 Medium 25 – 1,000 High > 1,000 Talk to the slide content * = the practical value, Not Significant

Thank you! …thoughts, questions? mike.murphy@stantec.com