Consideration and influence of climate change in environmental assessment: an analysis of British Columbia’s liquid natural gas sector

References

• Agrawala S, Kramer AM, Prudent-Richard G, Sainsbury M, Schreitter V. 2012. Incorporating climate change impacts and adaptation in environmental impact assessments: opportunities and challenges. Clim Dev. 4:26–39.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Arts J, Runhaar H, Fischer TB, Jha-Thakur U, van Laerhoven F, Driessen P, Onyango V. 2012. The effectiveness of EIA as an instrument for environmental management. J Environ Assess Policy Manage. 14(4):12500251.
   Google Scholar
• Bang G. 2010. Energy security and climate change concerns: triggers for energy policy change in the United States?. Energy Policy. 38(4):1645–1653.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• [CCA] Council of Canadian Academies. 2014. Environmental impacts of shale gas extraction in Canada. The expert panel on harnessing science and technology to understand the environmental impacts of shale gas extraction. Ottawa ON: Council of Canadian Academies.
   Google Scholar
• Birks D, Fernandez W, Levina N, Nasirin S. 2013. Grounded theory method in information systems research: its nature, diversity and opportunities. Eur J Info Sys. 22:1–8.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bishop G, Dachis B 2016. The National Energy Board’s limits in assessing upstream greenhouse gas emissions. Toronto (ON): C.D. Howe Institute Brief 229. [Accessed 2018 May 10] https://www.cdhowe.org/public-policy-research/national-energy-board%E2%80%99s-limits-assessing-upstream-greenhouse-gas-emissions
   Google Scholar
• Brill MO. 2014. Assessing the scope of the National Environmental Policy Act: recent attempts by environmentalists to add climate change considerations into NEPA review. Nat Resour J. 54(409):409–438.
   Google Scholar
• Burdge R. 2008. The focus of impact assessment (and IAIA) must now shift to global climate change! Environ Impact Assess Rev. 28:618–622.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Byer P, Cestti R, Croal P, Fisher W, Hazell S, Kolhoff A, Kornov L. 2012. Climate change in impact assessment: international best practice principles. special publication series No.8.. Fargo (ND): International Association for Impact Assessment.
   Google Scholar
• Climate Leadership Team. 2015. Recommendations to government. [accessed 2018 Oct 31, 2015. 2018 Jun 31, 2015. 2018 Jun 3]. https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/2623232-climate-leadership-team-recommendations-to.html
   Google Scholar
• [ECCC] Environment and Climate Change Canada. 2016. About Canada’s greenhouse gas inventory. Government of Canada. [accessed 2018 Jan 14] https://www.ec.gc.ca/ges-ghg/default.asp?lang=En&n=3E38F6D3-1
   Google Scholar
• [ECCC] Environment and Climate Change Canada 2018. Discussion paper: Developing a strategic assessment of climate change. Ottawa (ON): Environment and Climate Change Canada.
   Google Scholar
• Enriquez-de-Salmoneca A, Martin-Aranda R, Diaz-Sierra R. 2016. Consideration of climate change on environmental impact assessment in Spain. Environ Impact Assess Rev. 57:31–39.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Environmental Assessment Office. 2016. Environmental assessment certificate policy: Drafting conventions for certificates, certificate amendments, and exemption orders. Government of British Columbia [accessed 2018 June 18] http://www.eao.gov.bc.ca/files/guidance/Proponent_Guidance-EAC_Certificate_Policy.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Ernst and Young. 2013. Potential revenues to the BC government from potential liquefied natural gas development in BC. Victoria BC: Ernst & Young; Fischer & Sykes.
   Google Scholar
• Fischer TB, Potter K, Donaldson S, Scott T. 2011. Municipal waste management strategies, strategic environmental assessment and the consideration of climate change in England. J Environ Assess Policy Manage. 13(4):541–565.
   Google Scholar
• Fischer TB, Sykes O. 2009. The new EU territorial agenda - indicating progress for climate change mitigation and adaptation? In Davoudi S et al., editors. Planning for Climate Change. London: Earthscan; p. 111–124.
   Google Scholar
• Fuggle R. 2005. Have impact assessments passed their ‘sell by’ date? Int Assoc Impact Assess Newsl. 16(1):6.
   Google Scholar
• Gelinas J, Horswill D, Northey R, Pelletier R 2017. Building common ground: A new vision for impact assessment in Canada: the final report of the expert panel for the review of environmental assessment processes. Minister of Environment and Climate Change, Ottawa (ON): Government of Canada.
   Google Scholar
• Government of British Columbia. 2007. Greenhouse gas reduction targets act. 2017 Apr 5. Victoria (BC): Queen’s Printer, Government of British Columbia.
   Google Scholar
• Government of British Columbia. 2014. Terms finalized for LNG customers using BC Hydro system. Victoria (BC): Government of British Columbia. [accessed 2018 Feb 22] https://news.gov.bc.ca/stories/terms-finalized-for-lng-customers-using-bc-hydro-system
   Google Scholar
• Government of British Columbia. 2016. Climate action legislation. Victoria (BC): Government of British Columbia.[accessed 2018 Feb 22]. http://www2.gov.bc.ca/gov/content/environment/climate-change/policy-legislation-programs/legislation-regulations
   Google Scholar
• Grafton RQ, Lambie NR. 2014. Australia’s liquefied natural gas sector: past developments, current challenges and ways forward. Aust Econ Rev. 47(4):509–522.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gray E. 2015. Blind spot: The failure to consider climate in British Columbia's environmental assessments. Victoria (BC): University of Victoria Environmental Law Centre.
