Reading Environment Commissioner Julie Gelfand’s report on Canada’s climate action, we’d have to say that the woman sounds … ticked.

Here are five reasons Gelfand is wagging a disappointed finger at Canada’s environment officials.

1. Never met a climate target I actually…met

Canada has introduced several climate targets during the last 25 years but has failed to meet a single one.

As Gelfand puts it, “Since 1992, the government has repeatedly promised to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, adapt to the impacts of climate change, and support clean energy technology. However, since then, Canada has missed two separate emission reduction targets and is likely to miss the 2020 target as well; in fact, emissions have increased by over 15 percent.”

What are the details?

Canada set its first target, to reduce annual emissions to 613 megatonnes (Mt) by 2000, at the Rio Earth Summit in 1992. In 2000, Canada was 20 per cent over the mark.

In 2005 the Kyoto Protocol aimed to reduce emissions to 576 Mt by 2012. Canada missed that target by 25 per cent.

In 2012 the Copenhagen Accord aimed to cut emissions to 620 Mt by 2020. That target was replaced by the Paris Agreement, which aims to reduce Canada’s emissions to 524 Mt by 2030.

According to Environment and Climate Change Canada’s own estimates, Canada will emit 814 Mt of carbon dioxide equivalent per year by 2030 — that’s 55 per cent over the target.

2. Climate Action Plan. We’ve done a lot of work on the plan part.

Gelfand’s audit found that when it comes to actually implementing plans to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, Canada keeps kicking the can down the road.

On implementing regulatory changes, for example, “the federal government has yet to do much of the hard work that is required to bring about this fundamental shift,” Gelfand wrote.

“Instead of developing a detailed action plan to reach the 2020 target for reducing emissions, the government changed its focus to the 2030 target.”

The government has failed to actually implement new greenhouse gas regulations, like methane emission rules, “thereby losing opportunities to achieve real reductions in emissions,” Gelfand said.

Last year Canada did announce the Pan-Canadian Framework on Clean Growth and Climate Change, which calls for policies aimed at reducing emissions in a number of sectors.

“It is crucial that the government turn its plan into actions,” Gelfand said.

3. Climate adaptation? That’s a movie with Nicolas Cage, right?

The government is also nowhere near ready to adapt to the impacts of climate change, according to Gelfand. According to recent research, Canada can expect more frequent and severe storms, droughts, floods and fires as a result of a warming climate.

Canada has done very little to prepare for this new reality. That’s despite the fact a 2011 report by the National Round Table on the Environment and the Economy estimated every dollar spent now on adaptation will result in $9 to $38 worth of avoided damages.

In 2011 Environment and Climate Change Canada developed a Federal Adaptation Policy Framework, but then did nothing to actually implement it or work with departments to identify what climate risks actually mean.

Gelfand found only five of 19 departments and agencies analyzed have fully assessed their climate change risks and taken action to address them. The other 11 have “taken little or no action to address risks that could hinder their ability to deliver programs and services to Canadians. “This means that the government does not have a complete picture of the risks it faces from climate change. If Canada is to adapt to a changing climate, much stronger leadership is needed.”

Five Reasons Canada’s Environment Commissioner Gave Ottawa a Failing Grade on #Climate https://t.co/tlA15WR62x #cdnpoli @cathmckenna

— DeSmog Canada (@DeSmogCanada) October 10, 2017

4. Well shucks, you’re right! We DID promise to phase out fossil fuel subsidies…

The federal government simply doesn’t have a solid strategy for eliminating fossil fuel subsidies, Gelfand found.

In 2009 Canada promised to eliminate inefficient fossil fuel subsidies but has so far done none of the leg work to identify what exemptions, tax breaks or funds fall into that bucket.

In fact, a 2017 spring report to Parliament from the federal auditor general found “a disconcerting lack of real results when [looking] at what the government had been doing” to meet that commitment, Gelfand noted in her report.

“We found that the Department of Finance Canada and Environment and Climate Change Canada — the two departments tasked with delivering on this commitment — had yet to determine which subsidies would require phasing out, according to the commitment,” Gelfand wrote.

“It is unclear how Canada will meet this international commitment by 2025 without a clear roadmap to get there.”

5. What do you mean climate change is here? NOW?

Canada warmed at twice the global average between 1948 and 2007.

And according to a 2016 federal auditor general report, disaster funds released through the Disaster Financial Assistance Arrangements in the previous six years is greater that all funds released in the previous 39 years.

Gelfand said Canada has been stuck in a “seemingly endless planning mode” and Parliamentarians are ready to move “into an action mode.”

But she adds, “that shift needs to happen, and it needs to happen now, because Canada is already experiencing the impacts of a changing climate.”

On a positive note, Canada does seem to be making progress on clean energy investments. Yaaaaaay?

The Narwhal’s reporters are telling environment stories you won’t read about anywhere else. Stay in the loop by signing up for our free weekly dose of independent journalism.

