Even though the COP21 climate talks in Paris only began Monday, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau has already made waves, thrusting Canada back onto the international stage amid excitement and applause.

Yet climate experts are quick to point out Trudeau has a lot of work to do to bridge the gaps between the talk and the walk when it comes to meaningful climate action.

The international climate negotiations ongoing in Paris will continue on until the end of next week and onlookers will have to wait to know what shape the final outcome will take.

But for now, here are five numbers you need to know to understand Canada’s role in the world’s most important climate negotiation to date.

Two Degrees

The climate talks are intended to bring more than 190 countries to a binding international agreement on climate action designed to prevent the world from warming more than two degrees Celsius.

Although, on the first day of the summit over 100 countries signed a declaration calling upon the global community to keep global temperature rises to 1.5 degrees Celsius.

Canada so far supports the two degree target, although Trudeau and his delegation have yet to reveal the new federal government’s climate commitments. The current commitments, formulated under the former Conservative government promise to reduce the country’s emissions 30 per cent below 2005 levels by 2050 — although no specific policy measures have been announced to show how Canada will achieve that target (which has been criticized as weak compared to other developed nations).

90 Days

Trudeau surprised Canadians by taking a large and diverse delegation to Paris for the climate talks. In addition to Canada’s new Minister of Environment and Climate Change, Catherine McKenna, and Foreign Affairs Minister Stephan Dion, Trudeau invited all of Canada’s premiers.

To fight climate change, we’re all in this together. Canada is back. #COP21 pic.twitter.com/atvk3L09C8

— Justin Trudeau (@JustinTrudeau) November 30, 2015

Trudeau has repeatedly stated that Canada’s emissions can only be tackled by working closely with the provinces and tailoring regional climate plans that address the unique challenges each province faces.

Although a strong showing of support for the climate talks signals positive attention, the real policy work will take place in just under 90 days when the prime minister will meet with the premiers to discuss the nitty gritty details, including targets for clean energy and emission reductions.

Number One Globally

Critics of climate action often argue Canada’s overall emissions are just a drop in the bucket and don’t require bold policy measures.

But the World Resources Institute ranks Canada as the highest per capita polluter in the world, when taking into account emissions from land use and forestry.

According to a recent report by James Hansen, the former NASA scientist that first brought climate change to the world’s attention in 1988, Canada is fourth when it comes to cumulative per capita responsibility for emissions.  

The World Bank lists Canada in the top 15 emitters of carbon dioxide per capita. And according to the Pembina Institute, if Alberta were a country it would have the highest per capita emissions in the world. 

$2.65 Billion

Canada hasn’t been a positive force at the COP climate talks in recent years. This year, however, Trudeau surprised the climate community by announcing Canada will contribute $2.65 billion to the Green Climate Fund, up from just $300 million under the former Conservative government. (Interestingly this figure is less than the $3.6 billion Canada spends every year subsidizing the fossil fuel industry. )

Money from the Green Climate Fund will go toward helping developing nations transition to renewable energy, adapt to climate impacts and develop greenhouse gas reduction plans.

In his opening remarks on the first day of the climate talks, Trudeau told a crowd of media and dignitaries: “We believe that climate finance is critical. Our commitment to $2.65 billion over five years towards initiatives will help developing countries reduce their emissions and adapt to climate change. These efforts can bring about transformative change through increasing access to energy and poverty alleviation.”

Two Decades

The UN-led climate talks have been ongoing for 20 years. During that time, countries have found it impossible to agree on how a single path forward can suit the interests of so many diverse countries.

According to energy economist Mark Jaccard from Simon Fraser University, one of the most important things Canada can do at COP21 is be realistic about why previous climate talks have seen so much failure.

In the lead up to the COP21 talks, around 150 countries submitted their ‘intended nationally determined contributions’ or ‘INDCs.’

Jaccard says wealthy countries need to strengthen their INDCs and work together (through mechanisms like a shared carbon price) to meet their commitments. He added the wealthier countries could provide incentives (climate financing) to developing countries as a way of encouragement to meet targets.

But individual country commitments don’t really matter unless there is clarity about each country’s progress.

