It is a beautiful day outside, one of the crisp days of Winter where it becomes a pleasant chore to restock the wood pile near the house. Soon we will begin to tidy up the yard, and Spring will be here and plans are already made for trips and travel through the summer. Somehow in this planning, even though we know of the problems that are coming with energy supply, it doesn’t factor much into the plans that are made. There is a complacency of thought that says that things will continue, much as they are, and certainly in the discussions from the political contenders there is little concern expressed for dramatic change in the security of supply, or even the volume of that supply, within the near term.

As I mentioned last week, I have been giving talks that include a component of the coming problem outside of the small circle of our campus and moving out to the service clubs, and the occasional larger conference gathering. I largely dwell on the problems of oil and gas supply and the inadequacy of our being able to make up shortfalls in these with solar and wind, or even ethanol, because of the scale of the problem and the nature of the coming liquid fuels shortages. The talks seem to go over quite well, I even get the odd request for copies – but I strongly suspect that the audience, in very large part, quickly moves their attention to the next item on the agenda, and that within a week the topic is far back in their memories. I mention this because in many ways I think my small experience mirrors to a degree what we see on a much larger scale when folk like Matt Simmons give the more detailed, and skilled presentations that he provides. There is no experience of significant personal impact that causes the problem to seem immediate to many of the audience.

This is an Energy and Environment Round-Up by ilargi.

As the tar sands royalties soap drags on, and we do have links to some really good articles on the topic, from Nature.org, Mother Jones, and many others, still, how could we not open with climate change, two days after Al Gore and the IPCC won the first ever Climate Change Nobel Prize, and Sheila Watt-Cloutier and James Hansen did not?

Everything that the winners stand for is rendered obsolete in one broad stroke by the article from New Scientist that we open with below. And that is the problem: the people who do the frontline work are snubbed, while the late arrivals get decorated. Yes, Gore raises awareness. But awareness of what, exactly?

And that’s not the only issue: both winners stand out for being repeatedly, if not incessantly, wrong on what they claim to be experts in, only to be corrected time and again by those they beat out for the award. Yes, it’s done, we know, and maybe we should just lower our standards, like everyone else. Problem with that is, we don’t trust there’s time left for any standards other than the real ones.

In Alberta, the debate of the the tar sands royalty review is heating up. Major companies are threatening to pull investments in the province, while other point out that a peaking world offers them few other options. The environmental effects of large-scale bitumen mining, which are not considered often enough, are discussed in detail in journalist Willam Marsden's new book.

On the other side of the country, LNG shipments seem set to ignite a political row over safety in narrow shipping lanes. Nuclear appears to be approaching a revival, although cost is an issue. The effects of climate change are making themselves felt across the globe, notably in the Australia and in the Arctic, where Inuit climate change campaigner Sheila Watt-Cloutier could be about to share the Nobel Peace Prize with Al Gore. (More under the fold!)

The Alberta royalty review continues to generate a predictable response from an industry which has seen costs rise more rapidly than prices in recent years. Even though Alberta’s take is comparatively low, Encana has announced it will withdraw $1 billion in investment if the new royalty recommendations are accepted by the province.

Elsewhere on the energy scene, Alberta looks to expand both wind and nuclear power, while Ontario reactors’ inability to deal with an unexpected spell of warm weather during maintenance outage season made electricity imports necessary.

Globally, questions are increasingly raised over the global warming effects of both ethanol production and hydro-power dams.

In environmental news the drought in Australia and the Ukraine has led to record wheat prices and concerns over feeding the world's poor. The Arctic warms ever more rapidly, for some an opportunity to exploit new resources, rather than a problem. If warming continues to accelerate, it just might become an 'insurmountable opportunity'.

'All bets are off'

In the 10 days since a provincially appointed panel dropped its bombshell report recommending that Alberta play hardball with the oilpatch, work inside Calgary's office towers has turned from planning growth to assessing damage and even eyeing an exodus....

...."Everybody is holding their breath right now," said Hal Walker, a long-time provincial Tory and real-estate developer who is critical of the review process. "All bets are off."....

....Deutsche Bank highlighted the escalating risk of investing in the province: "Risk, risk and risk, and there's risk. Above all, be warned about risk," it said.

As out of character as the panel recommendations seem in business friendly Alberta, observers say it has big support in rural Alberta and in Edmonton, areas that believe they have suffered the downside of the oilsands driven boom, while not reaping enough of the benefits.