Search

The objective of this paper is to assess the impact of proposed Canadian climate change mitigation policies (discounting and carbon pricing) on cost, energy use, and greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions in the single-objective design/expansion optimization of the Amherstview water distribution system in Amherstview, Ontario, Canada. The single-objective optimization problem is solved with the elitist genetic algorithm (EGA). The optimization approach is used in a parametric analysis to examine the impact of discounting and carbon pricing on GHG reductions for cement-mortar ductile iron and polyvinyl chloride pipe materials. Preliminary results indicate that the discount rate and carbon prices investigated had no significant influence on energy use and GHG mass in the Amherstview system and did not meet the emission-reduction targets set by the Canadian government. This result was attributed to a number of factors, including adequately installed hydraulic capacity in the Amherstview system, the use of a time-declining GHG emission intensity factor, and the scope of the expansion problem. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Quantifying a proposed project's greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and scrutinizing their effect on climate change are increasingly required in Canadian environmental assessment (EA) processes. This paper investigates to what degree an EA authority's intention for the inclusion of GHG considerations has resulted in implementation into environmental impact statements (EISs) by proponents and how these considerations influence the achievement of GHG reduction targets. Fifteen projects across five Canadian jurisdictions were reviewed. The examination revealed that well-developed intentions by EA authorities did not necessarily result in proponents following guidelines for GHG consideration in their EISs due to the absence of regulation or clearly defined policies. Conversely, even though intentions by an EA authority are underdeveloped in some jurisdictions, EISs sometimes exhibited thorough GHG assessments due to mechanisms in the EA process through which GHG consideration by the proponent could be compelled. The examination did not reveal how GHG consideration in EA currently assists in meeting reduction targets. A GHG emissions limit imposed during the EA process could link EA to success in meeting these targets. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]