4 min. read
An oil and gas giant drew unusual praise from a sustainable energy think tank last week for its “common sense” call for predictable environmental regulation.
In a speech to the Economic Club of Canada, Shell Canada president Lorraine Mitchelmore said the company would “welcome” new regulations — regulations the federal government has consistently failed to provide.
“The real choice is to lead in both energy and environment and to succeed as a country — or not,” she said. “You may accuse me of wanting it both ways, but I believe that one will only come with the other. That is the world in which we are living today. That is what I believe Canadians and the world are asking us to do.”
Ed Whittingham, president of the Pembina Institute, an Alberta-based sustainable energy think tank, applauded the executive’s candour on the issue.
“Her common sense comments were a breath of fresh air in the very polarized debate over oilsands development,” he told Postmedia’s Mike De Souza. “Let’s hope she inspires others in the energy sector, and in government, to also acknowledge that the public’s environmental concerns are valid and deserve addressing.”
This is not the first time industry has shown a willingness to participate in the climate change discussion that outstrips that of the federal government. Early in the year, Bloomberg News reported that companies such as Exxon Mobile, Total SA and Cenovus were feeling frustrated by the lack of clear direction on this pressing issue.
“At least with a tax, you know what you’re getting,” Guy Turner, Bloomberg's head of economics and commodities, said in an interview from London. “The cost is in effect fixed. Industry will be able to lobby for a rate of tax that it feels it can wear.”
The companies also expressed that a carbon tax would bring Canada in line with established European regulations, thereby opening new markets.
Meanwhile, in March of this year, a study by Ontario-based Sustainable Prosperity found many companies were already factoring a hypothetical “shadow carbon tax” of between $15 and $68 per tonne into their future projections.
Oil and gas regulation in Canada has been a long time coming.
"Successive Conservative environment ministers have pledged to deliver comprehensive climate change policies for nearly eight years, but have missed their deadlines to deliver a plan for the oil and gas sector,” De Souza wrote. “Mitchelmore said if new federal regulations were introduced, they would pressure companies to develop technologies, while sending a message to the world that Canada is doing its part to fight climate change."
The federal government promised new regulation when they pulled out of the Kyoto Accord in 2012 to the shock and disappointment of the international community. Back then the government promised to be “working toward draft regulations for 2013.”
Now, as 2013 comes to a close, Environment Minister Leona Aglukkaq has argued the implementation of new environmental regulations is too complex because it requires the cooperation of the provinces and territories.
“We want to get this right for Canada and when I’m ready to release this information that will be released publicly,” she said in response to questions from opposition New Democrats and Liberals at a parliamentary committee.
In October, Environment Canada estimated that with current measures in place greenhouse gas emissions will continue to rise. By 2020 they will reach 734 megatonnes, well above Canada’s goal of reducing greenhouse gas emissions to 612 megatonnes.
Alberta already has a carbon tax of $15 per tonne, although critics say the amount will have to rise significantly to be an effective deterrent against sky-rocketing emissions from the oil and gas industry in the province’s oilsands.
“What we know from other jurisdictions is that putting a price on pollution spurs innovation, creates certainty and can provide billions of dollars for the development of needed alternatives… ,” wrote environmental campaigner Tzeporah Berman this spring in The Globe and Mail. ”Most importantly it works to reduce the greenhouse gas emissions that are already degrading our life-support systems.”
Image Credit: Kris Krug via Flickr
