This is a guest post by Tzeporah Berman, Adjunct Professor York University Faculty of Environmental Studies and longtime environmental advocate. A shorter version of this piece originally appeared on the Toronto Star.

The debate over energy, oilsands and pipelines in Canada is at best dysfunctional and at worst a twisted game that is making public relations professionals and consultants on all sides enormous amounts of money.

Documents obtained through Freedom of Information routinely show our own government hiding scientific reports or meeting secretly to craft PR strategies with the companies they are supposed to regulate, while millions of dollars are spent on ads trying to convince Canadians that the oilsands are like peanut butter and that without them our hospitals will close. *(See change notice at end of article.)

On the other side we march, we rally and we point fingers creating a narrative of exclusion and moral high-ground while acting as though a low carbon transition is going to be a walk in the park.

Enough.

Recently the people of Alberta voted for a change and got a progressive majority government that is not only acknowledging the urgent need to address our climate challenge but is also committing to a new partnership with First Nations, many of whom are in court over the impacts of oilsands expansion to the their Treaty rights — to wildlife, air, water and a safe climate.  And then this month our Prime Minister Harper was forced to acknowledge the critical need for the decarbonisation of our economy.  

It’s time for a new, honest conversation in Canada.

It’s time to recognize that the oilsands are, in fact, a technological marvel that took great Canadian ingenuity and acumen. It’s also time to acknowledge that when we began the exploration of the oilsands we did not know what we know today.

We didn’t understand the cumulative impacts on our disappearing caribou populations, the toxic impact on our lakes and fish, the human health impacts of air and water pollution. We didn’t know that carbon trapped in our atmosphere would create climate impacts as severe as we currently face — the droughts, the floods, the wildfires, the rising intensity and frequency of violent storms. Now we do.

Keeping Canada’s total emissions within a carbon budget that is consistent with our climate commitments while allowing oilsands production to grow as projected would require extraordinary disruption and hardship in the rest of the country.

In order for all of us to see this challenge as a collective challenge, to truly work together and not just move around the deck chairs on the Titanic, we need to face some simple but hard truths:

Basic math shows us that it would mean that every single vehicle in the country has to be electric and run on renewable energy. Or that British Columbia, all the Atlantic provinces and the territories have zero emissions. Honest math shows us that since 1990, Alberta has contributed 73 per cent of Canada’s GHG emission growth, and Saskatchewan 29 per cent, while both Ontario and Quebec have reduced emissions.

I can already hear the arguments for inaction “But Canada’s emissions are only a small part of global emissions."  

Yet Canada is one of the worlds top 10 polluters and, when taking into account emissions from land use and forestry, the World Resources Institute ranks Canada as the highest per capita polluter in the world. 

The hard truth is the oilsands are the fastest growing source of emissions in Canada and Environment Canada projects with current technology and development plans oilsands emissions will more than double over the next decade.

The path to decarbonisation does not come from expanding the fossil fuel industry. I have met many in industry who argue that if Canada doesn’t expand the oilsands, the oil will just come from somewhere else. Not only does that argument deny the impact of disruptive technologies (electric vehicles, lithium-ion batteries, etc.) will have on demand for oil, it is also an incredibly low bar for moral leadership.

Might as well mine and drill more even though we now know the majority of the world’s scientists and the World Bank have warned we need to stop expanding fossil fuel production because if we don’t someone else will. Is this the best we can do in a time of global crisis?

Isn’t that kind of like trying to justify selling arms to corrupt governments? “Look if we don’t sell it to them someone else will.”

The more pipelines we build, the more projects we bring online the greater the challenge we are creating for ourselves. We need to do everything we can to avoid new infrastructure that locks us in longer to a fossil fuel economy. Our leadership will inspire others and contribute to greater market certainty for renewable energy, electric cars and other innovative technologies.

Yes many of us still use gasoline to fill our cars, we fly in planes and we will continue to for many years. We need to recognize that that will not change overnight and the oilsands will not shut down tomorrow.

