By Mike De Souza for the National Observer.

Erik Solheim doesn’t mince his words when it comes to industry giants that fail to embrace change in the global economy.

Solheim, a former Norwegian cabinet minister, is the new top boss of the United Nations Environment Programme. Speaking at an early-morning breakfast with a mixed crowd of environmental stakeholders, policy experts and media in Ottawa, he said that Canada’s fossil fuel companies need to take stock of what’s happening before it’s too late for them.

“Many of you will remember Kodak,” Solheim said at the event hosted by the Winnipeg-based International Institute for Sustainable Development. “They didn't believe in digital photography. Where is Kodak now? In industrial museums somewhere.”

Ottawa is the first stop on Solheim's tour of North America after he was appointed a few months ago as executive director of the UN agency based in Nairobi, Kenya.

His message was also delivered in a series of private meetings with federal cabinet ministers — Environment and Climate Change Minister Catherine McKenna, Global Affairs Minister Stéphane Dion and International Development Minister Marie-Claude Bibeau — and comes at a time when Canada’s energy debate has been hijacked by arguments about new pipelines to Canada’s east and west coasts.

“The world is full of companies that oppose change and many of them are out of business now.”

Solheim used the example of cell phone maker Nokia.

“Basically because they didn’t believe in touch screens," he said, drawing some chuckles from the room. "Steve Jobs believed in touch screens. The Koreans believed in touch screens. Nokia didn't believe in it and they are out.”

Energy companies, along with some business and union leaders say that new pipelines such as TransCanada Corp.'s Energy East, Kinder Morgan's Trans Mountain Expansion and Enbridge's Line 3 replacement are key to boosting fortunes for slumping oil and gas companies.

On the other side, many environmentalists, First Nations leaders and politicians are skeptical of the long-term economic benefits of new pipelines, while warning the projects pose unacceptable risk of oil spills and would push Canada’s climate change goals out of reach.

“If Canada doesn’t embrace change, it will lose,” he said. “For economic and environmental issues combined. Of course some fossil fuels will remain a source of energy for some time, but the changes are coming much faster than anticipated. The price of solar is going down much faster than anyone thought. And energy efficiency provides solutions to a lot of issues if we really embrace it. So embrace the change.”

Rumours circulating in Ottawa have spread across the country suggesting that Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s government wants to approve at least one major new pipeline project to support Alberta’s NDP government.

Some federal Liberals believe this would prevent Conservatives from regaining control of the oil-rich province, which is home to the oilsands, the world’s third largest reserve of oil — after Saudi Arabia and Venezuela — and Canada’s fastest growing source of greenhouse gas emissions.

Without weighing directly into the country’s pipeline debates, Solheim said Canadians would have to create space for Trudeau to make bold decisions.

“We need to make people out there (to be) enthusiastic because if there’s not a citizens movement, for (sustainable) development and environment it’s very difficult for political leaders to do it,” he said.

“I mean business leaders and political leaders, even if they are of the caliber of Mr. Trudeau, need the support of the people. So we must speak with people and make people enthusiastic for the environment.”

He also stressed the importance of working closely with businesses to encourage more leadership and solutions. He said that last year’s international climate summit in Paris achieved results because some important companies said they were willing to take action, recognizing the potential to make money and create jobs by seizing the green agenda.

“There has been a long-term view in the UN and in the development of the environmental community and fostered maybe by people like me, coming from the left, that business was something dirty, something you should be afraid of, rather than an enormous opportunity for change,” he said.

Solheim said he sees a fast-growing list of companies and countries that are leading the way to the future.

Image: Erik Solheim. Photo: Mattis Folkestad, NRK P3 via Flickr

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.

A diverse group of experts, scholars, First Nations and civil society organizations recently released a sweeping program that shows just how Canada can transition to a low-carbon society.

Building on a March 2015 report, Acting on Climate Change: Solutions from Canadian Scholars, a group of academics from Sustainable Canada Dialogues reached out to individuals and groups from across Canada in an attempt to engage society in the question of our low-carbon transition.

The result, Acting on Climate Change: Extending the Dialogue Among Canadians, brings together a broad range of insight from across the social and political spectrum.

The report comes on the heels of an open letter (attached below) to federal leaders, calling for a “national dialogue on climate change policy.” The letter, released by 60 academics with Sustainable Canada Dialogues, states a national conversation is needed “to identify socially acceptable transition pathways to a low-carbon society and economy.”

