Tidal Energy Law in Canada: Hindering an Untapped Potential for International Primacy

• Author: Justin G. Fisch
• Position: Graduated from the McGill University Faculty of Law with dual degrees in common and civil law (B.C.L./LL.B.) in the fall of 2015
• Pages: 37-58

APPEALVOLUME 21

n

37

ARTICLE

TIDAL ENERGY LAW IN CANADA:

HINDERING AN UNTAPPED POTENTIAL

FORINTERNATIONAL PRIMACY

Justin G. Fisch*

CITED: (2016) 21 Appeal 37

INTRODUCTION..................................................38

I. PURPOSE & FOCUS............................................38

II. BACKGROUND ON OCEAN ENERGY............................39

A. A Short Primer on Ocean Energy..................................39

B. Benets of In-Stream Tidal.......................................40

C. Siting and Geography ..........................................41

D. Technology Take-Aways .........................................43

III. ECONOMICS OF TIDAL POWER . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43

IV. PROJECT FINANCING .........................................44

V. ENERGY LAW & POLICY .......................................45

VI. REGULATORY APPROACHES ...................................46

A. Developments Towards a Unique Approach..........................48

B. Canadian Structure ............................................49

VII. INFRASTRUCTURE AND TRANSMISSION .......................51

VIII. TIDAL ENERGY, ENVIRONMENT, & CLIMATE CHANGE ..........53

A. Precautionary Principle .........................................54

B. Climate Change ...............................................55

C. Mitigation of Environmental Concerns .............................56

IX. A FRAMEWORK FOR TIDAL ENERGY DEVELOPMENT............56

A. Nunavut.....................................................57

B. Nova Scotia ..................................................58

CONCLUSION ....................................................58

* Justin G . Fisch graduated from the McGill Univer sity Faculty of Law with dual degre es in

common and civil law (B.C.L ./LL.B.) in the fall of 2015, having previously earn ed a Bachelor of

Arts, magna cum laude from the Universit y of Florida in Geography, Sustainabili ty Studies, and

Political Science. An initial ver sion of this paper was prepared for a co urse in Energy Law &

Climate Change, oered during th e spring of 2015 in Montreal, Quebec. The author owes than ks

to instructors Émilie Bun dock and Anne Drost for the excellent cl ass, which provided inspiration

for the research herein.

38

n

APPEALVOLUME 21

INTRODUCTION

In recent years, countries around the world have been mak ing signicant strides toward

building or renewing their energy infrastructures based on clear renewable portfolio

standards (“RPS”), in which they set targets for renewable energy production within a

given timeframe.1 Early in the spring of 2015, for example, Costa Rica made news for

having powered its entire country o of renewable energy alone for three full months.2

Every morning, Icelanders turn on their lights without emitting an ounce of carbon

into the atmosphere, thank s to the country’s strong geothermal and hydro energy grid.3

When it comes to riding the wave of renewable energy, Canada is no exception: the

country produces a lmost 60 percent of its total energy from renewable sources , primarily

hydropower.4

Despite such promising numbers, however, drastic discrepancies ex ist among provinces.

On one hand, Quebecers enjoy over 90 percent of their electricity from renewable

sources.5 On the other, Nunavummiut6 depend wholly on diesel-fueled generators to

power their lives, while the territory’s system does not benet from a single input of

renewable energ y.7 As renewable energy sources are geographically specic, Canada has

struggled to d iversify its infrast ructure, depending prima rily on hydropower installations

developed from the 1950s to the 1970s to meet its renewable energy target s.

e Prairie provinces, the Maritime provinces, and the Arctic territories are among

the jurisdictions with the lowest amount of renewables in their energy mix.8 Yet, a

tremendous untapped resource—42,000 megawatts (M W), enough to provide over 70

percent of Canada’s present annual electricity consumption,9 to be precise—exists just

oshore of the maritime and a rctic regions. at untapped resource is tida l energy.

I. PURPOSE & FOCUS

With tidal energy’s potential to provide so much of Canada’s energy, it is important to

question why a valuable and promising re source is being ignored in favour of conventional

energy development.10 Political will, nancial capabilities, regulatory diculties, and

1 For more on renewable por tfolio standards in Japan an d the United States, see e.g. Walter

Musial & Bonnie Ram, “Larg e-Scale Oshore Wind Power in th e United States: Assessment of

Opportunities an d Barriers” (2010) National Renewable Energy Lab oratory at 27.

2 Using generally a combination o f hydropower, geothermal, solar power, and wind powe r.

Lindsay Fendt, “The tr uth behind Costa Rica’s renewable ene rgy”, The Guardian (30 Mar 2015),

online: /30/truth-behind-costa- rica-

renewable-energy-reser voirs-climate-change> archived at .

3 Cheryl Katz, “ Iceland Seeks to Cash In On Its Abu ndant Renewable Energy” (3 Oc tober 2013),

Yale Environment 360, online: <http://e360.yale.edu/feature/iceland_seeks_to_cash _in_on_its_

abundant_renewable_energy/2697/> archived at >.

4 Energy and Mines Minister s’ Conference, “Canada – A Global Leade r in Renewable Energy:

Enhancing Collaboration on R enewable Energy Technologies” (2013) Energy and Mines

Ministers’ Conference.

5 Ibid.

6 People of Nunavut.

7 Government of Nunavut, “Iku mmatiit: Government of Nunavut Energ y Strategy” (2007)

Government of Nunavut.

8 Carol Ní Ghiollarnáth, Renewable Energy Tax Incentives and WTO Law: Irreconcilably Incompatible?

(Nijmegen, NL: Wolf Legal Pub lishers, 2011).

9 Michael Tarbotton & Max Lars on, “Canada Ocean Energy Atlas (Phase 1): Potential Tidal Current

Energy Resources” (2006) Triton Consultant s for Canadian Hydraulics Centre at 30.

10Referring specica lly to the continuing focus of energy devel opment in Alberta’s oilsands, in

oshore oil & gas in the Atlantic Ocea n, and in developing capabilities fo r drilling in the Arctic,

broadly.