Jaccard recommends Trudeau take his transparency agenda to Paris in order to push for more accountability on a nation-to-nation level. Canada can join other countries asking for an agreement that requires countries to consistently review and improve their climate action.

Image: Prime Minister Justin Trudeau with French President François Hollande 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.

This is a guest post by David Suzuki.

On July 15, a state-of-the-art new pipeline near Fort McMurray, Alberta, ruptured, spilling five million litres of bitumen, sand and waste water over 16,000 square metres — one of the largest pipeline oil spills in Canadian history. Two days later, a train carrying crude oil from North Dakota derailed in Montana, spilling 160,000 litres and forcing evacuation of nearby homes.

At the same time, while forest fires raged across large swathes of Western Canada — thanks to hotter, dryer conditions and longer fire seasons driven in part by climate change — Canadian premiers met in St. John’s, Newfoundland, to release their national energy strategy.

The premiers’ Canadian Energy Strategy focuses on energy conservation and efficiency, clean energy and reducing greenhouse gas emissions to combat climate change. But details are vague and there’s no sense of urgency. We need a response like the U.S. reaction to Pearl Harbor or the Soviet Sputnik launch!

The premiers seemingly want it both ways. Despite its call to “Build on the ongoing efforts of individuals, businesses, governments and others to improve energy efficiency, lower the carbon footprint, and improve understanding of energy in Canada,” the strategy promotes fossil fuel business as usual, including expanded pipeline, oilsands and liquefied natural gas development, including more fracking.

The premiers’ plan is a non-binding framework, described as a “flexible, living document that will further enable provinces and territories to move forward and collaborate on common energy-related interests according to their unique strengths, challenges and priorities.” It doesn’t include specifics on how to revamp our energy production and distribution systems, but buys time until the next elections roll around.

Although the language about climate change and clean energy is important, the strategy remains stuck in the fossil fuel era. As Climate Action Network Canada executive director Louise Comeau said in a news release, “Governments discriminate against smoking and toxics in food and consumer products. What’s needed now is discriminatory policy against fossil fuels if we are going to drastically reduce the carbon pollution putting our health and well-being at risk.”

Fossil fuel development has spurred economic development, created jobs and provided many other benefits, but the risks now outweigh those benefits. The costs in dollars and lives of pollution, habitat and wildlife degradation, pipeline and railcar spills, and climate change — all getting worse as populations grow, energy needs increase and fossil fuel reserves become increasingly scarce and difficult to exploit — have become unsustainable.

Even job creation is no longer a reason to continue our mad rush to expand development and export of oil sands bitumen, fracked gas and coal. Many fossil fuel reserves are now seen as stranded assets that will continue to decline in value as the world shifts to clean energy and the scramble to exploit resources gluts the market. The Climate Action Network points out that Clean Energy Canada’s 2015 report on renewable energy trends showed that “global investors moved USD$295 billion in 2014 into renewable energy-generation projects — an increase of 17 percent over 2013.”

Yet, many of our leaders are still pinning their hopes on rapid oilsands expansion, massive increases in fracking for liquefied natural gas and new and expanded pipelines across the country — with benefits flowing more to industry than citizens.

It’s refreshing to see provincial premiers at least recognizing the threat of climate change and the need to address it through conservation, efficiency and clean technology, but we need a far greater shift to keep the problems we’ve created from getting worse. There are many benefits to doing so, including more and better jobs, a stronger economy, healthier citizens and reduced health-care costs, and greater preservation of our rich natural heritage.

The recent spate of pipeline and railcar oil spills, along with disasters like the 2010 Deepwater Horizon explosion in the Gulf of Mexico, are the result of rapid expansion of fossil fuel development, as industry and governments race to get the dirty products to market before demand dries up.

Canada’s premiers should take these issues seriously and commit to a faster shift from fossil fuels as they continue to develop their energy strategy. They must also stress the importance of having similar, stronger action from the federal government — and so should we all.

Written with contributions from David Suzuki Foundation Senior Editor Ian Hanington.

Learn more at www.davidsuzuki.org.

Image Credit: Two Island Films

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 provincial leaders finalized the Canadian Energy Strategy Friday with a document many onlookers are criticizing as too reliant on traditional carbon-based sources of energy.