“We hope each party will enrich its position with ideas put forward by Canadians, before, during and after this election campaign, to restore Canada’s global leadership as a champion for the environment.”

Catherine Potvin, editor of the new report, writes 2015 is an important year for climate intervention.

“It is crucial to elect a federal government that has a climate action target with a coherent plan to achieve it,” Potvin states in the report’s foreword.

“I hope [this report] helps citizens make clear demands on their governments and believe in the future.”

First Nations Rights a Priority Concern

Among the report’s highlights is a submission by the First Nations of Quebec and Labrador Sustainable Development Institute that emphasizes the importance of First Nations political sovereignty in government-to-government relations.

“Considering the wide-ranging impacts that climate policies could have on the Aboriginal Title and Aboriginal and Treaty Rights of First Nations, in particular regarding the use of their territories, it is essential that First Nation governments be involved from the beginning in this dialogue,” the authors write.

The importance of First Nations constitutional and territory rights are critical when considering the role the extractive industries play on traditional lands and within the context of climate change.

Government and Industry Need to Seek Opportunities

A submission from the International Institute for Sustainable Development’s president Scott Vaughan questions the capacity for market mechanisms to adequately address the need for urgent climate action.

Vaughan, Canada’s former Environment Commissioner, argues a more intentional collaboration is needed between government and industry to spur low-carbon innovation.

Vaughn points out the “various rigidities” of the oil, gas and coal sectors when it comes to measuring performance and expenditures.

“Climate debates need to turn towards the opportunities,” Vaughan writes, “to accelerate zero-carbon energy options that benefit from a longer tradition of purposeful industrial policy.”

Workers Must be Considered in Low-Carbon Transition

Erik Bouchard-Boulianne from the Centrale des syndicats de Québec (CSQ), one of the largest trade unions in Quebec, said transitioning to a low-carbon economy will bring big changes to each of the provinces. 

“There will be winning sectors and losing sectors,” he said in an interview included in the report.

Bouchard-Boulianne pointed out that Quebec will benefit from a move away from oil, which represents a large portion of the province’s trade deficit. Quebec imported about $18 billion in petroleum products in 2014.

Alternatively, he points out that Alberta, as an oil-producing province, will be hit hardest in the transition.

The key to helping workers throughout this transition is implementing support programs like unemployment insurance and re-qualification training.

Bring Science Back

Science advocacy group Evidence for Democracy argues a low-carbon transition will require both scientific and political leadership.

“Integrity of science and evidence have an important role to play in not only facilitating this transition, but also providing the forecasting and monitoring skills necessary for adaptive management throughout the process.”

Evidence for Democracy recommends the federal government play a central role in reducing carbon emissions, increase funding support for scientists and monitoring programs, fund academic researchers engaged in non-commercial science and produce climate and emissions policies that are transparent and based on best available evidence.

Make it Count for Youth

Generation Squeeze, an organization that advocates for young Canadians, writes a low-carbon society should focus on “leav[ing] at least as much as we inherit.”

That will require the better use and collection of tax dollars, leading to the elimination of fossil fuel subsidies and putting a price on pollution, writes author Paul Kershaw.

“Generation Squeeze recommends that Sustainable Canada Dialogues contribute to telling a broader narrative about generational prosperity and intergenerational fairness.”

Charting Low-Carbon Pathways

The David Suzuki Foundation also contributed to the report, outlining Canada’s various opportunities to cut carbon including reducing the use of coal and prioritizing renewable energy, a sector that now contributes $12 billion to the Canadian economy.

As Canada heads to the UN climate summit, policy makers can look to domestic successes for carbon-reduction opportunities.

“When Canadians head to the polls in October, we are deciding who will represent us at the 2015 Paris Climate Summit and the vision they have for Canada’s role in acting on climate change,” Dr. Mark Stoddart, from Memorial University and one of 60 co-authors of Sustainable Canada’s Dialogues original climate action plan, said.

“Extending the Dialogue Among Canadians provides novel ideas that can inform the next federal government,” he said.

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.

It may come as a surprise to some that Alberta pioneered carbon pricing — not just in Canada, but for all of North America.