If Saudi Arabia’s oil minister’s dire warning about high-cost energy producers didn’t effectively get the message across that Canada needs to adjust to a new market reality, perhaps a new warning by the International Energy Agency (IEA) might.   “We are likely to see continued capacity increases (in) the near term, with growth slowing considerably, if not coming to a complete standstill, after the projects under construction are completed,” the IEA said in an oil market overview published Monday.   According to the IEA, Canada’s oil era may be coming to an end due to dramatically low prices, increasing environmental concerns, a lack of public support for pipelines and evolving climate policies.   In an in-depth review of Canada’s energy portfolio and policies released Thursday, the agency urged Canada to adopt strong climate goals as it considers future energy production.   “As a leading exporter of oil, coal, natural gas, uranium and hydropower, Canada is a cornerstone of global energy markets and energy security,” IEA Executive Director Fatih Birol said as he presented the report, Energy Policies of IEA Countries – Canada 2015.

At the COP21 climate summit Canada committed to the Paris Agreement, which seeks to limit global temperature increases to two degrees Celsius. The treaty, signed by nearly 200 nations, also aims for a major decarbonization of the world’s economy by 2050.

Under the previous federal government Canada pledged to cut emissions by 30 per cent below 2005 levels by 2030 although a recent Environment and Climate Change Canada report revealed Canada is not on track to meet that target in large part due to rising emissions from the oil and gas sector.   “We very much welcome that the new federal government is collaborating closely with provinces and territories to turn Canada’s COP21 climate pledges into concrete energy policies,” Birol said Thursday.   Federal-Provincial Climate Collaboration Still in Question 

Since the agency last reviewed Canada’s energy policy in 2009, Canada has made some climate-friendly changes, most notably through the shuttering of major coal-fired power plants.   However, Canada’s long-running lack of federal greenhouse gas regulations has negatively influenced the oil and gas industry, the report notes. The agency recommends Canada “reduce uncertainty for investors and project developers by setting a clear timeline for the implementation of federal GHG regulations.”   The report also noted Canada has yet to put in place a mechanism for working with the provinces to align climate goals.   The federal government will meet with provincial environment ministers early next month to discuss how Canada will collectively work towards its climate targets.   According to Erin Flanagan, policy expert with the Pembina Institute, how Canada will craft a national energy framework remains a question.

“One of the things the federal government talked about is using Canada's climate target as a floor instead of a ceiling,” Flanagan said in an interview at the COP21 climate talks. Canada's climate target requires reducing emissions 30 per cent relative to 2005 levels by 2030.

But, she added, what that means on a provincial level remains unclear. This could lead to complications with provinces like Alberta that have just unveiled new climate leadership plans.

In November Alberta promised to phase out its 18 coal-fired power plants, introduce a carbon tax to match B.C.’s $30/tonne price and to put a cap on oilsand’s emissions. The province’s plan did not guarantee absolute emissions reductions by 2030 or acknowledge how the provincial plan will fit within federal targets.

The provincial government's climate panel “provided a pathway to reach emissions stabilization 2030,” Flanagan said. “So there will need to be additional conversations now about what Alberta’s contribution to a national target will be.”

Low Oil Prices Won’t Last Forever

Canada’s oil-dependent economy has been significantly impacted by a major downturn in oil prices. As Canadian crude prices have fallen to record lows, Alberta has lost 63,000 jobs, according to Natural Resources Minister Jim Carr.   Today’s report notes that although the Canadian economy is heavily reliant on the energy industry — about 10 per cent of the national GDP is due to oil and gas production — the country has the opportunity to diversify its energy mix by investing in clean energy.   “Canada is in a strong position to foster innovation and become a leader in clean energy technologies,” the report states. “This will contribute to reducing the environmental impact of energy use and production, as well as the cost of natural resource development, notably for oil-sands operations.”   The agency states that Canada needs to shift investment and policy to support clean energy technologies.   A September report by Clean Energy Canada found that the value of clean energy projects in Canada approached $11 billion in 2014, although suffered from a lack of government investment and policy support.   “The news on clean energy is good, but with federal leadership, it could be terrific,” Clean Energy Canada executive director Merran Smith told DeSmog Canada at the time of publication.   “Unlike Washington, Ottawa’s pretty much been ignoring this sector. We hope and expect this report will serve as a flashing neon sign for federal parties: There’s a huge opportunity here; get on board and show us what you can do.”   The IEA report acknowledges that current oil market conditions provide an opportunity to turn investment interest towards alternative energy.   “While today’s low oil prices may drag down returns and pressure future investment, these conditions will not last forever,” Birol said.   “By ensuring responsible energy production and use, Canada can continue to develop its resources while balancing economic and sustainability goals.”

Image: Kris Krug, DeSmog Canada

The Narwhal’s reporters are telling environment stories you won’t read about anywhere else. Stay in the loop by signing up for our free weekly dose of independent journalism.