Mobilizing Canadians to Take Action - Post Kyoto Challenge
Whatever level of commitment Canada and other developed countries take at the Kyoto Conference of Parties, December 1997, there will be a need to strengthen Canada's Action Plan on Climate Change. This becomes especially clear when one considers that total Canadian GHG emissions are projected to increase by 19% in 2010 and by 36% in 2020 from 1990 levels (Source: Canada Second National Report, p. 47). This section introduces a number of key issues that will have to be dealt with if Canada is to successfully address the post Kyoto Challenge. Panelists who have been invited to each Briefing Session to contribute their own views on What should Canada do in Kyoto and beyond? will undoubtedly add other issues to this list as well as new perspectives on the issue of climate change itself.
Mobilizing Canadians to Take Action
If Canada is to meet an emissions target, the public has to become engaged. However, the 1996 Review of Canada's National Action Program on Climate Change (National Air Issues Coordinating Committee, November 1996) notes that while a significant number of the NAPCC actions involve making information available to the public or raising awareness about climate change and energy issues, as yet, an action-oriented public education campaign on climate change, as outlined in the NAPCC, has not been launched. Clearly their is an urgent need for action on this front. What can be done to clarify and promulgate the messages needed to convince Canadians that actions taken now to reduce emissions are a good investment? How best to go about getting these messages out? What are the respective roles of the three levels of government as well as the corporate sector?
Ensuring a Fair and Equitable Sharing of the Burden in Canada
Assuming there is enough political agreement to deal seriously with the issue of climate change, a fundamental challenge will be to determine the relative responsibilities of each of the major economic sectors and each province. To date, Ministers of energy and environment have been unable or unwilling to enter into such a discussion. Canada's commitment remains a national one with no regional or sectoral targets. Given that most of the levers for policy action on emissions limitation rest with the provincial governments, forging some sort of agreement on the allocation of targets (or the distribution of burden) will be essential. The overall goal is to change the nature of the climate change debate from being a win-lose polemic pitting one region of the country against another, to one of shared responsibility and a search for win-win solutions. To do so, the debate must be broadened from an energy-environment focus to one that involves all sectors of the economy and engages a wider range of ministers, notably finance ministers.
Determination of a burden sharing agreement essentially becomes a federal-provincial negotiation, the political spectre of which may be seen by some as too daunting at this time. But, in all likelihood, if an international target emerges from Kyoto, there will be a two to four year period before the agreement would enter into force; a time for Canada to work towards a consensus on the need for a formula that spreads the economic burden and opportunities equitably across the country.
Providing Canadian companies with the flexibility needed to undertake further actions
One of the key messages from Canadian industry has been the need for clear policy direction coupled with the provision of flexibility for individual companies to choose how they will most cost effectively reduce their emissions. This explains the underlying popularity of the Voluntary Challenge and Registry (VCR). However, in a regime whereby a legally binding target is the goal for Canada, ways must be found to make the VCR more effective, including providing recognition for early actions, for offset projects and for activities implemented jointly with other countries.
Internationally, there are a number of flexibility provisions likely to be included, at least in principle, in the Kyoto deal. These include joint implementation (JI) and emissions trading and possibly differentiation of targets based on individual national circumstances. Is Canada positioned to take best advantage of JI and emissions trading? There is a JI office established in NRCan but to date the number of projects registered with the group is small, primarily because potential investors have no guarantee that the credits resulting from the projects they are sponsoring abroad will have any value in Canada. Emissions trading is at its inception, with an international pilot trading regime planned to be in place by 2000 involving a few interested countries (Canada included). In general, a dialogue should be established with industry leaders to learn what they feel would be cost effective and innovative means of achieving internationally agreed targets. Their views would be helpful as well on what Canadian initiatives would be required to create the optimal policy environment to provide industry the flexibility it needs to achieve meaningful reductions. As noted earlier, engagement of other ministries, notably the finance ministry, will likely be needed to provide the best policy setting.
New markets for Canadian Products and Knowledge
One of Canada's key negotiating objectives has been to engage developing countries, particularly large emitters, in taking steps to reduce their emissions. The UN FCCC has failed to make progress in this regard, with a highly divisive North-South polemic dominating the discussions. Developing countries feel that the industrialized world is shirking its responsibilities for emissions limitation while at the same time calling for poorer countries to shoulder their part of the burden. A lack of trust has been established that will make diplomatic breakthroughs slow and difficult.
However, at the same time there are opportunities to build trust in the developing world through wise investment choices. As sustainable development principles become implemented, new markets will be created . For Canada, it will be important to identify promising market niches and choose policies and programs aimed at fostering development and export of selected, high potential greenhouse gas reducing and energy efficient technologies. Opportunities also exist in developed countries where the market for innovative energy efficiency technologies and for alternative energy sources is very large.
The Transportation Sector
Figure 9 shows the projections for greenhouse gas emissions by the end-use sectors. The emissions portrayed are those associated with the direct combustion of fossil fuels (principally refined petroleum products and natural gas). The relative contribution of four sectors are provided with transportation and industrial being the most important. These two sectors may provide some excellent opportunities for reducing emissions without sacrificing living standards.
Figure 9: Greenhouse Gas End-use Emissions, 1990-2020
(Source: Environment Canada, Canada's Second National Report on Climate Change, 1997, p. 37)In the transportation sector, the fuel consumption per km of private vehicles (cars, vans, light trucks) was reduced significantly in the late 70s and early 80s. Since then all the innovative engineering has gone into more power and heavier vehicles because there has been no price or regulatory incentive for manufacturers to reduce vehicle fuel consumption. However, there are many opportunities available to reduce emissions per km. driven which would not only reduce the greenhouse gas burden but would also help solve regional smog and other local air pollution problems. It is estimated that just a moderate re-design of present vehicles would yield a 20% improvement (Scientific American Dec. 1994), and newer technologies, such as hybrids (combined battery and small gasoline engine) or hydrogen fuel cells could cut emissions drastically. Ballard Fuel Cells of Vancouver is a leading player world-wide in fuel cell development and one manufacturer expects to have fuel cell vehicles on the market by 2004. Regulatory or economic measures by government would speed up this process. As the IPCC 1995 report put it, Greenhouse gas emission reductions per unit of transport activity could be reduced 20 to 50% by 2025 if there were no changes in vehicle performance and size. If changes in performance and size were accepted, the reductions could be 60 to 80%. At the same time, other transportation sector policies, such as improved public transportation, greater use of rail and ships, more energy efficient urban planning, and vehicle inspection programs could help to keep the number of kilometres driven from rising rapidly.
