Though it is difficult statistically to link a long-term trend to day-to-day weather, more and more evidence suggests that these irregular and record-breaking weather events are consequences of climate change heating up the Arctic.

Research has been looking at how Arctic warming is changing the polar jet stream, which is a high altitude wind that encircles the globe. This jet stream is the key factor influencing the weather experienced in the Northern Hemisphere.

This polar jet stream is well understood by climate scientists. Because warm air is less dense than cold air, it rises above it. So when warm air parcels from the south travel northward, they sit atop the cold Arctic air. The greater the difference in temperature between these two air parcels, the faster the jet stream moves across the Northern Hemisphere. But when the temperatures of these air parcels are disrupted, the weather events that travel with the stream are disrupted as well. Loss of Arctic sea ice is linked to increased heat in the atmosphere, as sea ice cover acts as a lid that separates the ocean from a colder atmosphere. As increasing amounts of sea ice are lost, the Arctic is becoming incrementally warmer, and the temperature difference between these two air parcels is lessening, causing a slower, weaker jet stream. The change in speed of the jet stream’s movement is causing for a more convoluted path, and weather patterns are disrupted and tend to remain in one place for longer periods of time. In theory then, when weather is especially hot, wet, dry, or cold, it will tend to stay in this state for longer, thus increasing the chance of flooding, drought, and other extreme weather events.

The report, which spans eleven volumes, stated that if the pipeline were to be constructed, it would not significantly elevate greenhouse gas emissions. It noted that whether or not the Keystone pipeline would be built, carbon emissions from the tar sands would continue, with the crude oil simply being shipped elsewhere, or through a different mode of transportation. Greenhouse gas emissions derived from bitumen production are seventeen per cent higher than the average barrel of crude oil used in the United States.

United States President Barack Obama said last summer that he would not approve the pipeline if it heightened carbon pollution from the oil sands. The pipeline has become largely symbolic of Obama’s approach to climate change issues. He has avoided making concrete decisions about the pipeline’s approval since the project was proposed five years ago.

The long, drawn-out approval process associated with pipeline development are the result of intense pressure from environmental groups to reduce the United States’ dependence on environmentally unfriendly tar sands oil. Pressure to approve the pipeline is rising as oil-by-rail has gone beyond its own capacity, with an increasing number of train derailments and harmful spills of petroleum products from damaged train cars. Republicans, lobbyists from the tar sands industry, and the Canadian government, are also all pressuring for approval.

There is another three-month-long review process and no firm deadline for the project to be approved. United States Secretary of State John Kerry said he has to consult with a number of government agencies over the next three months to assess the broader economic, environmental, and national security impacts of the proposed pipeline before approving or rejecting it. The report released this week still leaves many questions unanswered and is far from providing a green light toward the pipeline’s approval.

The village of Akhshtyr has been plagued by waste from Olympic construction sites, where an illegal dump has been set up. For over three months, trucks bring in construction waste throughout the day and night. The dump is operating without a license by a state-owned Russian enterprise. The area where the dump is located is particularly environmentally sensitive because of its proximity to local water supply.  Moisture from the landfill seeps through porous rocks and into the underground springs that connect to the Mzymta River, which is a source of water for the city of Sochi. Local officials have tried to clean up the illegal dump, but they lack resources to dispose of the waste correctly. The reckless dumping is cause for concern in this region, known for its floods and landslides. The landfill in Akhshtyr is just one of many that dot the landscape surrounding the Sochi area.

Many other environmentally sensitive areas have been disturbed in preparation for the games. Damage in the Mzymta River Valley is particularly severe. Around 5,000 acres of forestland that was formerly home to certain rare species has been completely destroyed. Damage has been extended to wetlands areas where migrating birds once lived.

Even national park sites were not safe from environmental destruction. Russian authorities have reversed legislation that limited new construction in national parks. As well, soil, a by-product of massive infrastructure projects, has been dumped in Sochi National Park.

Environmentalists claim that the development of infrastructure projects in these areas, as well as the construction of new sports venues, is threatening to irreparably damage the Sochi region’s natural environment. According to United Nations experts, this is unprecedented for an Olympic host country.

