The Globe and Mail gets it badly wrong today.
In its masthead editorial about a report showing how Canada can meet emissions reduction targets that scientists tell us we must make to stop our atmosphere from deteriorating, it tries to equate protecting polluters with national unity, and also gives politicians a blank cheque to simply give up on science itself.
Luckily, Globe columnists were more balanced. John Ibbitson summarized "Better a decade of discomfort, perhaps, than a century of misery." And Jeffrey Simpson thought of the modelling:
"Scaremongers would have to eat their words if they gave this study a fair-minded report, but so, too, would those who paint cost-free scenarios of reducing emissions."
Thursday, October 29, 2009
Wednesday, October 28, 2009
Tar Sands Investor Alert
We were pleased to host an event last night on the litigation brought by the Beaver Lake Cree. Their traditional territory overlaps with tar sands operations.
They are suing since tar sands and other industrial activity are rendering their treaty rights to hunt and fish meaningless when there soon will be nothing to hunt or fish.
We also did some interesting outreach to investors who face growing legal risks in tar sands country because of First Nations litigation. Basically, the entire Alberta resource permitting regime is more than a decade behind court precedents, rendering individual permits - including tar sands permits - suspect.
Other First Nations in the tar sands area are already in court, with more to follow soon. Overall, this is one more way in which sanity is intruding on the out-of-control dirty oil machine in Alberta.
Matt Price
Program Manager
Friday, October 23, 2009
Prentice flip flops
Until today, Environment Minister Jim Prentice had said repeatedly that he would let us average people in on his climate change plan before the Copenhagen talks begin in December - meaning of course that he'd have some kind of plan to show.
Now though he's hiding behind the Americans, saying that we can't have a plan before they do. This is patently absurd given that most of the American plan is already in plain view in Bills in the U.S. House and Senate. Both the general level of ambition and the architecture of a U.S. cap and trade system have been revealed, so there's nothing stopping Prentice from designing a Canadian system to intergrate with a U.S. system, if that indeed is the over-riding goal.
The real reason he's hiding is that he now admits he wants to give special treatment to the tar sands to be able to grow emissions, even as everyone else must dramatically reduce theirs to stem our deteriorating atmosphere. He can only do this by either building loopholes into his plan, which the Americans would call us on due to competitiveness issues, or by requiring that the rest of Canada do even more to cut emissions in order to make room for more tar sands pollution. Just imagine what that would do to his government's political fortunes in Ontario and Quebec.
We can only hope that Minister Prentice will flip flop again: both by letting a light shine into his secret plan before Copenhagen, and by agreeing that any system cannot let tar sands emissions grow, thereby burdening other economic sectors.
Matt Price
Program Manager
Environmental Defence
Now though he's hiding behind the Americans, saying that we can't have a plan before they do. This is patently absurd given that most of the American plan is already in plain view in Bills in the U.S. House and Senate. Both the general level of ambition and the architecture of a U.S. cap and trade system have been revealed, so there's nothing stopping Prentice from designing a Canadian system to intergrate with a U.S. system, if that indeed is the over-riding goal.
The real reason he's hiding is that he now admits he wants to give special treatment to the tar sands to be able to grow emissions, even as everyone else must dramatically reduce theirs to stem our deteriorating atmosphere. He can only do this by either building loopholes into his plan, which the Americans would call us on due to competitiveness issues, or by requiring that the rest of Canada do even more to cut emissions in order to make room for more tar sands pollution. Just imagine what that would do to his government's political fortunes in Ontario and Quebec.
We can only hope that Minister Prentice will flip flop again: both by letting a light shine into his secret plan before Copenhagen, and by agreeing that any system cannot let tar sands emissions grow, thereby burdening other economic sectors.
Matt Price
Program Manager
Environmental Defence
Thursday, October 22, 2009
Harper's New Speech Writer a Climate Denier
Nigel Hannaford was in charge of my Rotary exchange to Finland in the late 80's. I owe the man a debt of thanks for opening my eyes to the world.
Word now, though, that he's just left the Calgary Herald to become Stephen Harper's speech writer.
The significance, just a month and a bit prior to the UN climate summit in Copenhagen, is that Nigel Hannaford is a vocal denier that humans are causing the dangerous deterioration of the world's climate.
This will therefore only serve to reinforce the perception out there that Stephen Harper never gave up on his own climate change denial, documented in our report here.