The strategy, intended to guide the integrated development of Canada’s energy resources across the provinces, places no restrictions on the release of greenhouse gas emissions and takes a proactive approach to building oil and gas pipelines.

According to officials who spoke with the Globe and Mail the strategy was meant to strike a balance between the energy ambitions of each province with growing concerns over global climate change.

“We have a path to pursue two critical national priorities,” a senior Alberta official said, ”how are we going to keep building our energy industry and how are we going to address climate change?”

Commitment to Cleaner Energy Long-Overdue

The Canadian Energy Strategy, although acknowledging the need to reduce greenhouse gas emissions in the provinces, maintains an equal opportunity approach to all energy sources — an element of the document that weakens Canada’s stance in the rapidly evolving clean energy economy according to alternative energy analysts.

Clean Energy Canada, a climate and energy think tank, said the energy strategy lacks the strong commitments needed to advance low-carbon sources of energy.

“Today’s strategy recognizes the role that renewable electricity and pricing carbon will play in this shift, but still leans heavily on traditional fossil-based energy sources,” Sarah Petrevan, senior policy advisor with Clean Energy Canada, said.

Petrevan said the document merely gives a nod to clean energy without outlining any meaningful policy for its real-world development.

“This is 2015, and we need to do better,” she said. “We need deeper reductions, and a clear plan to deliver them, we hope [the premiers’] work over the next year will yield that.”

As DeSmog Canada has previously reported, Canada has no national climate legislation and has failed for years to deliver promised regulations for the oil and gas sector. According to Environment Canada, the country is on track to miss its greenhouse gas reduction targets agreed to under the Copenhagen Accord. 

Last year Environment Commissioner Julie Gelfand released a scathing critique of Canada after she found the nation has no plan in place for reaching its climate targets and has “no climate vision” whatsoever.

Canada Missing Economic Benefits of Clean Energy

Petrevan added: “If the global economy were a baseball game, a home run would be heading straight for the clean-energy industry — but Canada hasn’t even left the dugout.”

“We’ve lost out on nearly $9 billion in clean-energy export opportunities in 2013 alone. We need a plan to transition our economy and reap the benefits of the growth and jobs that come with it.”

Petrevan and others are pointing to an absence of federal leadership as a critical weakness in Canada’s fight against climate change.

In late 2013 Canada 2020 released a poll that showed while the vast majority of Canadians (84 per cent) think the federal government has a responsibility to the take lead on combatting global climate change, very few (16 per cent) believed it was an actual priority for the government.

Diana Carney, associate with Canada 2020, said the poll results confirmed a common public sentiment across the nation: “there is a leadership vacuum when it comes to fighting climate change in this country.”

Louise Comeau, executive director of Climate Action Network Canada, said Canada should make more effort to enter into the clean energy transition, arguing that is where the future job market lies.

The strategy’s ‘non-discriminatory’ approach to all forms of energy is out-of-touch, according to the network. “What’s needed is public policy favouring clean, renewable energy over the oil, coal and natural gas unbalancing the climate system,” the group stated in a press release.

Comeau said it is not uncommon for governments to restrict the entry of harmful products into the market.

“Governments discriminate against smoking and toxics in food and consumer products,” she said. “What’s needed now is discriminatory policy against fossil fuels if we are going to drastically reduce the carbon pollution putting our health and well-being at risk.”

In early 2015 Clean Energy Canada released a report on the state of renewable energy, finding global investment in alternative energy increased by 17 per cent from 2013.

The report concluded Canada, by directing enormous subsidies and tax breaks towards the fossil fuel industry, is holding Canada’s clean energy revolution back.

Major Pipeline Rupture in Alberta Emphasizes Fossil Fuel Risks

This week a pipeline owned by oilsands operator Nexen ruptured near the company’s Long Lake facility southeast of Fort McMurray, releasing 32,000 barrels or 1.32 million gallons of bitumen emulsion into the surrounding environment.

The spill is a reminder of the high-stakes risk major oil pipelines pose to the environment, according to Peter Louwe from Greenpeace.

“Alberta has a long way to go to address its pipeline problems,” Louwe said, adding “communities have good reasons to fear having more built.”