That’s right: the province with the fastest growing greenhouse gas emissions in Canada was the first place on the continent to put “polluter pays” legislation into place almost exactly eight years ago.

“Even back in 2007, Alberta was getting pressure over its environmental management, particularly of the oilsands. This may have been in response to that,” Matt Horne, associate B.C. director at the Pembina Institute, told DeSmog Canada.

Since then, three other provinces have joined the carbon pricing club: British Columbia with a carbon tax and Quebec and Ontario with cap and trade.

Each system is meant to, in theory, shrink provincial carbon footprints while allowing economies to remain strong and competitive. (If you want to totally geek out on the differences between Canada's carbon pricing systems, check this paper out).

With support for a national carbon pricing system growing, Canada need look no further than these provinces to learn some lessons. So, let's start with the first: Alberta.

Canada’s First Carbon Price: The Alberta Carbon Levy [view:in_this_series=block_1]

Although a pioneering system, Alberta’s carbon levy or Specified Gas Emitters Regulation (SGER) has not been effective in decreasing emissions in the province.

The carbon levy goes after the big emitters in the province — those producing more than 100,000 tonnes of GHG emissions. Mainly oilsands operations and coal-fired power plants — which make up roughly 50 per cent of the province’s total carbon footprint — fall into this category.

Rather than requiring emitters to make overall reductions in GHG emissions, the Alberta system requires a 12 per cent reduction in GHG-intensity of their product.

That means that as long as a project or facility produces 12 per cent less GHG emissions per dollar or barrel of bitumen than it did in the baseline year, the overall carbon footprint of that project is free to grow.

“Alberta’s system is an intensity-based system, which means you can potentially increase your total emissions as long as your intensity goes down,” Philip Gass, a senior researcher at the International Institute for Sustainable Development, said.

Companies unable to make the 12 per cent reduction in energy intensity pay a $15 levy per tonne of GHG emissions.

Source: Pembina Institute

The Alberta system also allows for carbon offsets — the option to purchase the right to emit from other large emitters that have met their reduction targets. 

However, the flexibility provided to polluters in Alberta is both the system’s strength and weakness.

“The short answer is Alberta’s carbon levy has not been effective,” Horne said.

“But that is not an indictment of the system itself. The problem stems from the relatively weak parameters they’ve used to populate it.”

Alberta’s carbon levy may need to toughen up as international pressure to limit emissions grows.  

As the world prepares for the upcoming UN climate summit in late 2015, some countries have turned their attention to the oilsands, asking how Canada plans to curtail the resource’s growing emissions. A recent report argues development of the oilsands stands at odds with Canada’s climate targets.  

For more on Alberta's carbon levy read How Carbon Pricing Currently Works in Alberta from the Pembina Institute. For a more detailed analysis of the levy read Andrew Leach's analysis in the Canadian Tax Journal (pdf).

Image Credit: Kris Krug

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.

Several provincial initiatives to reduce greenhouse gas emissions are closing the gap created by the federal government’s continuing lack of climate legislation. This patchwork of provincial policies may be the future of climate policy in Canada, according to a review of Canadian climate or carbon policy in 2013.

“If we have learned anything about carbon policy in Canada, it is that top-down national systems are lost to the federation and we need to embrace bottom-up subnational systems,” argues the review released recently by the prestigious International Institute for Sustainable Development (IISD) in Winnipeg.

The Institute found in 2013 the federal government’s will to implement greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions reducing regulations “evaporated," but several Canadian provinces had “major successes” in adopting measures to reduce their own provincial carbon footprints. BC’s carbon tax, Quebec’s cap and trade system and Ontario phasing out coal-fired power plants are a few highlights of 2013 filling the lack of federal climate policy gap mentioned in the report.

“In 2012 the carbon policy Lego was strewn across the floor waiting to be built. In 2013 we walked on it with bare feet. Looking forward to 2014, one has to wonder if the Lego will be put back in the box and forgotten in the basement until yet another federal plan emerges. In the meantime, look to the provinces to take it upon themselves to start building something from all of the pieces,” concludes the report.

Eighty-four percent of Canadians want the federal government to take action on climate change according to a November 2013 survey.

