Author Archives: Rudiger Tscherning

About Rudiger Tscherning

LLB (Trinity College Dublin), LLM (International Commercial Law, University of Nottingham); LLM (Energy and Climate Change Law, CEPMLP, University of Dundee); PhD (University of Heidelberg, Faculty of Law); Solicitor (England & Wales); Assistant Professor, Faculty of Law, University of Calgary. Please click here for more information.

Alberta’s Carbon Capture & Storage Land Grab And The Potential For Conflicts Of Subsurface Rights

By: Nick Ettinger, Renée Matthews & Rudiger Tscherning

PDF Version: Alberta’s Carbon Capture & Storage Land Grab And The Potential For Conflicts Of Subsurface Rights

Matter Commented On: Alberta’s Request for Full Project Proposals for Carbon Capture and Sequestration Hubs

On March 3, 2022, the Government of Alberta issued a province-wide Request for Full Project Proposals (RFPP) for carbon capture and sequestration hubs (CCS Hubs). This followed a more limited RFPP for CCS Hub(s) to service emissions from Alberta’s Industrial Heartland (IH), which closed on February 1, 2022. By the end of March 2022, Alberta Energy is expected to announce the successful proponents of the IH RFPP, who will receive permits to evaluate large amounts of publicly owned pore space for the eventual permanent sequestration of millions of tons of carbon dioxide (CO2). The RFPP for the rest of the province closes on May 2, 2022. Nigel Bankes has previously commented on the evolution of this process for pore space tenure dispositions (see here, here, and here). We’ve previously described the potential for conflicts arising from the subsurface convergence of CCS and critical minerals such as helium and lithium in Alberta (read our article here). This post examines the potential for conflicts of competing subsurface rights and interests arising from the current legislative scheme and the province’s rapid roll-out of CCS Hub dispositions. Continue reading →

Western Canadian Lithium as a Critical and Strategic Mineral for Clean Tech Battery Storage Technologies

By: Rudiger Tscherning and Brady Chapman

PDF Version: Western Canadian Lithium as a Critical and Strategic Mineral for Clean Tech Battery Storage Technologies

Matters Commented On: The Canadian Minerals and Metals Plan 2019; Review of the Alberta Mineral Development Strategy 2002 by the Alberta Mineral Advisory Council; Québec Plan for the Development of Critical and Strategic Minerals (2020-2025)

Critical and strategic minerals (CSMs), including lithium, are essential for the transition of the global economy to “net-zero.” The COVID-19 pandemic will only serve to accelerate this transition. Calls for rebuilding economies on ambitious and sustainable climate principles have become louder since the pandemic began. At a multilateral level, the April 2020 Petersberg Climate Dialogue established clear directions towards a sustainable and climate-focused post-pandemic recovery. Such recovery plans are also echoed in the European Commission’s Next Generation EU recovery plan, and the September 2020 Government of Canada’s Speech from the Throne, both of which set out clear impulses towards developing clean tech industries as part of post-pandemic economic recovery.

However, CSMs, such as lithium, have been recognized for their importance well before the pandemic. In 2019, the International Renewable Energy Agency reported that global sales of electric vehicles, which rely heavily on lithium-ion batteries, increased significantly from 500,000 units in 2015 to over 2 million units in 2018. The Bank of Canada recently cited the International Energy Agency’s projection that there will be 120 million plug-in hybrid or battery electric vehicles on the world’s roads by 2030. In Canada, the share of all electric vehicles amounted to approximately 2.3%, or 90,100 vehicles, of the total vehicle market in 2018, with 51% consisting of battery electric vehicles. In addition, the rapid scaling-up of wind and solar renewable electricity generation is not only vital for decarbonizing global energy systems, but will crucially depend on electricity storage technologies. Lithium-ion batteries are efficient and have fast charging and discharging rates, making them ideal for the large-scale implementation of renewable energy sources to meet baseload power demands.

Continue reading →

An Emerging Corporate Risk – Climate Impacts to Critical Energy Infrastructure

By: Rudiger Tscherning

PDF Version: An Emerging Corporate Risk – Climate Impacts to Critical Energy Infrastructure

Research Commented On: “Corporate Risk and Climate Impacts to Critical Energy Infrastructure in Canada” (Dalhousie Law Journal)

Introduction

This post, based on my recent article, examines climate impacts to critical energy infrastructure assets from a corporate risk perspective. It focuses on the importance of undertaking climate adaptation to critical energy infrastructure as a corporate risk-mitigation strategy. Emerging climate risk was most recently identified as one of the top five challenges facing the global economy at the World Economic Forum 2020 in Davos, Switzerland (see World Economic Forum Global Risks Report 2020).

By way of background, Canada’s 2009 National Strategy for Critical Infrastructure considers infrastructure as critical where the asset is essential to the “health, safety, security or economic well-being of Canadians.” Examples in the energy sector include electricity generation and transmission infrastructure, oil and gas industry infrastructure, maritime ports, and rail infrastructure related to energy transportation. All of these classes of assets are vulnerable to the anticipated and unanticipated effects of climate change impacts from extreme weather and climate events, which are predicted to intensify. These impacts may affect both the physical infrastructure of the asset and their operations, as well as the business continuity of the owners and operators of the asset. Within this context, adaptation to the effects of climate change can be considered a process of adjustments in natural and human systems to actual or expected climate impacts and their effects (see, for example, Article 7 of the Paris Agreement, 12 December 2015, FCCC/CP/2015/L.9/Rev.1). Continue reading →

Small Modular (Nuclear) Reactors in Canada – Small Steps Towards Realization

By: Rudiger Tscherning

PDF Version: Small Modular (Nuclear) Reactors in Canada – Small Steps Towards Realization

Matter Commented On: New Brunswick-Ontario-Saskatchewan Collaboration Memorandum on Small Modular Nuclear Reactors

Introduction

On December 1, 2019, the premiers of New Brunswick, Ontario, and Saskatchewan announced that they are formally collaborating by way of a memorandum of understanding to develop small modular nuclear reactors (SMRs) and that further provinces and territories may join the collaboration. Premier Ford has identified the opportunity as one for Canada “to be a true leader” on an issue of the future. I have followed the international development of small nuclear reactors, and their implications for domestic and international law regimes, since 2010. This post serves as an introduction to SMRs, both within and outside of Canada, and the legal and policy frameworks involved. Continue reading →

Canada’s interpretation of the Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction – the influence of the new hybrid approach on a child’s objection to return

By: Rudiger Tscherning

PDF Version: Canada’s interpretation of the Hague Convention on_the_Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction – the influence of the new hybrid approach on a child’s objection to return

Cases Comment On: Office of the Children’s Lawyer v Balev, 2018 SCC 16; Erhardt v Meyer, 2018 ABQB 333; Husnik v Barbero Salas, 2018 ONSC 2627

Introduction

On November 9, 2017, the Supreme Court of Canada (SCC) heard the appeal in Office of the Children’s Lawyer v JPB and CRB (Supreme Court of Canada, Leave to Appeal (37250)) (Balev), a case which raises important issues about the interpretation of the Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction. For an overview of the background and issues arising from the Balev litigation, see my earlier posts at here, here, and here. The SCC rendered its decision in Balev on April 20, 2018.

Continue reading →