The Enbridge Northern Gateway pipeline and Kinder Morgan Trans Mountain pipeline expansion both plan on carrying increased oilsands crude to the coast of British Columbia. The National Energy Board refused to consider the climate impacts of the pipelines during public hearings, claiming upstream impacts were not relevant to the project’s application.

A similar argument has been made by the regulator regarding TransCanada’s Energy East pipeline, currently the largest proposed pipeline on the continent.

According to the Pembina Institute the Energy East pipeline could generate up to 32 million tonnes of additional oilsands emissions from the crude it will transport, the equivalent of adding seven million more cars to Canada’s roads.

Dale Marshall, national program manager with Environmental Defence, said the premier’s energy strategy ignores the climate impacts of pipelines and is falling out of step with the rest of the world.

Marshall described the strategy as “a big step backwards.”

“By lending support to pipelines, the strategy will put Canada further out of step with the rest of the world where climate change is being treated as a serious matter,” he said.

“We in Canada need to come to grips with the fact that it’s practically impossible to grow the tar sands and reduce carbon pollution.”  

Image Credit: Government of Ontario 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 new poll released today by Angus Reid finds the majority of Canadians support carbon pricing programs and more than half the population would like to see a national climate policy instituted at the federal level.

Although Canadians say they’re ready for climate action, there’s a lot less certainty surrounding climate leadership at the federal level, according to poll results.

There also appears to be some question about the actual impact of a carbon price but, despite the uncertainty, 75 per cent of Canadians support the idea of a national cap and trade program, and 56 per cent support the idea of a national carbon tax.

Currently Canada has a smattering of province-led carbon price initiatives — B.C.’s celebrated carbon tax being perhaps the most notable — although no national program to reduce emissions exists.

"Thankfully, we are past the point of debating whether something should be done and into a discussion of how we are going to stop climate change," Keith Stewart, energy and climate campaigner with Greenpeace Canada, said.

Canada’s premiers recently met at a climate summit to discuss provincial contributions to lowering the country’s greenhouse gas emissions. Major steps were taken at the summit — most notably Ontario’s decision to join Quebec and California’s cap and trade program — but Canada’s national contribution to tackling climate change remain a question.

Canada has no climate legislation and, according to Environment Canada, growing emissions from the Alberta oilsands will prevent the country from meeting its emission reduction targets under the Copenhagen Accord.

The majority of Canadians see climate change as a serious threat to the planet, according to a previous study from Angus Reid, and more than half of the population says the federal government is not doing enough to tackle climate change.

One in five Canadians said climate change would likely be a deciding factor for them in the upcoming federal election. About half of survey respondents indicated climate would be of moderate election importance (four to seven on a 10-point scale).

Stewart was blunt in his reading of the results: "The poll results show that a large majority of Canadians support taking action on solutions to climate change and that anyone looking to replace Stephen Harper as Prime Minister should talk a lot more about how they would do this," he said. 

The federal election is expected to take place in October. 

In December, countries will meet in Paris at the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) to reach a new global agreement on climate change. Nations were expected to release their reductions targets at the end of March but Canada declined to submit its plans.

"The only thing the Conservatives are on target to meet is complete failure," NDP environment critic Megan Leslie said at the time. "Mexico has announced its plan. The U.S. is moving forward. When will we stop being international laggards on climate change?"

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.

In the lead up to December’s UN climate talks in Paris, most countries are approaching their promised emission reductions with new national regulations. Canada’s Conservative government is taking a different path.

Instead of considering a federal carbon tax, Environment Minister Leona Aglukkaq has asked premiers to submit their own cuts and how they will achieve them. In a letter submitted to all premiers on Friday afternoon, Minister Aglukkaq notes that Canada is falling far short of its promised 2020 emission cuts and suggests it is up to individual provinces to fill in the gaps.

Those reductions — plus working out the details of the Canadian Energy Strategy — form the agenda for Tuesday’s Premiers' Climate Summit on Climate in Quebec City.

On Saturday afternoon, more than 25,000 people filled the streets of Quebec City asking provincial leaders to take the action the federal government seems obstinately set against. And these marchers are not outliers: a new poll commissioned by Canada’s Climate Action Network revealed 70 per cent of Canadians want the country to become global leaders in protecting the climate.

