Issue: To Kyoto or Not to Kyoto?

by Patrick Burkhard, for Apathy is Boring — February 4, 2007

    Oh what, oh what shall Canadians do, about the horrible state of the environment, and its failed climate strategy too?  Canadians are at a loss for answers and the current governmental plan put forth by the Conservatives has come under a tremendous amount of criticism.  While the future direction on this issue seems uncertain, the necessity to change seems ever more present as Canada is due for a long hot summer.  But what is all this hubbub about climate change and the Kyoto Accord anyways?  Why has Canada’s plan turned all of our politicians into angry finger pointing little children blaming each for a lack of action in the past as well as in the present?  The article will examine the Kyoto and climate change issues in Canada.  It is time to cut through some of the party rhetoric to see what is really at stake for Canadians and what they should expect from their government in years to come. 

The Kyoto Protocol itself is the result of negotiations between various countries at a December 1997 meeting in Kyoto, Japan.  The agreement was made under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, backed by extensive research of thousands of international climatologists and various other scientific types.  Initially, many countries and pundits debated whether or not climate change was even a problem or whether or not ‘global warming’ is a natural or man-made phenomenon.  At this stage in the game, most of those people who adhered to a “global warning isn’t real” position, including US president George Bush as well as the current Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper, have abandoned this belief and admitted that it is a problem countries must address and take responsibility for.  The Kyoto Accord officially came into effect in February 2005, following Russia’s ratification.  As of 2006, a total of 160 countries have signed on, representing over 55 % of global greenhouse gas emissions (GHG), which are seen as the major cause of global warming the world over.  Canada’s specific goal under Kyoto is a reduction of green house gases 6 % below 1990 levels by 2008-2012.  Now that doesn’t sound too difficult to achieve, does it?

    Under Chrétien the Liberal government showed a lot of pride and supposed leadership on the Kyoto issue.  They ratified the treaty and attempted to launch many climate initiates aimed at meeting Canada’s climate goals.  Kyoto becomes a point of pride for Canadians as we all thought we were doing our part.  In actuality however, the Liberals under Chrétien undertook very little to pressure business and industry to lower their emissions.  Some figures show that by 2004, Canadian emission levels had risen to 27 % above 1990 levels and are sure to have continued to increase since then.  Public support for the environment as well as Canada’s participation in Kyoto has been high all throughout this decade and current support for Kyoto – despite the Conservative governments stance that it will not meet the Kyoto obligation – are still incredibly high.  This is not surprising considering the large number of climate change inspired natural phenomenon’s affecting Canadians across the country:  heat waves, floods, droughts, forest fires, and fallout from longer hurricane seasons - the list can go on and on, especially when looking at the overall world picture.  It seems then that Canadians see and understand the problem and generally are willing to accept some negative consequences to keep the human race (and the world) going a few more millennia.  It doesn’t sound like a bad trade off, some short term economic pain for long term gain.  So why has it been so hard for governments to do anything about this issue if the public support is there?

    It is now time to turn to the latest installment of the ‘environmental policy flavour of the month’.  The latest plan put forth by the current Conservative government in April of 2007 is entitled ‘Turning the Corner’.  Following this plan would entail abandoning the country’s Kyoto commitments, attempt to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions by 20% from current levels, not 1990 levels like Kyoto, by the year 2020.  The plan also sets a long-term 2050 goal of a 65 % reduction from current levels.  Criticism of this plan has been widespread.  John Baird, now environment minister, was publicly confronted and lambasted by environmental guru and champion David Suzuki over the plan.  Al Gore, while promoting his hit documentary about the necessity to act on the global warming issue also criticized the plan, calling it a “Fraud” .  Despite the criticism, the Conservatives have stood by their plan. 

    Most of the disapproval with the latest plan involves the manner in which the GHG reduction would take place.  Instead of regulating the industry and establishing reduction targets, of say reducing green-house gas emissions by a certain percentage, just like the Kyoto agreement is written, the current plan focuses on ‘intensity’.   The plan calls for companies set up before 2004 to reduce the intensity of their emissions by 18 per cent by 2010 and a 2 % per year reduction every year after that point.  Also under the plan, industry would be thus responsible for 40 % of Canada’s total greenhouse gas reductions, where everyday Canadians and other sectors would makeup the difference.  The problem arises as by focusing on intensity reductions, there is no guarantee of an overall reduction in the amount of GHG’s Canada is releasing into the atmosphere.  As an April 2007 Toronto Star article highlighted , if the economy grows by 3 % every year, industrial output might also increase at that rate.  If industrial output grows, even though it would not be cleaner or ‘less intense’, total emissions could also rise.  So under the current Conservative plan, in 10 or twenty years, Canada could be actually polluting more then it is now!

    Even more damning than this realization is a recently released study  released by the conservative think-tank, the C.D. Howe Institute, which blew the Conservative plan’s projections out of the water using statistical projection models.  Sounds fancy, doesn’t it!  In the study, the think tank used a generous projection model, taking into account future reductions in car emissions as well as assuming that the 2 % reduction per year continued until 2050.   They found that while the new plan would substantially reduce GHG levels when compared to what levels would look like ‘Business-as-usual’ – meaning that no current or future restrictions would be placed on emissions.  However, the study found that it is very unlikely that the current plan will ever really succeed in lowering emissions below their current levels of output – meaning no % reduction in the amount of GHG’s.  This report is the third since the program’s launch in April to counter its expectations.  Despite this though, the Conservative government is still standing by its plan…

So now where does that leave Canadians who clearly want action on the environment and to tackle this climate change problem?  The Conservatives have been very quick in defending their plan to cite how the many Liberal governments in decades passed did nothing to meet the Kyoto goals either, making their job now more difficult.  As the same C.D. Howe report stated, it was not for a lack of environmental plans or programs that emissions grew in the 90’s and the early years of 21st century.  The problem was that all of the plans implemented during these decades were ineffective in countering the growth of the big polluting industries.  These days, an economic and development orgy is taking place in Alberta, and the work done in the oil sands in responsible for a large amount of pollution and greenhouse gas emissions.  The tradeoff now is that same as it has always been, economic growth vs. clean air and fighting climate change.
   