It could be comedy that the leader of one of the world's largest industrial economies is surrounding himself with those who so clearly favour ideology over reality, but I've got a three year old boy now who will inherit the results - and that's a tragedy.
Matt Price
Program Manager
Word now, though, that he's just left the Calgary Herald to become Stephen Harper's speech writer.
The significance, just a month and a bit prior to the UN climate summit in Copenhagen, is that Nigel Hannaford is a vocal denier that humans are causing the dangerous deterioration of the world's climate.
This will therefore only serve to reinforce the perception out there that Stephen Harper never gave up on his own climate change denial, documented in our report here.
It could be comedy that the leader of one of the world's largest industrial economies is surrounding himself with those who so clearly favour ideology over reality, but I've got a three year old boy now who will inherit the results - and that's a tragedy.
Matt Price
Program Manager
Wednesday, October 21, 2009
Ottawa is cutting off public input into climate-change policy
http://www.montrealgazette.com/business/Ottawa+cutting+public+input+into+climate+change+policy/2126254/story.html
Ottawa is cutting off public input into climate-change policy
All Canadians and their offspring have a massive stake in this debate
By MATT PRICE, Freelance October 21, 2009
Montreal Gazette
Environment Minister Jim Prentice recently appeared in these pages arguing
that Canada is fully engaged in addressing climate change ("Canada is
doing its part to fight climate change," Opinion, Oct. 19). If that's
true, it's too bad he hasn't let the Canadian people in on it.
We commissioned a poll last summer asking Canadians several questions
about global warming and Canada's response to it. The biggest consensus we
found was on the question of whether Canada's system of carbon cuts should
be worked out in the open or behind closed doors. Not surprisingly, more
than 70 per cent favoured working it out in the open.
But, transparency is the opposite of what we are now getting. Instead,
Prentice has been meeting behind closed doors with industry to consult
about the shape of a cap and trade plan for Canada. He has also met behind
closed doors with the premiers. Nothing gets written down. Nothing gets
disclosed.
Prentice is saying he will release his plan before going to the UN climate
summit in Copenhagen in December where he will share it with other
countries. Presumably, then, the Canadian public gets no input. We are
just told the way things are going to be.
The tragedy here is that this will be perhaps the most significant piece
of economic and environmental policy in the history of the country. It
will either chart the course for Canada to be a leader in the next
industrial revolution as the world economy decarbonizes, or it will fall
short and leave Canada in its current last-place position in this regard
behind our competitors. All Canadians alive today and their offspring have
a massive stake in this initiative, and they are being shut out.
Rather than present a proposed plan for Canadians to comment on, Prentice
seems content to dribble out little bits of it to friendly audiences who
won't ask the tough questions. In this vein, he just revealed to the
editorial board of the Calgary Herald that he will ask each of the
provinces to take on the 20 per cent below 2006 levels by 2020 target for
emissions cuts.
Set aside for now that these cuts are much less than is needed to stop our
climate from deteriorating, the significance is that it could be seen as
an answer to the key issue of whether the system will be equitable across
Canada. This is critical to the Quebec and Ontario economies in
particular, since exploding tar sands pollution in Alberta is currently on
track to take up all the room under future national cap on emissions,
thereby forcing other industries out. Just a few days ago a tar-sands CEO
said that other industries should do more so that tar sands pollution can
continue to grow.
So, is Prentice standing up to the tar-sands industry? We don't know,
since the problem with not putting something out for proper scrutiny is
that the probing questions don't get asked. Or maybe that's the point.
We must ask, for example, whether the loopholes built into past proposals
by the Harper government will still exist in the new system, loopholes
that would enable tar-sands companies to dodge actual pollution cuts by
paying into a fund or even by simply planning to invest in pollution
control sometime in the future. Such loopholes could not only undermine
the equity issue across Canada, but also put us offside with the Americans
who will be watching that we don't give breaks to polluters that they
don't give, at the risk of trade sanctions.
Overall, cap-and-trade design is a complicated task with huge
implications. Debate about Canada's design belongs in the light of day
where the motives of the government can be examined properly. We've got
about 50 days left until the UN climate negotiations open in Copenhagen.
Let's use that time to get Canada's position right, with the benefit of
public debate.