That’s why this Premiers' Climate Summit is so important — it is their leadership (or not) that could make the difference in Canada finally taking climate action. But who are the premiers leading the way and who could hold back progress yet again? Read on.

Provincial Leadership by the Numbers

British Columbia

• Premier: Christy Clark
• Annual GHG emissions (2012): 60.1 Mt CO2
• Percentage of Canadian total emissions (2012): 8.6 per cent  

Much has been written about British Columbia’s progressive and award-winning carbon tax. Since its inception in 2008, B.C. has reduced its annual CO2 emissions by 2.2 gigatonnes, taking strides towards its goal of a 33 per cent reduction from 2005 levels by 2020. Christy Clark, in the lead up to the summit, challenged other governments to 'meet or beat' the province's carbon tax.

Unfortunately, Clark promised to freeze the carbon tax for five years as part of her 2013 election campaign. At the same time, Clark also pledged to reinvigorate B.C.’s economy by developing a $100 billion industry around the export of liquefied natural gas to Asian markets. Neither of these actions are likely to help B.C. meet or exceed its emission reduction targets.

On the plus side, Clark is lukewarm on two proposed pipeline and tanker projects that would carry diluted bitumen from the Alberta oilsands to the B.C. coast. She has pledged to deny provincial operating permits to both Northern Gateway and Kinder Morgan’s TransMountain expansion unless they meet five conditions ranging from safety to profit sharing. After the dismal response to this week’s relatively small spill of toxic bunker fuel in Vancouver’s English Bay, the most important condition — a ‘world class’ oil spill response plan — seems unlikely to be met anytime soon.

Premier Clark will not attend the summit and will be speaking at a World Bank event instead.

Alberta

• Premier: Jim Prentice
• Annual GHG emissions (2012): 249.3 Mt CO2
• Percentage of Canadian total emissions (2012): 35.7 per cent  

Alberta is the source of the lion’s share of Canada’s emissions, thanks largely to the Athabasca oilsands. After more than a decade of high global oil prices fueled rapid growth in the industry, the market for oil futures (with the high prices that kept the oilsands profitable) collapsed last fall.

The expansion of Alberta’s oilsands infrastructure is the source of much discussion and contention. Premiers of B.C., Quebec and Ontario have all set conditions before allowing any of the three large pending oil pipeline and tanker projects to proceed through their provinces, and the Obama administration in the U.S. has said it will not allow the Keystone XL pipeline to proceed if it contributes to climate change.

In 2007, the Alberta government implemented a small carbon levy of $15/tonne for large emitters. The tax will expire on June 30, 2015.

Premier Jim Prentice (a former Federal Minister of Environment in the Harper Conservative cabinet) has said he supports the idea of “the provinces [finding] common ground on energy and the environment, and [enforcing] fair, clear, well thought-out rules,” but has yet to reveal any plans.

Premier Prentice is currently running for re-election. His office confirmed he will not attend Tuesday’s summit.

Saskatchewan

• Premier: Brad Wall
• Annual GHG emissions (2012): 74.8 Mt CO2
• Percentage of Canadian total emissions (2012): 10.7 per cent

Since becoming Premier in 2007, Brad Wall has said or done little about climate change. He actively supports development of pipeline infrastructure, particularly TransCanada’s Energy East and Keystone XL pipelines. In 2014, he travelled to Washington, D.C., to lobby for the approval of the latter.

In a March 2014 roundtable interview with Canadian journalists he floated the idea of a moderate carbon tax as a being a means of encouraging the U.S. government to approve the pipeline. "I think you start slow and see what impact it has on the economy… I don't think you want to kneecap your economy with a carbon tax."

A few months later in November 2014, he approached the idea of CO2 emissions with a more fatalistic view, saying “If you want to get serious about (reducing) GHGs in Canada, we’d all stop driving cars.”

Premier Wall will not attend the summit.  

Manitoba

• Premier: Greg Selinger
• Annual GHG emissions (2012): 21.2 Mt CO2
• Percentage of Canadian total emissions (2012): 3.03 per cent  

Since taking office in 2009, Premier Greg Selinger has been outspoken on climate change and Manitoba’s need to adapt and take action. His administration held knowledge-sharing sessions with experts in neighbouring Wisconsin; he’s spoken at sustainability conferences in India and committed to a robust set of climate adaptation goals, including reducing greenhouse gas emissions to six per cent below 1990 levels, to about 17.5 megatonnes.

