NRSP
Email to Members of Provincial Parliament (Ontario)
From: Tom Harris [mailto:tom.harris@nrsp.com]
Sent: June 5, 2007 2:33 PM
To: M.P.P.s
Cc: 'timothyball@shaw.ca'; 'lbroten.mpp@liberal.ola.org';
'minister.moe@ontario.ca'
Subject: Ontario Minister of the Environment
still refuses to reveal how she decided to ban used oil
heaters. NRSP fears the ban may increase, not lessen,
environmental damage
Importance: High
Dear Members of Provincial Parliament,
Here is the latest media coverage of NRSP’s investigation
into Minister Broten’s decision to ban used oil heating
in most of Ontario (underlined phrases are linked to the
applicable Web pages) (interested media, scientists and
engineers are blind Cc’d on this e-mail):
June 4 (10:20 pm): Hear
broadcast on Late
Night Counsell of Ottawa's CFRA
radio – how the used oil heating ban may be a serious
threat to many Ontario small businesses that use or produce
advanced energy and pollution reduction technology was
discussed.
May 30: “No
proof, just bad bans”, OpEd newspaper piece, Ottawa
Sun.
May 29: Hear
interview with NRSP Executive Director Tom
Harris on The
Gary Doyle Show on 570
News radio in Kitchener-Waterloo, Ontario. After the
interview, I emailed
an answer to caller's question about Sun/planet interactions.
The host read my e-mail on air.
- previous media references are listed in below e-mails.
NRSP has still received no response whatsoever to our
April 20 request that Minister Broten share with us how
she came to the decision to ban used oil heating in most
of the province. Premier McGuinty has also yet to respond
when we twice asked to encourage the Minister to respond.
Consequently, I would like to direct a question to MPPs
at large:
Is NRSP expecting too much from the Minister with regards
to at least acknowledging our request and eventually providing
the information we requested? We first contacted Minister
Broten nearly seven weeks ago, both by e-mail and registered
courier – is it not normal practice for provincial MPPs,
especially Ministers, to answer Ontarians when they write
about an issue that concerns them? NRSP waited nearly
a month before publicizing the issue, hoping that we would
see some action on this file but, to date, our communications
have been ignored entirely.
As we will continue to explain to the public, NRSP’s
concern is that the ‘solution’ of banning used oil heaters
may very well result in more environmental damage than
simply allowing their continued use (and perhaps even
encouraging an expansion in their use). To determine whether
this is true or not requires a full life cycle analysis
of the competing options for handling used oil but we
are starting to get the impression that this was never
done. As we said at the end of our Ottawa Sun piece: “Looking
'green' is no longer good enough -- governments must demonstrate
their decisions really are green if they expect to be
seen as anything other than political opportunists.”
Sincerely,
Tom Harris, B. Eng., M. Eng. (thermofluids)
Executive Director
Natural Resources Stewardship Project
P.O. Box 23013
Ottawa, Ontario K2A 4E2
Phone: 613-234-4487
Web: www.nrsp.com
From: Tom Harris
[mailto:tom.harris@nrsp.com]
Sent: May 28, 2007 2:48 PM
To: M.P.P.s
Cc: 'timothyball@shaw.ca'; 'lbroten.mpp@liberal.ola.org';
'minister.moe@ontario.ca'
Subject: NRSP piece in today's Toronto
Sun references Ms. Broten's used oil heating ban and her
lack of response to our enquiries
Importance: High
Dear Members of Provincial Parliament,
Please see http://www.torontosun.com/Comment/2007/05/28/4214065-sun.html
for the subject NRSP article. This paper has a Monday
circulation of about 200,000 and 688,000 readers (Ref.).
We are receiving significant support from the public
concerning our enquiry into the used oil heating ban,
primarily as a result of our piece published yesterday
– people naturally want to know – how did Minister Broten
decide to ban used oil heating?