There is a long and difficult road in front of us of retraining, of building new clean energy infrastructure, reducing oil demand through efficiency, scaling up public transportation and electrifying transport.

That will take time and we need to ensure that people are not thrown out of work and we do not destabilize capital markets. That requires serious transition planning and it’s not going to be easy or comfortable. It is in fact going to be messy and complicated. We are going to all have to let go of our black and white ‘truths’ and be willing to muck about in ‘grey’ together.

I believe Canadians are up for the challenge. That we have the ingenuity, the knowledge and the creativity to lead a new path forward.

In fact, I suspect that for the majority of Canadians, debating solutions, timelines, the pace and scale of the transition out of the oilsands over time, having the real, hard honest conversations, will be a relief.

* This article originally included a reference to ads trying to convince Canadians that the oilsands are as toxic as peanut butter. Those ads actually compared the consistency, not the toxicity, of oilsands to peanut butter.

Image Credit: Pembina Institute

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.

An estimated 25,000 took to the streets of Quebec City Saturday to protest the federal government’s lack of leadership on climate change and unfaltering support for increased production in the Alberta oilsands.

“Our message is simple — yes to climate equals no to the tar sands,” Christian Simard, executive direct of Nature Quebec, said. Nature Quebec along with Greenpeace, Equiterre and the David Suzuki Foundation and other eastern Canadian environmental groups organized the demonstration — already being called the largest climate protest in Canada's history.

Demonstrators filled the streets of Quebec City’s historic quarter demanding the nation's premiers be climate leaders and reject proposed pipeline projects like TransCanada’s Energy East and Kinder Morgan’s TransMountain.

“We don’t want to see the premiers under the cover of a national energy strategy agreeing to help Alberta expand the tar sands. A national energy strategy needs also to be a climate strategy,” Adam Scott, climate and energy program manager at Environmental Defence Canada, told DeSmog Canada.

All premiers will be in Quebec City next week, save Nova Scotia's Stephen McNeil, for the annual premiers’ summit.

Update April 15: B.C. premier Christy Clark and Alberta premier Jim Prentice also declined to attend the climate summit. For details on the province's role in the summit read our DeSmog Canada Primer: How is Your Province Acting on Climate? A Primer for the Premier's Climate Summit.

Discussions on new oil pipeline projects will feature prominently during this year’s meeting which has the sole focus of addressing climate change. The oilsands and pipeline industry has run up against roadblocks in recent years in British Columbia, the United States and now Quebec while seeking public approval for major projects designed to export oilsands bitumen to international markets.

Thousands march on the streets of Quebec City. Photo: Derek Leahy

“Quebec and Ontario are facing the prospect of the largest tar sands pipeline in North America in Energy East. Ontario and Quebec need to decide if they will take climate change seriously and say no to Energy East,” Scott told DeSmog Canada.

Ontario premier Kathleen Wynne and Quebec premier Philippe Couillard have both professed a desire to be ‘climate leaders.’ Both also support the 1.1 million barrels-a-day Energy East pipeline expected to travel through their provinces.  

The turnout in Quebec City for the ‘Act on Climate’ march may be an indicator Wynne and Coulliard, by supporting Energy East, may find their positions offside in their respective provinces. According to a recent poll, one in two Canadians are against the west-to-east pipeline project.

“There is no compromise between climate change and tar sands expansion — it is just not possible,” Simard told DeSmog Canada.

A new report released this week by Environmental Defence and Greenpeace argues it is highly unlikely Canada can meet any greenhouse gas emission reduction targets and grow the oilsands at the same time. If the oilsands continue to grow, by 2020 Alberta will produce as much greenhouse gas emissions as B.C., Ontario and Quebec combined. Alberta compromises only eleven per cent of Canada’s total population.

“It’s ridiculous that politicians claim to want to address climate change while also wanting tar sands production to grow. These are totally incompatible goals,” Dale Marshall, national program manager at Environmental Defence and co-author of the report, said.