The train derailment in Plaster Rock is reflective of the increasing number of incidents relating to the shipment of oil by rail in Canada. With regulatory delays in the construction of many pipelines across North America, the petroleum industry has come to increasingly rely on rail as a mode of shipping transportation. With the increasing frequency and seriousness of oil-by-rail incidents, the capacity and competency of Canada’s rail industry to deal with the expanding amount of petroleum needing to be shipped throughout the continent is being questioned.

Aside from these oil-by-rail incidents causing immense safety concerns for communities near railways, the extensive environmental damage from these derailments is a  major issue as well. Both the short- and long-term damage to the environment is cause for major concern. With derailments such as the one in New Brunswick, environmental hazards are numerous, from the petroleum that leaks out of damaged rail cars to the air pollution as a result of ongoing fires. 

Train derailments like the one in Plaster Rock have multiple adverse impacts on the environment. Due to the highly flammable nature of oil and gas, the extent of the ongoing fires creates considerable amounts of air pollution, as the petroleum that is burning contains a multitude of toxic chemicals. As well, there is concern over the effect on plant life and soil in the area where the petroleum spilled and left residual contaminant in the soil. On the day of the derailment, one nearby resident reported he was ankle deep in some of the petroleum that had escaped from the train cars. Soil that has been contaminated will have to be dug up and though much of the spilled petroleum can potentially be removed, it will be impossible to extract all of it. 

Another concerning aspect of the spilled petroleum is the polluting effect on local water sources. Contamination levels, and the ease of clean-up, will depend on the type of crude oil. Light crude is much easier to collect, as it floats on top of water, whereas heavy crude (like bitumen) sinks to the bottom. It is not known what type of crude the train was carrying. Regardless, these oils contain toxic chemicals that have the ability to permeate into the local environment and contaminate water supplies and local habitats. 

When comparing the shipment of petroleum by rail to other methods of transportation, it becomes evident very quickly that rail accidents, though somewhat infrequent, cause the most environmental damage. On average, train spills result in tens of thousands of litres more of crude oil seeping into the environment compared to pipeline leaks. Truck accidents, though frequent, tend to spill even smaller quantities.

Geothermal energy captures the heat from naturally occurring steam and hot water trapped in reservoirs under the Earth’s surface. This is done by drilling one to three kilometres below the surface and injecting cold water into the hot, porous rocks below. Once forced to the surface, the resulting steam turns a turbine to generate electricity. Besides driving the steam-turbine generators, geothermal energy can also be used to heat hot water or air for space or water heating. What gives geothermal energy an edge over other renewable energy sources, like wind and solar, is the fact that it provides consistent power twenty-four hours a day. Its function as a base load power (the minimum amount of power required to prevent a blackout) is what makes it extremely valuable.

The potential for geothermal energy greatly depends of the geological aspects of a given region. Canada’s physical environment is certainly endowed with rich geothermal potential, (especially in the western and northern provinces) though development of these resources is slow, due to high start-up capital costs and weak federal and provincial government support.

Interest in the industry is mounting, and Canadian innovators have not let a lack of government support stop them. Canadians produce about twenty per cent of the world’s geothermal power generation, with twenty-seven per cent of the United States’ geothermal development being carried out by Canadian-based companies.

Despite the weak support from the Canadian government, industry developers appear determined to start building Canada’s first commercial geothermal plant. One of these innovators is Deep Earth Energy Production Corp. (DEEP), a Saskatoon-based start-up that is hoping to become Saskatchewan’s first geothermal power producer by establishing a plant near the city of Estevan. This project has received a $2-million commitment from provincial utility SaskPower and Natural Resources Canada, to help fund an engineering design study. This project is now preparing to drill its first well, with power generation happening as soon as 2015. The project has the potential to grow to as many as five different projects that could end up producing hundreds of megawatts of base load power.

As the DEEP Corp. project gets underway, impediments for the industry are still very present elsewhere. A regulatory regime conducive to development is not yet established, with British Columbia and the Northwest Territories being the only Canadian jurisdictions that issue permits for geothermal projects. As well, financing for development projects is hard to come by, with small companies like DEEP Corp. having difficulty raising equity or debt finance in initial drilling stages because investors feel the risk outweighs the return. In this sense, government assistance in aiding this infant industry during its initial phases of development could greatly ease the growing pains of geothermal energy development in Canada.