NRSP will report on the progress of this file to the
growing number of Ontarians who are now following this
issue. Many people are now seeing it as a warning for
future government technology bans in other areas of the
economy as well and so, understandably, are quite concerned.
We hope to hear from the Minister soon.
Sincerely,
Tom Harris, B. Eng., M. Eng. (thermofluids)
Executive Director
Natural Resources Stewardship Project
P.O. Box 23013
Ottawa, Ontario K2A 4E2
Web: www.nrsp.com
From: Tom Harris
[mailto:tom.harris@nrsp.com]
Sent: May 26, 2007 10:26 PM
To: M.P.P.s
Cc: 'timothyball@shaw.ca'; 'lbroten.mpp@liberal.ola.org';
'minister.moe@ontario.ca'
Subject: RE: our enquiry to Minister
Broten about the used oil heater ban
Importance: High
Dear Members of Provincial Parliament,
I greatly appreciate the responses I have received from
several of you about our piece in the Peterborough Examiner
(below) that references our April 20, 2007 enquiry to
Minister Broten concerning the process employed in her
decision to ban used oil heating in Ontario. You may also
be interested in our cover story that references this
issue today in Canada Free Press. Our outstanding query
to the Minister is referenced in the piece subheadline
and starting about half way through the article. As of
this writing our OpEd may be seen at the top of http://www.canadafreepress.com/.
By the time you look, it may have shifted down on the
CFP home page but our article has its own dedicated Web
page at http://www.canadafreepress.com/2007/global-warming052607.htm.
As an increasing number of Ontarians have expressed interest
in this issue, I have posted the latter link to relevant
Web sites.
We look forward to hearing from the Minister on this
crucially important issue.
Sincerely,
Tom Harris, B. Eng., M. Eng. (thermofluids)
Executive Director
Natural Resources Stewardship Project
P.O. Box 23013
Ottawa, Ontario K2A 4E2
Phone: 613-234-4487
www.nrsp.com
From: Tom Harris
[mailto:tom.harris@nrsp.com]
Sent: May 17, 2007 11:54 PM
To: M.P.P.s
Cc: 'timothyball@shaw.ca'; 'lbroten.mpp@liberal.ola.org';
'minister.moe@ontario.ca'
Subject: our enquiry to Minister Broten
about the used oil heater ban
Importance: High
Dear Members of Provincial Parliament,
We at the Natural Resources Stewardship Project (NRSP)
are very concerned that the Minister of the Environment’s
decision to ban used oil heating in the province may not
have been based on a comprehensive life cycle environmental
impact analysis and so has the potential to result in
an increase in environmental damage, not a decrease.
Please click here
to read the press release from NRSP that addresses, as
its main issue, the used oil heating ban announced by
Minister Broten. Here
is NRSP’s letter to the Minister from four weeks ago –
she has yet to respond to in any fashion.
I look forward to hearing your own opinions on this issue
– do you believe environmental decisions should be based
on a full life cycle environmental impact analysis of
the competing options for handling such substances as
used oil or do you believe it is acceptable to skip such
an analysis? The highlighted portion of the below article
explains our concerns in more detail.
I look forward to hearing from you soon.
Sincerely,
Tom Harris, B. Eng., M. Eng. (thermofluids)
Executive Director
Natural Resources Stewardship Project
P.O. Box 23013
Ottawa, Ontario K2A 4E2
Phone: 613-234-4487
www.nrsp.com
From: Tom Harris
[mailto:tom.harris@nrsp.com]
Sent: May 17, 2007 2:36 PM
To: 'minister.moe@ontario.ca'
Cc: 'timothyball@shaw.ca'
Subject: piece mentioning our enquiry
to Minister Broten about the used oil heater ban - also
discussed in a number of radio programmes in the last
few days, today in London, Ontario
Importance: High
Dear Madam Minister,
Here is a piece that was published today that mentions
our enquiry to you.