Act on Climate rally. Photo: Derek Leahy

As part of the upcoming United Nations climate talks in Paris this year, Canada was suppose to table plans on how the country will make deep reductions in emissions output. No such plans surfaced from Ottawa. South of the border, the U.S. and Mexico agreed to a joint task force on climate policy. Canada decline to participate in that agreement.

“We march today for a Canada we can be proud of again. It’s time for climate policy to be developed in Ottawa, not in the oil patch,” Tzeporah Berman, co-founder of ForestEthics, said.

Photo: Derek Leahy

Students groups, First Nations, unions and other segments of civil society all participated in today’s march.

Image Credit: Derek Leahy

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.

During the first three parts in this series, I found that becoming a 100 per cent renewable energy region is mostly possible, but when it comes to long-distance trucking, shipping and flying it will need some technological breakthroughs, supported by regional and international cooperation.

But so what?

We could become an 80 per cent or 90 per cent renewable energy region on our own provincial efforts, and a government that chose to make it a priority could play a powerful leadership role in helping the world to tackle the larger problems that we’ll need to overcome to get to 100 per cent.

We need such leadership urgently. Climate change is already hitting communities and entire states with dramatic forest fires, superstorms, and 1000-year floods or droughts —and it’s only going to get worse. In mid-August, a senior NASA water scientist estimated that the entire state of California could run out of water within 12 to 18 months.[view:in_this_series=block_1]

“Without a few successive winters of above-average precipitation,” he wrote, “we have only enough water in storage to get through the next 12 to 18 months, and that's it.”

And the impacts we are witnessing today are the result of carbon emissions from fossil fuels and forests that were burned forty years ago, back in the 1970s. In forty years time, our children and grandchildren will reap the storms that we are priming today whenever we drive into town or turn up the oil- or gas-fired heat.

If we can’t yet get to 100 per cent, what will it take to reach 80 per cent or 90 per cent? That’s the critical question. We need major change on three levels:

LEVEL ONE: WIDESPREAD POPULAR MOBILIZATION

In spite of the growing crisis, we have not seen much climate mobilization in B.C. —nowhere near the level needed to educate voters and make stronger government action possible. The current campaigns against oilsands bitumen pipelines are the closest we get as a proxy for climate action. The Dogwood Initiative’s pursuit of a ‘Let B.C. Vote’ citizens’ initiative to demonstrate that most people do not want the Enbridge pipeline has all the indicators of success, with 211,000 signed up supporters and thousands of trained volunteers.

The secrets to their success, as well as hard work, are a black and white issue and a clear and simple ‘ask.’ Tackling climate change and achieving 100 per cent renewable energy is so much more complicated — it covers a host of issues from buildings and transportation to fossil fuels extraction, forest management, farming, and even the food we eat.

It’s kind of complex.

We don’t all need to become policy wonks to cut through the complexity, however. We just need to assemble a powerful package of actions; give it clear, strong branding; persuade prominent people and organizations to endorse it; and choose a window to launch.

With a clear ask in hand we could mobilize thousands of people to write letters, pick up the phone, and push for action. Prior to an election, we could contact every candidate to see if they supported the package, and they would use their influence to turn it into reality.

Effective mobilization to make B.C. a 100 per cent renewable energy region will need far more than a one-time shot, however. It will need a whole army of people who will continue to push for action over an extended period of time.

LEVEL TWO: EFFECTIVE ACTIONS

What kind of actions could the government embrace? We already have a small but effective carbon tax, and willing participation in the Low Carbon and Renewable Energy Fuel Standards; we have a municipal Climate Action Charter signed by 180 of B.C.’s 188 municipalities, who are moving ahead with many initiatives; and we have a carbon neutral commitment being pursued by hospitals, schools, colleges and local governments across the province. We had a government-led climate launch in 2007, but maybe we need a re-launch every three or four years, to keep us focused and on the ball.