Friday, October 16, 2009
Tar Sands CEO: Make Ontario Pay
A tar sands CEO - Marcel Coutu of Oil Sands Trust (Syncrude) - finally had the audacity to say out load what we have known for months his industry is thinking: make the rest of Canada pay for the massive increases in pollution the industry wants to inflict upon our deteriorating atmosphere.
We've documented this very issue in the Report "Divided We Fall" that shows the tar sands industry quickly taking up all the space underneath a hard cap on emissions should the federal government give it special treatment under a coming national cap and trade system. Who pays for this special treatment? Mainly the manufacturing sector in Ontario and Quebec.
We also polled on this very issue in August and found coast-to-coast opposition to giving the tar sands industry weaker pollution controls than the rest of the country in order to let it expand.
Even though we knew it to be true, it's still shocking, though, to have someone say out load that somehow his pollution is more special than the next person's, that his industry should be allowed to inflict even greater damage on our kids so that it can be allowed to expand.
The ball is very clearly in the court of federal Environment Minister Jim Prentice on this issue. He's denied that his behind-closed-doors design of a national cap and trade system is going to give special treatment to the tar sands, but has refused to provide any specifics in this regard beyond vague platitudes.
We've got about 40 days until UN climate negotiations open in Copenhagen and Canada is absolutely nowhere in terms of being able to show up with any kind of national consensus on how we should be cutting carbon and transitioning to the clean energy economy. The fact that Mr. Coutu can still stand up with a straight face and say "make others pay" is a tesitment to the lack of leadership on this file from the Harper government.
Matt Price
Program Manager
Climate and Energy
We've documented this very issue in the Report "Divided We Fall" that shows the tar sands industry quickly taking up all the space underneath a hard cap on emissions should the federal government give it special treatment under a coming national cap and trade system. Who pays for this special treatment? Mainly the manufacturing sector in Ontario and Quebec.
We also polled on this very issue in August and found coast-to-coast opposition to giving the tar sands industry weaker pollution controls than the rest of the country in order to let it expand.
Even though we knew it to be true, it's still shocking, though, to have someone say out load that somehow his pollution is more special than the next person's, that his industry should be allowed to inflict even greater damage on our kids so that it can be allowed to expand.
The ball is very clearly in the court of federal Environment Minister Jim Prentice on this issue. He's denied that his behind-closed-doors design of a national cap and trade system is going to give special treatment to the tar sands, but has refused to provide any specifics in this regard beyond vague platitudes.
We've got about 40 days until UN climate negotiations open in Copenhagen and Canada is absolutely nowhere in terms of being able to show up with any kind of national consensus on how we should be cutting carbon and transitioning to the clean energy economy. The fact that Mr. Coutu can still stand up with a straight face and say "make others pay" is a tesitment to the lack of leadership on this file from the Harper government.
Matt Price
Program Manager
Climate and Energy
Wednesday, October 14, 2009
Iggy Comes Clean
While Environment Minister Jim Prentice clings to the tired old "either-or" framing of environment vs. economy, Liberal leader Michael Ignatieff just jumped ahead to "both-and."
In a speech yesterday, Mr. Ignatieff pledged to campaign on "the most significant national investment in clean energy jobs this country has ever seen."
This is a recognition that the next industrial revolution and next significant wave of job creation will centre on decarbonizing our economy. Like all industrial revolutions, there will be winners and losers - and Canada is currently on track to fall into the loser category, left behind by other countries making large clean energy investments today.
Some of our provinces are stepping up, such as Ontario with its Green Energy Act. Right after the Act's renewable pricing regulations were announced, two large wind power projects began to move ahead, with more in the works.
But, instead of a coherent Canadian push towards a clean energy economy we have a patchwork of local initiatives, and a federal government more interested in coddling tar sands polluters than becoming a winner in the next industrial revolution.
Mr. Ignatieff's speech could begin to change that, should he flesh out his ideas into more concrete terms so that voters can get excited by them. We need to hear more about specific policy proposals that will drive change, and more about how carbon cuts are the other side of the clean energy coin.
But, the speech was a step forwards to that place, and for that we are thankful.
Matt Price
Program Manager
Energy and Climate
In a speech yesterday, Mr. Ignatieff pledged to campaign on "the most significant national investment in clean energy jobs this country has ever seen."