We certainly look forward to your response to our enquiry.
Sincerely,
Tom Harris, B. Eng., M. Eng. (thermofluids)
Executive Director
Natural Resources Stewardship Project
P.O. Box 23013
Ottawa, Ontario K2A 4E2
Phone: 613-234-4487
Web: www.nrsp.com
Peterborough Examiner
(Ontario)
May 17, 2007 Thursday
Let's see green proof
TOM HARRIS; TIM BALL
Prove it! That's how Canadians must start responding every
time governments impose restrictions to our lifestyle
to supposedly "save the planet. " If politicians
can't validate their schemes with comprehensive and unbiased
scientific studies then they should get out of the way
and stop telling us how to live our lives.
Take the recently announced incandescent light bulb ban.
The federal government's "Action on Climate Change
and Air Pollution" boasts that the ban "will
give Canadian consumers real opportunity both to save
money on energy and to help clean up our environment."
Prove it! Show us the results of comprehensive life cycle
environmental analyses that demonstrate that the energy
savings from a compact fluorescent lamp (CFL) more than
compensates for its increased manufacturing and mercury
disposal impacts. Prove to us that the loss of convenience
and light quality of the tried and true incandescent bulbs
is indeed off-set by a significant net environmental benefit.
Otherwise, expect little co-operation from the public
and a profitable black market in light bulbs.
The Natural Resources Stewardship Project (NRSP) has
asked Environment Minister John Baird to describe how
he decided to ban incandescent light bulbs. Unless a science-based
decision process is seen to have been followed, many will
conclude that the ban is purely political, designed to
look good in the press, appease environmental extremists,
while trumping the NDP who had a private members bill
banning incandescents in the works.
Last month NRSP asked Ontario Environment Minister
Laurel Broten a similar question about her plans to ban
used oil heating in the province. For many years, hundreds
of Ontario car dealerships, garages, farm equipment dealers,
etc. have burned used oil from various sources to reduce
heating costs. Strict emission regulations apply to these
heaters and we know of no evidence that these regulations
are not being adhered to. Yet Broten decided to ban the
heaters in favour of the complex process of collecting
and re-refining the used oil so that a portion of it may
be re-used.
NRSP's interest in the issue was aroused because
Broten focused strongly on the supposed contribution her
ban would make towards the impossible goal of "stopping
climate change." We wondered: under the guise of
reducing carbon dioxide, the non-polluting gas of concern
in most climate change plans, was the used oil heating
ban actually going to result in an increase in real pollution
that causes acid rain and smog, and fouls our ground water?
Only a comprehensive life cycle environmental impact assessment
of the options for handling used oil would reveal the
answer.
Broten announced the ban from the headquarters
of the largest used oil re- refiner, a company that stands
to gain significantly from her decision. Later that same
day, the company announced an expansion to its facility.
Taxpayers are justified to ask if the ban is really about
protecting the environment at all. And if it is, would
it offset the financial loss suffered by business owners
who had already invested in used oil furnaces? We asked
the minister to "prove it".
Nearly four weeks after our request that Broten
reveal how she concluded that banning used oil heating
would be environmentally beneficial, she has yet to respond.
It is important to also question why governments are
banning or promoting specific technologies at all. Surely
their role is to simply establish environmental standards
that must be met across the board, regardless of who,
or what equipment, is being assessed. The marketplace,
not governments, should be left to determine which products
win the hearts and minds of consumers. Implementing bans
against specific technologies risks collusion between
government and industry supporters and stifles innovation,
all the while threatening even further damage to the environment.
Looking "green" is no longer good enough -
governments must demonstrate their decisions really are
green if they expect to be seen as anything other than
political opportunists.
Tim Ball, chairman of the Natural Resources
Stewardship Project), is a Victoria-based environmental
consultant and former climatology professor. Tom Harris
is an Ottawa-based mechanical engineer and NRSP executive
Director.
back to NRSP News
|