That said, after five years his administration has yet to table any large-scale legislation or programs to make these reductions a reality. A planned cap-and-trade program expected for implementation in 2012 has not materialized. In the meantime, climate change impacts continue to add up. As Scott Forbes wrote in a Winnipeg Free Press op-ed last summer:

“Even the most powerful politicians cannot hold back the rain. But they can plan for a rainy day. With higher spring and summer river levels now the new normal, lowering river levels is going to be harder than ever. So build the walkway higher. Rack up the cost to our changing climate.”

At present it is unclear if Premier Selinger will attend Tuesday’s summit.

Ontario

• Premier: Kathleen Wynne
• Annual GHG emissions (2012): 166.9 Mt CO2
• Percentage of Canadian total emissions (2012): 23.9 per cent  

Ontario is the second-largest source of GHG emissions in Canada, and has, in recent years, taken its reduction very seriously. Before leaving office in 2012, Premier Dalton McGuinty passed the Green Energy Act, and pushed forward legislation to end urban sprawl, protect clean drinking water and limit toxic chemicals in manufacturing.

Premier Kathleen Wynne seems poised to take things even further. Her administration has already made Ontario completely free of coal-fired power and pledged seven conditions before new pipeline infrastructure projects such as Energy East will be allowed to go forward.

Together with Quebec Premier Philippe Couillard, she has led the development of the Canadian Energy Strategy — the framework for the Premier’s Climate Summit.

On Monday, Premier Wynne signed a cap-and-trade agreement with Quebec Premier Couillard in advance of Tuesday’s climate summit.

Quebec

• Premier: Philippe Couillard
• Annual GHG emissions (2012): 78.3 Mt CO2
• Percentage of Canadian total emissions (2012): 11.2 per cent  

Couillard is a climate action champion in his own right. He has worked closely with Ontario Premier Wynne on developing the Canadian Energy Strategy and his administration implemented a cap-and-trade scheme in partnership with California starting in January of this year. He opposes the Energy East pipeline plan for a terminal in Quebec (which fortunately for Quebeckers and belugas, has been dropped in TransCanada’s latest plans) and as of December 2014, supports continuing a moratorium on hydraulic fracturing in the province saying "if there’s no segment of the population that approves of the practice, then I don’t see the interest in developing it."

He’s also repeatedly said that he hopes for Quebec to have an important voice at December’s UN Climate Summit in Paris.

“I will ensure that Quebec is not only present, but also that it has the opportunity to make its voice heard.”  

New Brunswick

• Premier: Brian Gallant
• Annual GHG emissions (2012): 16.4 Mt CO2
• Percentage of Canadian total emissions (2012): 2.35 per cent  

Premier Brian Gallant’s leadership on climate and energy is inconsistent. Despite imposing a moratorium on fracking across the province, he is an active and vocal supporter of the Energy East pipeline. This proposed pipeline would carry diluted bitumen from the Alberta oilsands to a deepwater port on the Bay of Fundy for export to international markets.

Speaking at January news conference, Gallant said:

"There's no doubt as a nation we have to do a better job on climate change…On top of that, we also have to have a conversation about developing our economy throughout the country in a responsible way. We believe the Energy East pipeline is one that will help us grow our economy, create jobs; it's one we that we can do, we believe, in a sustainable way."  

Premier Gallant will attend the summit.

Nova Scotia

• Premier: Stephen McNeil
• Annual GHG emissions (2012): 19.0 Mt CO2
• Percentage of Canadian total emissions (2012): 2.7 per cent

After implementing a law in 2010 that required the province to meet 25 per cent of its energy needs from renewable sources, the province is now on track for a second goal: generating 40 per cent of its electricity by 2020.

In fall 2014, the province also imposed a moratorium on onshore fracking, except for research or testing purposes.

Speaking to delegates at a conference, Premier McNeil said, "Nova Scotia is a small province with a big future in sustainable energy. We're addressing climate change and the need for a lower carbon future by embracing change through innovation that focuses on one of our greatest advantages — our proximity to the ocean and its tides."