    While it does seem Canadians are willing to accept a hit on climate change, every plan to date includes modifications for consumers, without objections from the population.  Everyone is now running out and buying compact fluorescent light bulbs to prove this point.  Consumers have also been quick to forfeit gas-guzzling SUV’s in favour of smaller Hybrid’s, or even better yet by riding bikes of taking public transport.  Is the burden being placed on industry to pay the penalty for polluting large enough though, are they doing their own part?  The answer to this question depends on who you ask.  Ask a banker or an engineer in Calgary and they will surely favour less government regulation, which would hamper economic progress and a return on the oil sands investments.  Ask some of my lefty university friends however and they would bring the polluters to their knees. 

    Unfortunately, my lefty friends won’t be allowed to tackle this one for the country and save the day (and maybe crash the economy in the process), so other solutions need to be considered.  The influence of business and industry in government runs deep and it will be difficult to sell any really tough climate plan to Alberta and more so the polluting industries.  Partisan politics, normally the cause of dismay for the public, in the case may actually bring some sanity to the climate change issue.  Partly due to the massive international embarrassment Canada has faced for pulling out of Kyoto (the leaders of many European nations must think we are taking crazy pills), the House of Commons recently passed a bill requiring Canada to respect its commitment in cutting GHG emissions under the Kyoto Protocol.  The curtain may not have fallen here after all, as the current government may be bound to act. 

    The Conservatives have answered saying they will obey the law, but will not put forth a new climate plan.  The recent C.D. Howe Institute report asserts that the only way Canada will ever be able to meet its Kyoto targets or ever reduce its emissions levels is by associating a direct cost for polluting the atmosphere.  They suggest this can either be done through a tax or by regulating the industry.  There are many options out there, such as trading in carbon-credits on the international scene, but we would have to recommit to Kyoto officially to benefit from this and be allowed to trade.  So as stated, the curtain is still hanging, the ship is still in port, quite ready to sail past this whole Kyoto issue, however there is still hope yet. 
    The sad truth though is that in order for any Canadian government to change its course on the climate change or environmental issue, it will take a massive change in the way government works.  The population is clearly in support of regulation on industry and is willing to do its part; it just wants to take action.  Governments however, until really pressured to change their ways, can hide behind ineffectual policies and partisan rhetoric.  The only way any real change is going to come here is if the government starts choosing the interests of the people over the interests of business.  Now some people may be saying, “Hold on here, what is this crazy intern talking about now?” 

    The truth is that the current Conservative plan, while better than some we have seen in the past 2 decades, is quite similar when compared to the Liberal plans of the past.  They all fail in doing what they are supposed to do – clean up the environment and the air!  In my eyes, the government has always been choosing the lesser of two evils.  It is the government’s job to keep the economy rolling and to ensure that people have jobs and that the economy is growing steadily.  At the same time, any move against industry entails a backlash from business and industry.  If the government regulates heavily, business gets angry and it is taking money out of their pockets.  When the government is lax on polluting, the populace tends gets angry as the world becomes a hotter and dirtier place.  The problem is that over the past two decades, governments have put environmental plans into action, which they realistically knew would get outpaced by development and the growth of industry.  Governments just made it appear that they were doing something.  These plans were great at appeasing the public, who in its general apathy (for the most part of course – no one is discounting the efforts of those working for positive change) accepted these plans piecemeal and waited for things to get better or cleaner in this case.  The government plans favoured business though, because the public allowed these plans to do so – it was silent on the issues when the plans didn’t make a difference.  Governments have been favoring the lesser of two evils.  If the plans had been tough on business and forced some real reductions in emissions, you better damn well believe the papers would have been filled with op-ed pieces from industry and CEO leaders condemning the government for its economically damaging regulations.         

    The solution then:  time for the people (yes, that does mean us) to pick up the ball we dropped decades ago and force the government to wake up and prioritize the environment over the economy.  This will only happen once we, as a nation, stop being so apathetic in our daily lives.  This means knowing who our representatives are: our mayors, city councils, provincial MP’s and leaders, and finally House of Commons members.  They all have local offices and most all love talking to and meeting the people they represent.  We need to show our representatives what we want and that we are willing to sacrifice to get it.  If the conventional political channels do not work, the buck does not stop there.  This may mean signing petitions, joining community groups and even taking to the streets if need be to get the message heard.  The opinion polls don’t lie.  Canadians support Kyoto, Canadians care about the environment and it is our top priority.  We just have to show the government that we are serious about what we believe in and that the same old appeasement plans won’t shut us up!  Don’t let the name on the latest plan fool you, much more action is needed on climate change and the environment before we can turn the corner on the issue of global warming.   

 1. Gore Calls Canada Climate Plan a ‘Fraud”.            
 2. Tory climate plan fails Canadians. 
 3. C. D. Howe PDF