Canada Admits There’s No Chance It’ll Reach Its Climate Change Targets — Not Even Clo

B00Mer

Keep Calm and Carry On
Sep 6, 2008
44,800
7,297
113
Rent Free in Your Head
www.getafteritmedia.com
Canada Admits There’s No Chance It’ll Reach Its Climate Change Targets — Not Even Close



In statistics released on Friday evening — a prime time to break bad news — the Canadian government admitted that it was way off its already modest CO2 emission targets.

The numbers show that years of environmental efforts in Canada essentially had no impact.

The projection, released by Environment and Climate Change Canada, shows that Canada is expected to pump out the equivalent of 768 megatons of CO2 by 2020, and 815 megatons by 2030. Those projections also do not include emissions from the forestry sector.

"The data are clear and confirm that more needs to be done."​

That's nowhere near the targets Canada set for itself at the Copenhagen climate talks in 2009. There, Ottawa pledged to reduce its CO2 emissions by 17 percent over 2005 levels by 2020.

Instead, Canada will likely increase its CO2 emissions by roughly two percent. The numbers say that increase may be as high as five percent.

The projections for 2030 are even further off. Canada pledged to reduce its emissions by 30 percent. Instead, it's on track to to increase those emissions by nearly 17 percent.



In a clear indictment of Ottawa's ineffective environmental initiatives, the numbers released Friday are actually higher than projections from 2012 and 2013.

"We're getting results," former Environment Minister Leona Aglukkaq said of the 2013 projections at the time.

Canada's new minister of the environment and climate change Catherine McKenna conceded that the numbers were not good.

"The data are clear and confirm that more needs to be done," reads a statement from McKenna.

McKenna's office turned down an interview request on the numbers.

The new projection makes very clear that these trends do not include initiatives planned by the still-fresh government of Justin Trudeau, nor do they take into account new measures adopted by some of Canada's provinces.

"Our governments are now moving forward collaboratively to develop a framework and specific actions, including investments in green infrastructure, to meet the commitments we made in Paris in order to close the gap," McKenna said in the statement.

Trudeau's plan has primarily been to cajole the provinces to undertake more ambitious carbon pricing schemes. Those initiatives, which include cap and trade programs in Quebec and Ontario, and carbon taxes in oil-rich Alberta and natural gas exporter British Columbia, have only just begun to come online. Most of those policies were not included in Friday's projections.

On the federal level, Trudeau's government has sketched out details of new funding for clean technology and renewable energy that will appear in the government's March budget.

Related: Justin Trudeau Subjects Canada's Premiers to a Science Class Before Paris Climate Summit

But while Trudeau may be able to blame his predecessor for the lack of results on its CO2 reduction plans, the buck will ultimately stop at his desk if — or, perhaps more accurately, when — Canada does not meet its international targets. And blame may come much sooner than 2020.

The new projections were prepared in advance of Canada's report to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), for the organization's biennial report.

Other reports already filed with the UNFCCC show that Canada stands to be a laggard when all the chips are counted.

Thanks to recent steps taken by the Obama administration, the United States is expected to reach its Copenhagen goal of a 17 percent reduction by 2020, or at least get quite close. The European Union's report is similarly optimistic that they will achieve their 14 percent reduction.

Trudeau has promised to meet with the premiers to hammer out a more concrete CO2 reduction plan by March.

https://news.vice.com/article/canad...ach-its-climate-change-targets-not-even-close
 

CDNBear

Custom Troll
Sep 24, 2006
43,839
207
63
Ontario
This must be devistating to Flossy? :lol:
Wait your turn. I already caught him deceitfully changing links and article titles to suit his agenda, and embarrassed him by pointing out the 23 year old guy mentioned in the article he posted to try and troll the older members here.

He'll be busy ignoring his deceit for a while, but I've got him doing the predictable in the other thread.
 

Sons of Liberty

Walks on Water
Aug 24, 2010
1,284
0
36
Evil Empire
Does any country ever? Back in the GW Bush era, everyone was bashing the US for not complying with the Kyoto Accord, did any country comply? Nope.
 

CDNBear

Custom Troll
Sep 24, 2006
43,839
207
63
Ontario
Does that actually matter, Ski? They're a developing nation and their emissions aren't as destructive as ours.
 

tay

Hall of Fame Member
May 20, 2012
11,548
0
36
According to sustainable energy professor, Marc Jaccard (link is external), all the talk about carbon pricing is just hot air. The Simon Fraser prof has crunched the numbers and concludes that for Canada to meet its commitments from last year's Paris climate summit, the carbon price would have to come in at about $200 per tonne or almost seven times the $30 per tonne levied in British Columbia. That, in Dr. Jaccard's view, would be political suicide.

Jaccard points instead to a tool that is already reducing carbon in some of the world's largest economies — regulation.

"All climate policies that are actually effective are politically difficult," he said. "The only issue is which ones are more politically difficult.

"Taxes are more difficult than regulation."


Ottawa is grappling with climate-change policy in advance of an expected federal-provincial meeting on the matter later this year. Canada is on the hook to devise a way to meet its Paris goal of 30 per cent carbon reduction over 2005 levels by 2030.Cabinet ministers have mused about imposing a national carbon price, while Prime Minister Justin Trudeau has suggested regulations could be part of the mix.
Jaccard proposes what he calls flexible regulations on industries, vehicles and power generation that focus on setting caps or standards rather than imposing solutions.

The regulations would phase out coal-fired power, require car builders to sell an increasing number of zero-emission vehicles, force trucks and buses to use more biodiesel and would cap the amount of carbon manufacturers are allowed to release per unit of production.



Taxes more difficult: Economist suggests regulating carbon instead of pricing it | National Observer

 

taxslave

Hall of Fame Member
Nov 25, 2008
36,362
4,337
113
Vancouver Island
Carbon tax scams have always been about money not reducing pollution. If it was really about saving the planet there would be more coal fired plants and phase out the dangerous nuke plants.