Re: LNG plans may alter B.C.'s climate-change goal

If BC's energy drama were written as a play, the first act would have been Gordon Campbell's through the previous decade: orders to BC Hydro to buy as much power as it could from IPPs, removal of the BC Utilities Commission from all significant decisions, self-sufficiency plus insurance, smart meters, no more gas-fired generation.

Act II is Christy Clark's. Oops on the self-sufficiency. Oops, on the gas-fired generation.

And Act III belongs to Adrian Dix, but now we're getting ahead of ourselves.

Back to Act II

Premier Clark is moving herself into a very troubling box. We're still targeting 33% reduction in greenhouse gas emissions by 2020, EXCEPT WHERE IT'S INCONVENIENT, like these LNG plants proposed for Kitimat.

So how does that work, Ms. Clark? You're saying we've got rules, but we'll just break them when we want to? You're saying British Columbians can effing well bite it, but Apache, EOG, Encana, Shell, etc. - for them we have special exceptions?

And what about this: "“If we can ship more LNG to China in particular, which is very dependent on coal, we are helping them wean themselves off dirty sources of energy. And that’s good for the world,” she said. “It’s good for global climate change. This myth that our control or responsibility for climate change stops at our borders – that that is the only way we should measure it – I think it is wrong.”

Well, Premier, that's a knife that cuts both ways. And I'd like to talk to you about a coal mine at the earliest opportunity.