The sad thing is that Canada is actually in one of the best places to make it’s individual targets compared to most other countries. We’re a rich nation with plentiful resources and all our needs are met domestically. Our major sources of greenhouse emissions are well known and clearly defined. They are also things that all have existing solutions to.
Even if complete elimination isn’t possible, at least doing enough to reach our climate goals should’ve been easy. Heating and fossil fuel production account for more than 30% of our CO2 emissions, both things that could be replaced with electricity from clean sources like nuclear.
Frankly, I think Canada would have a much greater impact on emissions if we put our highly-educated workforce towards developing clean technologies for export to the US. That’s what we should be working on, because we’re already operating in that weird part of the climate curve where it takes disproportionate investment to get any return in terms of GHGe.
If BYD opened an EV plant in Canada for export of $10k EVs to North American markets, we could wipe so may ICE vehicles off the roads across North America.
The problem is that there is no existing truly green technology as it stands. Wind and solar causes so much pollution in its construction that it’s not much better than natural gas as it stands. Especially once you consider that they need to be replaced every 10 years.
On the other hand, I do agree that we should push on energy development for export. The Ontario, Saskatchewan, and Albertan governments have teamed up to develop SMRs, and hopefully we’ll have a working model in the near future, ripe for mass production and export. It’s not 100% green, but far cleaner than any other technology we can expect to have within the next decade.
Is anyone surprised? No? Didn’t think so.
Especially with how the Liberals made concessions so quickly on the carbon tax because they’re afraid.
The residential heating oil concessions represent a miniscule amount of the total carbon taxes while maximizing carbon emission reduction intensity.
It’s a good trade-off, although their messaging on why the change happened was sloppy. Keeping the tax as is and avoiding this debacle, and then further enhancing the incentives to change would have been my preferred method.
Well of course they are. I learned as a kid that there are lots of things you have to get right to get a bullseye, but you’ll never even get close to the target if you don’t aim with intent. Has anyone seen any aiming? Any evidence of intent? Or just a target painted in kaleidoscope colours?
Unfortunately, once we reach a point where one half of the country is burning and being smothered by heavy forest fire smoke while the other half of the country is drowning from weekly once-in-a-thousand-year flash floods and the freak hurricane that went out of track and is on its way to make landing on Nova Scotia, we might perhaps collectively agree to finally actually maybe do something about it.
It will probably far too late far too little, and everybody will be too angry looking for their favorite menu du jour scapegoat to burn at the stake for all their misfortune and their nostalgia for the good old times.
We are currently too busy with balancing inflation and deflation, the housing crisis, the international geopolitical chain of powder keg situation, the opioid crisis, the mental health crisis, the skyrocketing cost of living, the nearshoring of manufacturing, the collapse of fisheries and illegal fishing, the prevalence and soaring increase of misinformation without any repercussions, the constant and multifaceted foreign interference by several countries/organizations and private individuals, the numerous environmental issues (from untested insecticides/herbicides, invasive species, innumerable toxic spills/burial/contamination of soil/groundwater/rivers/lakes, pollution, etc.), the constant lack of qualified personnel in every fields in every provinces and territories (teachers, doctors, nurses, judges, daycare attendants, technicians, specialist, etc.), the reconciliation with aboriginals, the accelerating increase of undocumented migrants, the lack of access to basic necessities in our remote regions/villages/reserves, the list of urgent requests that need immediate and continued attention is endless.
Of the above non-exhaustive list of priorities, every Canadian will have their own order of priorities and their particular pet peeves on what is important/urgent and what is unnecessary/superfluous. Nobody can agree, everyone wants to delay and put on ice whatever they perceive as personally non-beneficial or not pertinent from their point of view.
The reality is that we have to accomplish all of them and so much more simultaneously. We could if we decide to cooperate/trust/verify without hindering each other.
Whether that happens or not only time will tell. The hyperobject that is Climate Change is not waiting for anyone.
we might perhaps collectively agree to finally actually maybe do something about it
“The weather changes all the time, humans just haven’t been around long enough to have seen it” -My Boomer Coworker
Wasn’t that the goal and continues to be today?
Hey look everyone, in ten years time, I’m gonna jump 8 feet high … ten years comes along … they can only jump two feet high … don’t worry guys … in ten years time I’m gonna jump six feet high … now we all have to wait ten years to see if they make the jump.
This is like having a shifty contractor telling you that they’ll finish your basement in two weeks after having worked on it for two months and not seeing any progress.
Is there any country who is really serious about lowering emmisions? If so, who is the leader? Costa Rica?
China’s a leader in terms of actually hitting their emissions targets (they’re hitting peak oil earlier than expected, for example), but they aren’t able to use the natural gas crutch to drive down “emissions.”
Methane leaks absolutely destroy any GHGe advantage natural gas has in the short term, but it’s something that’s completely forgotten in emissions reporting. If you adjust for natural gas’ methane footprint, the GHGe reductions in the West start looking really depressing.
You are going to take china’s word at face value!? Lolololol
Well, I’ve already established you can’t take Western GHGe numbers at face value… What’s your point? Trust nobody and nothing?
The west may be skewed, but believing anything china has to say is laughable.
The West’s data is literally, demonstrably false to the point that it’s legitimately harmful to our climate goals. In the short-term, natural gas is indisputably worse than coal, maybe even 2-3x worse. Even in the long-term, natural gas is worse than coal when looking at observed methane leakage rates. The US’ emissions reductions are a fucking lie.
Meanwhile, China hasn’t exactly been hiding that they’re reliant on coal.
Don’t live in the USA, in Canada our emissions are less than 3% of global emissions
And a good chunk of Canadian emissions (about half) are due to O&G extraction and burning fossil fuels for transportation. It’s a simple problem to solve.
China, the country that is increasing the number of coal power plants they build every year?
I mean, if someone else wants to start producing solar panels and wind turbines…
China just lies about every metric they report. GDP, emissions, poverty, etc.
This is the best summary I could come up with:
The federal government is set to miss its 2030 target to cut carbon emissions by at least 40 per cent below 2005 levels by 2030, according to the latest audit from the commissioner of the environment’s office.
The report by Jerry DeMarco, commissioner of the Environment and Sustainable Development, looked at whether the plan was credible, inclusive and resulted in measures that will help Canada meet its targets.
The audit also criticized the modelling used to predict emissions in the plan, saying they were based on “overly optimistic assumptions, limited analysis of uncertainties and lack of peer review.”
“The Privy Council Office should work with other federal organizations to review the authorities, responsibilities and leadership accountabilities relating to climate change mitigation,” the report said.
DeMarco also looked at other environmental initiatives implemented by the federal government, including its zero emission vehicle infrastructure plan.
“The collapse of the Atlantic cod population in the 1990s — with its far-reaching economic and social impacts — has shown that it is far more expensive and difficult to recover depleted stocks than it is to keep them healthy in the first place,” DeMarco said.
The original article contains 774 words, the summary contains 186 words. Saved 76%. I’m a bot and I’m open source!