   Google Scholar
• [IPCC] Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. 2014. Summary for policymakers In: Edenhofer O, Pichs-Madruga R, Sokona Y, Farahani E, Kadner S, Seyboth K, Adler A, Baum I, Brunner S, Eickemeier P, Kriemann B, Savolainen J, Schlomer S, Von Stechow C, Zwickel T, Minx JC, editors. Climate change 2014, mitigation of climate change. Contribution of working group iii to the fifth assessment report of the intergovernmental panel on climate change: Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University press.
   Google Scholar
• [IEA] International Energy Agency 2017. Gas 2017: Analysis and forecasts to 2022. Market Report Series. Paris: International Energy Agency. [accessed 2018 Jan 18] http://www.iea.org/bookshop/741-Market_Report_Series:_Gas_2017
   Google Scholar
• Hands S, Hudson MD. 2016. Incorporating climate change mitigation and adaptation into environmental impact assessment: a review of current practice within transport projects in England. Impact Assess Project Apprais. 34(4):330–345.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hegmann G, Yarranton TA. 2011. Alchemy to reason: effective use of cumulative effects assessment in resource management. Environ Impact Assess Rev. 31:484–490.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Horne M, MacNab J. 2014. LNG and climate change: the global context. Victoria (BC): The Pembina Institute and Pacific Institute for Climate Solutions.
   Google Scholar
• Jiricka A, Formayer H, Schmidt A, Völler S, Leitner M, Fischer T, Wachter T. 2016. Consideration of climate change impacts and adaptation in EIA practice – perspectives of actors in Austria and Germany. Environ Impact Assess Rev. 57:78–88.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kågström M, Richardson T. 2015. Space for action: how practitioners influence environmental assessment. Environ Impact Assess Rev. 54:110–118.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kumar S, Kwon H, Choi K, Cho JH, Lim W, Moon I. 2011. Current status and future projections of LNG demand and supplies: a global prospective. Energy Policy. 39:4097–4104.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Larsen SV. 2014. Is environmental impact assessment fulfilling its potential? The case of climate change in renewable energy projects. Impact Assess Project Apprais. 32(3):234–240.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Larsen SV, Kornov L, Wejs A. 2012. Mind the gap in SEA: an institutional perspective on why assessment of synergies amongst climate change mitigation, adaptation and other policy areas are missing. Environ Impact Assess Rev. 33(1):32–40.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lee M. 2012. BC’s legislated greenhouse gas targets vs natural gas development: the good, the bad and the ugly. Vancouver (BC): Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives.
   Google Scholar
• Li W, Zhao Y. 2015. Bibliometric analysis of global environmental assessment research in a 20-year period. Environ Impact Assess Rev. 50:158–166.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ministry of Energy and Mines. 2012. Liquefied natural Gas: a strategy for BC’s newest industry. Victoria (BC): Government of British Columbia.
   Google Scholar
• Morgan RK. 2012. Environmental impact assessment: the state of the art. Impact Assess Proj Apprais. 30:5–14.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Murillo C. 2012. Natural gas liquids in North America: overview and outlook to 2035. Calgary (AB): Canadian Energy Research Institute.
   Google Scholar
• NEB National Energy Board. 2016. Canada’s energy future 2016: Energy supply and demand projections to 2040. Calgary (AB): National Energy Board [accessed 2018 May 05]. https://www.neb-one.gc.ca/nrg/ntgrtd/ftr/2016/index-eng.html#s1
   Google Scholar
• Noble BF. 2017. Getting the big picture: how regional assessment can pave the way for more inclusive and effective environmental assessments. Ottawa (ON): Macdonald-Laurier Institute.
   Google Scholar
• Noble BF, Martin JOlagunju A. 2016. A review of the application of cumulative effects assessment in the context of Section 22 project environmental assessments conducted in the James Bay territory. Prepared for the james bay advisory committee on the environment. Saskatoon (SK): Aura Environmental.
   Google Scholar
• Ohsawa T, Duinker P. 2014. Climate-change mitigation in Canadian environmental impact assessments. Impact Assess Proj Apprais. 32:222–233.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Phylip-Jones J, Fischer TB. 2013. EIA for wind farms in the United Kingdom and Germany. J Environ Assess Policy Manage. 15(2):13.40008.
   Google Scholar
• Posas P. 2011. Exploring climate change criteria for strategic environmental assessments. Progress Plan. 75(3):109–154.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Runhaar H. 2016. Tool for integrating environmental objectives into policy and practice: what works where? Environ Impact Assess Rev. 59:1–9.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Slotterback CS. 2011. Addressing climate change in state and local environmental impact analysis. J Environ Plan Manage. 54:749–767.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sok V, Boruff BJ, Morrison-Saunders A. 2011. Addressing climate change through environmental impact assessment: international perspectives from a survey of IAIA members. Impact Assess Proj Apprais. 29:317–325.
   Google Scholar
• Vicente G, Partidário MR. 2006. SEA – enhancing communication for better environmental decisions. Environ Impact Assess Rev. 26:696–706.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Watkins J, Durning B. 2012. Carbon definitions and typologies in environmental impact assessment: greenhouse gas confusion? Impact Assess Proj Apprais. 30:296–301.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• WCEL [West Coast Environmental Law] and NWI [Northwest Institute]. 2016. Regional strategic environmental assessment for northern British Columbia: the case and the opportunity. Vancouver (BC): WCEL and NWI.
   Google Scholar
• Wende W, Alan Bond A, Bobylev N, Stratmann L. 2012. Climate change mitigation and adaptation in strategic environmental assessment. Environ Impact Assess Rev. 32:88–93.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar