Green Canada? What a Farce
Globe and Mail
Eric Reguly
If you want to laugh, pick up the May edition of Vanity Fair, the magazine's first "green issue." Canada (along with Toronto Mayor David Miller) are slathered with kudos in the 30-page eco-champions section. "Our neighbours to the north certainly seem to get it: Canada ratified the Kyoto Protocol . . ." the editors wrote.
The implication is that Canada out-greens the United States, where Kyoto is a dirty word. Vanity Fair believes Canada has taken the high ground. The trouble is, holier-than-thou Canadians do, too. Nothing could be further from the truth.
While Canada is a card-carrying Kyoto member (merci, Jean Chrétien), the country's greenhouse gas emissions, largely carbon dioxide, are so far above the target that "Kyoto" and "Canada" don't belong in the same paragraph. Canada's Kyoto gap -- the difference between actual yearly emissions and the target emissions in the protocol's first reporting period, 2008 to 2012 -- was 177 million tonnes in 2003, when the last official figure was released. That was about 30 per cent higher than the target.
The current gap is undoubtedly higher, thanks in large part to northern Alberta's oil sands. The area, where a massively energy-intensive extraction and refining process is used to convert tarry guck called bitumen into synthetic crude, has emerged as one of the planet's single-biggest sources of greenhouse gas emissions.
Aldyen Donnelly, president of the Greenhouse Emissions Management Consortium (Gemco), estimates Canada's gap is now about 210 million tonnes. Unless miracle energy conservation technologies are found, national emissions output will soar as oil sands production more than doubles over the next decade. The point is, Canada hasn't got the slightest chance of meeting the Kyoto targets unless it turns the oil sands into a nature preserve. The odds of that happening are about the same as Vanity Fair holding its Oscar party in Fort McMurray.
What were the Chrétien Liberals thinking when they joined the Kyoto club? They were either incompetent and horrendously underestimated the difficulty in meeting the emissions target. Or the cynical brutes never had any intention of complying in the first place (Ms. Donnelly's belief).
The latter theory is credible. Mr. Chrétien wanted a PR win and got one with Kyoto. Kyoto is popular in Ontario and Quebec. It is supported by the NDP and the Bloc Québécois. More Canadians than not are proud that Canada is in Kyoto. Plus it gives them another reason to hate George W. Bush (never mind that Bill Clinton was the first president to step off the Kyoto bandwagon).
The Liberals may have also believed Canada would face no penalties for making a mockery of the Kyoto targets. Certainly, Ottawa has no obligation to fine Suncor and the other oil sands companies, or the owners of coal-fired electricity-generating plants, for their enthusiastic carbon dioxide output.
Prime Minister Stephen Harper has a problem, not least because Kyoto's fine print does in fact contain provisions for penalties, and scary ones too. In essence, other Kyoto members, such as Japan or the European Union, could impose trade sanctions on Canada for non-compliance. You could imagine the battle that would ensue. To get around the sanctions, Canada (or other naughty countries) might have to spend billions to buy greenhouse gas credits. Or they would have to crunch their industrial production, taking GDP and employment down with it.
What will the Tories do? It's hard to say at this stage. Federal research and spending programs related to climate change and energy conservation are being quietly shut down, though that does not necessarily mean the Tories have decided to kiss Kyoto goodbye. It may just be that the programs, such as EnerGuide, which subsidizes house furnace and insulation improvements, were never effective in the first place.
Also unclear is how fast, and under what conditions, the government can extract Canada from Kyoto if it chooses to go that route. It may take three years to get out. If so, Canada would leave during the early part of Kyoto's 2008 to 2012 initial reporting period, which might pose additional complications. If the rumours are correct, Mr. Harper and his environment minions are seeking legal counsel on how best to engineer a graceful exit.
Environment Minister Rona Ambrose is not granting interviews on the Tories' Kyoto plan, or lack thereof (like all cabinet ministers, she has been muzzled). In the past, she has said that Canada will stay in the Kyoto framework and is working on "made-in-Canada" solution. For his part, Mr. Harper has said Canada's emissions reduction target is impossible to meet. Confused? So, apparently, is the government.
Whether Canada is in or out of Kyoto is irrelevant as far as the health of the planet goes. That's because Mr. Harper's right -- meeting the cap is impossible. The only question now is the international price that Canada will pay, in terms of dollars, trade and reputation, to abandon Kyoto.