Climate Policy Highlights in 2013

The year of 2013 was a dismal for federal climate policy in Canada. The federal government quietly admitted to the U.N. Canada was nowhere near meeting its weak GHG reduction targets for 2020. Prime Minister Stephen Harper announced Canada’s long awaited oil-and-gas sector emissions regulations were years away from becoming a reality. Many had hoped the Harper government would implement those regulations to win over U.S. President Barrack Obama on the Keystone XL pipeline at the very least.

But the year was not all bad according to the IISD report.

While the federal government in Ottawa may loathe the idea of a carbon tax east of the Rockies, B.C. decided in 2013 to keep its successful and popular carbon tax going. The price on emissions will remain at $30 per tonne as well. B.C. also decided to extend its Clean Energy Vehicle Incentive, which offers up to $5,000 off on the purchase of electric, hybrid or natural gas powered vehicles.

Back in Ontario, (in Toronto, not Ottawa) premier Kathleen Wynne announced in 2013 the shut down of all coal-fired power plants in the province will be complete by the end of this year. The Institute describes this as the “single largest regulatory action in North America” to reduce GHG emissions. Wynne followed this up with a bill to ban the use of coal for power generation in the province in the future.

And in Quebec, the province launched its cap and trade system – trading permits on allowable GHG emissions – last year. Quebec linked its system with California’s successful cap and trade system to create a bigger market to trade permits. Hopes are high that the Quebec-California emissions trading market will serve as an example for other provinces and states to use this market-based approach to reducing GHG emissions.

“Learning from our provincial policy labs and building on successes now need to be ongoing objectives of those helping to shape future policy,” IISD argues in the report.

The report also commends the actions taken by other provinces in 2013. Newfoundland and Labrador's guaranteeing a $5 billion loan for the Muskrat Falls hydroelectric project and Nova Scotia’s approval of the Maritime Link – Nova Scotia buying water power from Labrador – were “major milestones in energy development in 2013." Even Alberta received recognition for reviewing how the province could make its oil and gas emissions regulations stricter.

Provincial Patchwork Policy Could Be the Future of Canadian Climate Policy

The IISD argues in absence of a unified national climate policy a fragmented climate policy made up of a “patchwork” of provincial policies is emerging in Canada.

“Against this backdrop of federal inaction and provincial patchwork, it is perhaps time to embrace policy fragmentation within the federation. The path forward for 2014 and beyond is therefore one of seeking provincial alignment to minimize long-term administrative and compliance costs,” states the report.

A fragmented provincial policies approach in the absence of federal policy is not a new concept to Canada. Canada’s current health care system of free and accessible health coverage for all Canadians was adopted by Saskatchewan before the federal government would even consider it.

The trick for an effective patchwork climate policy, according to the Institute, will be to find commonalities and linkages in the various provincial policies so they can work in cooperation with one another. 

Image Credit: International Institute for Sustainable Development Policy Brief

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.

It took a solid year of outrage from Canadian researchers, the international science community and the public to force the Harper government to finally agree to transfer the world-renowned Experimental Lakes Area (ELA) to a non-profit organization.

And then the Minister of Fisheries and Oceans tried to take credit for today's announced signing of a crucial Memorandum of Understanding with the Winnipeg-based International Institute for Sustainable Development (IISD).

“The Harper government was being hammered on this from every conceivable angle before they finally buckled,” said Diane Orihel, PhD student at University of Alberta and founder of the Coalition to Save ELA.

The ELA is 45 year old freshwater research facility in northern Ontario considered unique in the world. It was there that Canadian scientists discovered the dangers of acid rain as well as mercury and phosphorus pollution. Regulations that protect the health of the environment in Canada many countries are based on the work done at the ELA.

Claiming a need for austerity the Harper government slashed the budgets of Fisheries and Oceans and Environment Canada last year. The ELA cost the federal government just $2 million a year to operate but it was shuttered March 31st.

For comparison, it cost Canadians $1 million to ship Stephen Harper's armoured limo and SUV to India for a state visit last November.

“This transfer is only happening because independent scientists asked the IISD to try and convince the government to make it happen,” Orihel told DeSmog.

Only a few days ago scientists called on the Harper government to allow access to the ELA to continue world’s longest, whole-lake eutrophication experiment. That experiment is fully funded and crucial to understand the causes of economically devastating algal blooms in freshwater lakes such as Lake Erie she said.

The transfer is not a done deal, many issues remain outstanding however.