As a beginning, the package of actions to make B.C. a 100 per cent renewable energy region might include the following:

BUILDINGS

• 20 per cent of the energy used in B.C.’s buildings could be required to be renewable by 2020, as they are requiring in Europe. We could go further, making it 80 per cent by 2025 and 100 per cent by 2030.
• All new buildings could be required to be super-efficient and zero carbon, as Britain requires by 2019.
• All existing buildings could be required to be upgraded for greater energy efficiency and zero carbon energy before sale, following the example that Berkeley and San Francisco have shown since 1980.
• All multi-unit residential buildings could be required to undergo an energy efficiency audit every ten years, with low-interest loans for landlords and condo-owners to help with the cost of a retrofit.  

TRANSPORTATION

• There could be multi-million dollar grants to local governments for progress on safe cycling and public transit, funded by an increased carbon tax and selective road-tolls.
• There could be major support for electric vehicles and EV charging infrastructure, following Norway's example, with tax-breaks, cash incentives, free parking and free ferry rides throughout the province.
• B.C. and the Pacific Coast Collaborative could embrace Europe’s ever-advancing standard for reduced CO2 from new vehicles, pushing towards zero grams of CO2 per kilometre by 2030.
• B.C.’s vehicle insurance could change to be based on the annual distance travelled, providing a financial incentive to travel fewer miles.
• Every railway line in B.C. could be electrified.
• New railway opportunities could be opened up, including the Interurban line from New Westminster to Chilliwack.
• Every trucking company in B.C. could be encouraged to join a load-sharing network to reduce costs and emissions.

ECONOMY

• There could be a steady annual increase in the carbon tax, with the new income being used to support actions that help shift our energy-use from fossil fuels to renewables, instead of being returned as a tax-break.
• The progress of B.C.’s economy could be measured in terms of Genuine Progress towards greater happiness and sustainability, alongside the existing measure of GDP, which assumes that money spent on divorce, deforestation and disaster cleanup is just as beneficial as money spent on positive activities.

FOSSIL FUELS

• All proposals for new fossil fuel pipelines and rail transportation could be rejected.
• B.C.’s coal mining and natural gas extraction industries could be steadily phased out, with support being given to retrain workers and re-invigorate affected communities.
• Fugitive methane emissions from B.C.’s oil, gas and coal industries could be taxed on a comparable basis to the carbon tax.

The full list could be much longer—enough to give all but the bravest brain-freeze. The magic is in the packaging, the endorsements, and the evidence that the actions will create jobs and direct B.C.’s economy into a better future, using renewable energy in place of fossil fuels.

We need to turn people’s minds away from the mistaken belief that without fossil fuels the economy will collapse—that “there is no alternative,” to use the infamous phrase. There is in fact a great alternative, which promises a far healthier, more resilient, more sustainable future. Maybe TIAGA! (There Is A Great Alternative!) would be cool branding.

LEVEL THREE: STRONG GOVERNMENT COMMITMENT

The third level of change that’s needed is strong government commitment, backed by MLAs and ministers who have a really good grasp of the logic, the numbers and the costs and benefits of a shift to 100 per cent renewable energy as a primary response to the climate crisis. We need to give our political leaders real confidence about the prospects for a strong green economy, so that they have the green jobs numbers and the names of B.C.’s successful cleantech companies at their fingertips when they are knocking on doors or appearing on radio and TV, along with the reasons why action on climate change is such an imperative.

With well-educated voters behind them there is so much that a committed government could do. Our province’s current actions deserve the praise they receive, which are a lot more than most other provinces are doing; but they are only the beginning of what is possible, and what is needed.

We need province-wide mobilization. We need a bundle of actions that could get us close to being a 100 per cent renewable energy region. And we need a strong commitment to leadership by the government.

It is not as if B.C. would be alone in undertaking this goal. There are businesses, regions and governments throughout the world pursuing the same goal to become 100 per cent renewable energy regions. As regions and nations begin to act together there might be even a justifiable hope that our children’s future will not necessarily be the catastrophe that otherwise awaits them.

This series originally appeared on the B.C. Sustainable Energy Association website.

Image Credit: Zack Embree

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.