Premier McNeil will not attend the summit; he's sending Environment Minister Randy Delorey instead.

Prince Edward Island

• Premier: Wade MacLauchlan
• Annual GHG emissions (2012): 1.9 Mt CO2
• Percentage of Canadian total emissions (2012): 0.27 per cent  

Wade McLauchlan took the Premier’s oath of office less than 50 days ago. In his speech accepting the title of premier designate, Mclauchlan called P.E.I. a world leader in renewable energy, but said we can do more as “an important first step as we turn our attention to climate change.”

At press time, it is unclear whether Premier MacLauchlan will attend Tuesday’s summit.

Newfoundland & Labrador

• Premier: Paul Davis
• Annual GHG emissions (2012): 8.7 Mt CO2
• Percentage of Canadian total emissions (2012): 1.2 per cent  

Elected premier by a narrow margin in fall 2014, Paul Davis won his seat by pledging to protect the province’s offshore oil and gas extraction industry and ensure the billions of dollars it generates in royalties are better shared around the province.

On Friday April 10, Premier Davis announced his plan to attend the climate summit, citing an opportunity “to discuss best practices and future solutions in the fight against climate change and strengthen intergovernmental cooperation.”

Yukon Territory

• Premier: Darrell Pasloski
• Annual GHG emissions (2012): 0.4 Mt CO2
• Percentage of Canadian total emissions (2012): 0.06 per cent  

Despite promising to do so back in 2009, the Yukon has yet to set targets for territory-wide emission reductions.

In 2012, Premier Darrell Pasloski’s government announced that it would be impossible to predict future industrial and economic growth, and recommended the following action instead: “Rather than commit to an arbitrary target based on estimated projections of Yukon’s economic growth, the government is working with key players in the electricity, building and energy efficiency, industrial, and transportation sectors to identify actions that will lead to realistic and measurable outcomes to minimize growth in Yukon’s overall GHG emissions.”

Instead, the government has committed to a reduction in emissions for its own internal operations — 20 per cent lower than 2010 levels by 2015.

Pasloski does not support mandatory carbon pricing and just last week announced plans to explore fracking in the territory’s Liard basin, provided it had the support of First Nations in the region.

Premier Pasloski will attend the summit.

Northwest Territories & Nunavut

• Premier (NWT): Bob McLeod
• Premier (Nunavut): Peter Taptuna
• Annual GHG emissions (2012): 1.7 Mt CO2
• Percentage of Canadian total emissions (2012): 0.24 per cent  

Belying their huge size, both the Northwest Territories and Nunavut release approximately the same amount of GHG emissions as tiny Prince Edward Island. Despite this, their residents are disproportionately affected by rising seas and melting permafrost compared to Canadians in other provinces.

In 2014, the Premiers of the Northwest Territories and Nunavut met in Iqaluit to develop a strategy document for northern Canada, entitled ‘A Northern Vision.’ In it they agree that “clean, reliable, affordable energy is the backbone of a sustainable economy, is essential for the well-being of northerners, and fosters investment and economic growth in the North.”

At present it is not clear if either Premier McLeod or Premier Taptuna will attend the summit.

Image Credit: All images via Canada's Premiers

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.

On Saturday, April 11, thousands of Canadians are expected to gather in Quebec City for a national day of action on climate change (update: an estimated 25,000 attended the march). The march will occur in advance of an unprecedented gathering of the nation's premiers, who will meet in Quebec City April 14 to discuss provincial climate plans (Premiers Christy Clark, Jim Prentice and Stephen McNeil declined to attend the summit).

According to a new poll released by the Canadian arm of the Climate Action Network, the majority of Canadians feel addressing climate change is a higher priority than developing the Alberta oilsands or building pipelines.

“Canadians believe climate disruption is a moral issue and that climate protection trumps development of the tarsands and pipelines. They want politicians to control carbon pollution and give citizens a say in energy decision-making,” the network said in a press release.

Polling data shows the majority of Canadians — 61 per cent — from across the political spectrum said protecting the climate is more important than further developing the oilsands and building the proposed Energy East pipeline, designed to carry 1.1 million barrels of oilsands crude each day to east coast refineries and export terminals.