“It's a big step forward. The ELA does critically important science for Canada and the rest of the world,” Scott Vaughan, CEO and president of IISD, an internationally respected public policy research institute.

“Saving the ELA is the right thing to do,” Vaughan told DeSmog.

The best part of today's MOU is an agreement to allow scientists back into the ELA to continue their research for balance of the year. Present and future liability, staffing, remediation responsibilities and other legal matters still need to be negotiated. However Fisheries and Oceans are working to address a number of issues with the intent of turning over the ELA to IISD in good shape he said.

Finding $2 million to run the ELA is “a big challenge” for the non-profit IISD that has to fundraise for its core operations. “We didn't take this on lightly,” he acknowledged.

Freshwater and climate change is major part of IISD's work but the organization can't provide good policy advice without good science such as that provided by researchers at the ELA he said.

While Orihel is happy she'll be back at the ELA continuing her research this year, she is disappointed no new research programs will be permitted. One of those ready to go was designed to investigate the environmental impacts of nanosilver particles found in products like food containers, socks, shoe inserts, sports clothing and towels. Nanosilver particles are smaller than a virus and lab research has shown they can mutate fish embryos.

It says a lot about what is happening in Canada that in order to save an invaluable scientific resource it has to be taken out of the hands of government she said.

“A year ago I would never believed I would say I'm delighted the ELA will soon be freed from the shackles of our federal government.”

Image Credit: Diane Orihel via twitter @DianeOrihel.

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.

Canada's crown jewel of environmental research may yet survive the Harper government. Ontario Premier Kathleen Wynne announced yesterday the province would work with Winnipeg's International Institute for Sustainable Development (IISD) to keep the world-renowned Experimental Lakes Area open.

The 45 year old freshwater research facility in northern Ontario considered unique in the world was closed March 31st over protests from the scientific community and the public.

“Premier Wynne's announcement is most welcome but this is far, far from over,” said Diane Orihel, PhD student at University of Alberta and the founder of the Coalition to Save ELA.

“It's wonderful that IISD will lead but they don't have the $2 million to keep the ELA open. There will need to be a huge fundraising effort involving provincial governments, university and industry,” Orihel told DeSmog.

The investment will be more than worth it given the history.

Research done at the ELA warned the world about the dangers of acid rain as well as mercury and phosphorus pollution. Regulations that protect the health of the environment in Canada many countries are based on the work done at the ELA.

The United States just recently tightened regulations on mercury emissions coming from coal plants because of research at the ELA proved that if those emissions are reduced, mercury levels that make fish like trout risky to eat decline.

"We proved that if emissions are reduced mercury levels in fish decline fairly quickly," said Orihel who has spent 10 years at the ELA.

"That research couldn't have been done anywhere else."

The US paid for the mercury research and although Environment Canada has access to the data and long promised tighter regulations, it still has not acted Orihel said. 

The ELA is an outdoor lab with 58 lakes where researchers can experiment on an entire lake while comparing results to nearby lakes. This type of large-scale and decades long experimentation cannot be done anywhere else she said.

It costs $2 million a year to keep the ELA running. That's much less than 1% of the Department of Fisheries budget says Carol Kelly, a retired University of Manitoba ecologist who has done research there for more than 30 years.

An important experiment to determine the environmental impacts of nanosilver was fully funded and ready to go this year at the ELA. "We don't know what these tiny nanoparticles will do in environment and they're already in a lot of products," Kelly said in an interview.

Hundreds of products including food containers, socks, shoe inserts, sports clothing and towels are sold as ‘anti-bacterial’ or ‘odour controlling' now contain nanosilver particles that are smaller than a virus. Lab research has shown they can mutate fish embryos.

"We know nanosilver particles are getting into rivers and lakes but we don't know what they are doing to fish or other species," she said.

The ELA is the best place in the world to do this research. It makes no sense to close and government officials have never offered a credible reason for doing it said Kelly.

The only reason for the closure is to keep Canadians from knowing about the risks of new products like nano-silver or emissions of chemicals from the tar sands said Orihel.

"If public doesn't know then they won't fight for regulations to protect them."

A year ago most Canadians had never heard of the ELA. Now surveys show that 75% know about it and most, no matter what party they voted for, want the ELA to stay open she said.

“I hope the Harper government will co-operate and make this a quick and relatively painless transition.”

Image Credit: DFO.

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.