This is a recognition that the next industrial revolution and next significant wave of job creation will centre on decarbonizing our economy. Like all industrial revolutions, there will be winners and losers - and Canada is currently on track to fall into the loser category, left behind by other countries making large clean energy investments today.
Some of our provinces are stepping up, such as Ontario with its Green Energy Act. Right after the Act's renewable pricing regulations were announced, two large wind power projects began to move ahead, with more in the works.
But, instead of a coherent Canadian push towards a clean energy economy we have a patchwork of local initiatives, and a federal government more interested in coddling tar sands polluters than becoming a winner in the next industrial revolution.
Mr. Ignatieff's speech could begin to change that, should he flesh out his ideas into more concrete terms so that voters can get excited by them. We need to hear more about specific policy proposals that will drive change, and more about how carbon cuts are the other side of the clean energy coin.
But, the speech was a step forwards to that place, and for that we are thankful.
Matt Price
Program Manager
Energy and Climate
Friday, October 9, 2009
Hitting the target
For those of you on Facebook, here's an apropo metaphor for the state of the international climate negotiations - seemingly unlikely to hit the mark (and save the world), but you never know...
Facebookers check out the video here
Matt Price
Program Manager
Energy and Climate
Facebookers check out the video here
Matt Price
Program Manager
Energy and Climate
Monday, October 5, 2009
Harper Flunks Security
Stephen Harper likes riding on top of submarines to show he's down with the military, but does he really get where security issues are heading over the coming decades?
Word out of military leader the U.S. - the CIA just opened a 'Center on Climate Change and National Security.'
In fact, the U.S. military establishment has been waking up to climate change as a major security driver for some time, as recognized here by U.S. Senator John Kerry.
Not so with our Prime Minister, though. As summarized nicely by Margaret Purdy and Leanne Smythe at UBC, Harper is a laggard at making the connection between climate change and security issues, which speaks to his utter disregard for climate issues in general - reflected in Canada's last place performance on reducing emissions.
Who do you trust to guarantee your security? Some guy who has his head stuck stubbornly in the (tar) sand, or someone who is looking at the future clearly and preparing Canada for it?
Matt Price
Program Manager
Environmental Defence
Word out of military leader the U.S. - the CIA just opened a 'Center on Climate Change and National Security.'
In fact, the U.S. military establishment has been waking up to climate change as a major security driver for some time, as recognized here by U.S. Senator John Kerry.
Not so with our Prime Minister, though. As summarized nicely by Margaret Purdy and Leanne Smythe at UBC, Harper is a laggard at making the connection between climate change and security issues, which speaks to his utter disregard for climate issues in general - reflected in Canada's last place performance on reducing emissions.
Who do you trust to guarantee your security? Some guy who has his head stuck stubbornly in the (tar) sand, or someone who is looking at the future clearly and preparing Canada for it?
Matt Price
Program Manager
Environmental Defence
Friday, October 2, 2009
Melting hardened reporters
Story of the day that stuck with me is this one about the Dalai Lama melting hardened reporters in Calgary.
This even after he'd taken an indirect swipe at the tar sands.
Nice antidote to the story out of Tokyo that the 2016 Olympics may be the last one in history given global warming. Seems like a bit of an overstatement since they pulled them off in ancient greece, although it could be true that the corporate jet set version of today may struggle in years to come.
It does remind us though that we are still sleepwalking into a situation that's untenable for our kids, even as we rush them to school each day to prepare them for the future.
This is why we launced our swing ridings work, centred on the parent-kid bond. We all collectively need to amp it up though, and continue to melt the hearts of hardened reporters who don't seem to think this global-warming-threatening-our-kids-future thing is really news...
Matt Price
Program Manager
Environmental Defence
This even after he'd taken an indirect swipe at the tar sands.
Nice antidote to the story out of Tokyo that the 2016 Olympics may be the last one in history given global warming. Seems like a bit of an overstatement since they pulled them off in ancient greece, although it could be true that the corporate jet set version of today may struggle in years to come.
It does remind us though that we are still sleepwalking into a situation that's untenable for our kids, even as we rush them to school each day to prepare them for the future.
This is why we launced our swing ridings work, centred on the parent-kid bond. We all collectively need to amp it up though, and continue to melt the hearts of hardened reporters who don't seem to think this global-warming-threatening-our-kids-future thing is really news...
Matt Price
Program Manager
Environmental Defence
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