Eighty per cent of Canadians said they were familiar with the Energy East project and 47 per cent of Canadians oppose the project, 36 per cent support it and 18 per cent said they were unsure.

The poll also showed Canadians are supportive of clean energy initiatives, with 72 per cent saying they would like to see a plan in place for more jobs in the renewable energy sector.

A report recently released by Greenpeace Canada and Environmental Defence argues continued expansion of the Alberta oilsands is at cross-purposes with the nation’s greenhouse gas emission reduction targets.

The study argues increased production in the oilsands “makes it almost impossible for Canada to meet even weak carbon reduction targets or go further and show climate leadership.”

In the past few years Canadians engaged in the pipeline review process have expressed serious concern with the legitimacy of the National Energy Board and its role in reviewing major energy infrastructure projects.

The National Energy Board is currently engaged in a tense formal public hearing process in British Columbia on the Kinder Morgan Trans Mountain pipeline expansion and in Ontario and Quebec along the route of the Energy East pipeline.

Recently, seven B.C. mayors publicly declared their "non-confidence" in the board’s review of the Trans Mountain pipeline. The municipal leaders requested the federal government intervene and halt the process until a full public hearing process is re-instated.  

“Canadians are looking for political leadership,” Stephen Guilbeault, senior policy director at Equiterre, said. “The federal government is missing in action. It is time for all federal and provincial leaders to take responsibility for doing their part to protect the climate.”

The poll was conducted by Oracle Research Limited which conducted a national random telephone survey of over 3,000 Canadians between March 12 and March 30, 2015. The margin of error for the survey is +/- 1.78%, 19/20 times.

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.

Canada’s premiers have agreed to expand the nation’s developing energy strategy to address climate change and green energy while acknowledging the Alberta oilsands are still an important part of Canada’s economic future.

Endorsing the proposed Canadian Energy Strategy when they met last week at an annual conference on Prince Edward Island, the premiers said in an accompanying document that the plan “will express a renewed vision that describes the kind of energy future that provinces and territories aspire to achieve.”

The premiers added visions and principals included in the plan will allow “provinces and territories to work together, in respect of their own jurisdiction, on energy issues and grow the economy, protect the environment, mitigate climate change, create new opportunities for individuals, organizations and businesses, and enhance the quality of life for all Canadians.”

In a section called “Climate Change and Social and Environmental Responsibility,” the plan included a strategy to address global warming and move towards a lower carbon economy.

The strategy would recognize the importance of environmentally and socially responsible energy development, transportation systems, and enabling technologies to support conservation, efficiency, and effectiveness in the use of energy resources.

And it would allow the nation to “transition to a lower-carbon economy through appropriate initiatives, such as carbon pricing, carbon capture and storage and other technological innovations, while meeting current and future energy needs.”

A related article in The Globe and Mail said the recently-elected premiers of Ontario and Quebec — Kathleen Wynne and Philippe Couillard — suggested they were the driving force behind the strategy’s climate change considerations.

Despite the agreement, Wynne said there will be tensions between provinces that want to achieve progress on climate change, and others eager to boost oil exports.

“I think that is a tension that will continue to exist but the reason it is important to have a Canadian energy strategy is that we’ve got to manage that tension – it exists and we’ve got to deal with the realities of the oil sands, and we’ve got to deal with the realities of transporting that fuel, and we’ve got to deal with the realities of climate change,” she told the Globe and Mail.

The premiers agreed to finalize the strategy before their 2015 summer meeting.

While the proposed energy strategy does not include firm targets for reducing greenhouse gas emissions, Canada, under the Copenhagen Accord, has committed to reducing domestic carbon emissions by 17 per cent from 2005 levels by 2020, a level many analysts say will not be met. A recent report from Environment Canada shows that without stronger emissions reductions Canada will not meet that target.

By way of comparison, the European Union has set three key targets for 2020. These include a 20 per cent reduction in EU greenhouse gas emissions from 1990 levels; raising the share of the region’s energy consumption produced from renewable resources to 20 per cent; and a 20 per cent improvement in Europe’s energy efficiency.

EU projections indicate the region will comfortably meet its 20 per cent emissions-reduction target by 2020.

Image Credit: Premier of Ontario 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.