The study measured the concentration of samples of diatoms, a type of algae, from the bottom of four lakes surrounding the Sutton River. Certain diatoms prefer warm waters, while others are drawn to cold. The researchers found there had been little change in diatoms composition for over 200 years, but in 1995, warm-weather diatoms started to become markedly more abundant in the lakes. This reflects the warming that took place not only in the water, but also in the ecosystem as a whole. These changes in the water chemistry lead to a chain reaction of events in the environment. Researchers noted that some ponds will disappear completely, and some of the wetlands will dry up. 

What is unique about this area is the fact that some parts are relatively unaltered due to climate change, while other parts of the Arctic and sub-Arctic started warming up decades earlier. A bottleneck of ice locked into this region in the Hudson Bay kept annual temperatures stable up until about fifteen years ago. According to this new study though, the Hudson Bay Lowlands have warmed about three degrees since the mid-1990s.

Now that the Lowlands have warmed, there are all sorts of implications for the area and its residents. The region is home to Canada’s southernmost polar bear population. The population is completely dependant on sea ice, but there is a decreasing amount of ice because of the rising water temperatures. Hunting and fishing routes of the aboriginal populations in the area are likely to be affected by this change of temperature as well. The rising temperatures also caused mass die-offs of brook char, a sport fish, were recorded in the Sutton River in the early 2000s.

The research is coming out in the same month that an International Panel on Climate Change report stated that the warming of the Earth’s atmosphere has been less the past fifteen years than most climate models anticipated. In that same fifteen-year period, the Hudson Bay Lowlands have been witness to dramatic impact in temperature rise. Researchers in the Hudson Bay Lowlands study note that despite a slower warming in other parts of the globe, “we are witnessing the transformation of the Arctic at an exceptional pace.”

Concerns were first raised when a Radio-Canada report raised questions about LaPierre’s academic history. LaPierre claimed to have a PhD in ecology from the University of Maine. Upon further investigation, it became evident that this was not entirely true. LaPierre does hold a PhD, though it is in education, not science, and it is from Walden, an online university based in Minnesota.

Colleagues and other members of the environmental science community expressed deep concern over the impact his resignation has on the credibility of many of the projects LaPierre was a part of. Ian Jones, a biology professor at Memorial University, said the resignation is a “tragedy” for environmental assessments in Atlantic Canada. LaPierre was a powerful figure in many environmental evaluations in the region. His involvement was so extensive that it would be difficult to go back and re-evaluate their integrity. 

“I think the public needs to consider what else was compromised in the array of important environmental processes that were largely controlled by this individual,” said Ian Goudie, a wildlife biologist who worked on a project that was chaired by LaPierre while he worked with the Institute for Environmental Monitoring and Research. 

Though these academics and many others are concerned over the credibility of LaPierre’s work, the New Brunswick Government doesn’t seem to agree. New Brunswick Energy Minister Craig Leonard contends that the controversy does not tarnish the work LaPierre did for the province as chair on the New Brunswick Energy Institute. Premier David Alward also agrees that the contentions over LaPierre’s credentials do not undermine the work he and the institute have done, and that it is premature to be ordering reviews of the institute’s reports.

The news of LaPierre’s misrepresented academic credentials adds another piece of momentum to the ongoing debate of shale gas exploration in the province, an issue he had been advising the provincial government on for the past few years as chair of the institute. Leonard said that science was never an aspect of LaPierre’s job during the NB Energy Institute’s research on shale gas. This is a major shift from comments the government made last year touting the integrity and importance of LaPierre’s scientific reputation. Premier Alward noted on January 31 that “Dr. LaPierre is an internationally-recognized scientist.”

Whether the government will choose to call for reviews of the New Brunswick Energy Institute’s work under LaPierre has yet to be seen. LaPierre’s controversial resignation will no doubt cast an air of caution around the integrity of any work he has been involved with during his career.