On Nov. 29, the federal government granted conditional approvals for the twinning of Kinder Morgan’s Trans Mountain pipeline and the Enbridge Line 3 pipeline replacement project.

If built, the two pipelines will add just over one million barrels per day of export capacity from Alberta’s oilsands. Expectedly, many Canadians cried climate foul.

And, equally as predictably, there’s been a litany of arguments criticizing people for protesting the approvals.

The University of Calgary’s Trevor Tombe penned a thoughtful essay for Maclean’s contending that “blocking pipelines achieve less emissions reductions, at substantially greater cost, than the most efficient approach of pricing carbon.” In another vein, former Alberta Oil Magazine editor Max Fawcett suggested in an op-ed for Vancouver Is Awesome that “if you oppose the expansion of the Trans Mountain pipeline, you’re effectively being an environmental NIMBY.”

It’s true not all anti-pipeline rhetoric gets the numbers right, especially when it comes to the slippery practice of predicting emissions growth.

There’s no guarantee, for instance, that the two pipelines will generate 23 and 28 megatonnes (Mt) of new emissions as suggested by some. There’s also no guarantee oil in the expanded pipeline network won’t simply displace oil from rail transport. So when it comes to emissions counting, the incremental impact of these projects on overall emissions is hard to pinpoint.

But even despite those vagaries, Canadians concerned about climate change, or concerned about our international climate commitments, have some very legitimate reasons to protest the federal approvals.

Paris Agreement Requires Canada To Cut 291 Megatonnes of Emissions by 2030

Of course, that’s assuming Canada intends to honour international climate commitments. Some Canadians might even oppose those commitments — but that’s a very different story.

Under the Paris Agreement, Canada committed to reducing greenhouse gas emissions to 30 per cent below 2005 levels by 2030, which would drop the total to 524 megatonnes (Mt) of carbon dioxide equivalent a year.

The government also loosely committed to the “high ambition” goal of keeping temperatures below 1.5 degrees Celsius of warming, which would require a reduction to 400 Mt by 2030. In addition the federal government committed to an 80 per cent reduction in emissions by 2050, a goal that requires dropping emissions all the way down to 150 Mt per year.

So, how do new pipelines and the oilsands, Canada’s fastest growing source of greenhouse gas emissions, fit into those promises?

In its submission to the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change, the National Energy Board (NEB) estimates Canada’s emissions will hit 814 Mt per year by 2030. The oilsands are predicted to account for 115 Mt of that, up 43 per cent from 70 Mt in 2015.

Those numbers are “baked in” to the NEB’s 2030 estimates according to Erin Flanagan, federal policy director for the Pembina Institute.

“The reference case is bullish on fossil fuel development,” Flanagan says. “These numbers are not consistent with the Paris Agreement. These are not numbers that are aligned with Canada doing its fair share to address global climate change.”

“That’s the unfortunate reality of the NEB reference case,” she says.

“That’s why people call it a ‘coin toss on the climate.’ It’s not a Paris Agreement-aligned reference case.”

Oilsands to Expand with Global Oil Price Rebound

The Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers anticipates 3.7 million barrels per day of oilsands production by 2030, up from 2.4 million barrels per day in 2015.

(A July 2015 report by the Canadian Energy Research Institute pegged the 2030 higher, at 4.3 million barrels.)

Right now, oilsands producers aren’t moving enough oil to fill Canada’s pipelines. There’s currently 400,000 bpd of spare capacity in the pipeline network.

But that surplus could be rapidly filled with a recovery in global oil prices.

Brent oil prices are currently hovering around $53/barrel USD. In October, the National Energy Board predicted that Brent oil prices will hit $68/barrel USD by 2020, rising to $90/barrel USD in 2040.

But prices aren’t the only factor determining oilsands production in Alberta.

As part of Alberta’s Climate Leadership Plan, the provincial government introduced a 100 Mt cap on oilsands emissions. If per-barrel intensity remains the same, that cap would allow for about 3.4 million barrels per day of oilsands production, which could be accommodated via existing pipeline and rail networks with room for maintenance and outages.

But industry is planning for much more production than that. The National Energy Board is forecasting for 4.3 million barrels per day by 2040, an almost 80 per cent increase from 2015.

That’s where new pipelines such as Trans Mountain and Line 3 come in, providing a combined one million barrels in additional capacity to move product to heavy oil refineries in California and the Gulf Coast.

Andrew Leach, energy economist at the University of Alberta and former chair of the Alberta Climate Change Advisory Panel, tweeted back in April: “System will face constraints in the future, which is key to case for new pipes.”

The federal government has also reiterated its support for TransCanada’s Keystone XL pipeline, a project President-elect Donald Trump intends to approve, providing he can negotiate more profits for the U.S.

Keystone would add 830,000 barrels per day to the network, bringing the total pipeline capacity to 4.2 million barrels per day by 2030, exceeding the 3.7 million barrels per day of production.

An additional 1.1 million barrels of transport capacity will be brought online if the TransCanada Energy East pipeline is approved and another 400,000 barrels if the Enbridge Mainline expansion project proceeds (which is uncertain due to the potential approval of the Keystone XL).

These pipeline systems represent a significant potential to scale up production in the oilsands. So what does that actually mean for emissions?

Oilsands Would Account for Nearly 20 Per Cent of Allowable Emissions by 2030

Per-barrel emissions in the oilsands are high and getting higher by the year.

Between 2004 and 2014, per barrel emissions grew by 25 per cent, increasing from 50 to 63 kg of carbon dioxide equivalent per barrel. Most future growth in the oilsands will occur via in-situ extraction, which emits about 1.5 times the greenhouse gases than open-pit mining due to the use of natural gas to create steam.

Industry has hyped up the possibility of using new processes to cut in-situ emissions, but the technology is not expected to come into play for years.

As mentioned above the National Energy Board anticipates Alberta’s 100 Mt oilsands cap will be breached — reaching a total of 115 Mt — before 2030 (assuming, of course, that the cap isn’t simply tossed out by a new government before then.)

Suppose industry miraculously finds a way to cut per-barrel emissions by eight per cent, allowing producers to grow oilsands production to 3.7 million barrels per day — as projected by the Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers — while remaining within the 100 Mt cap.

David Hughes, expert on unconventional fuels and author of multiple reports for the Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives, calculates that if industry produces up to the 100 Mt cap (a 43 per cent increase in production), oilsands emissions will take up a whopping 19 per cent of Canada’s entire allowable 2030 emissions budget.

“Saying that we’re going to grow oilsands by 43 per cent means our Paris Agreements are a bit Orwellian for me,” Hughes told DeSmog Canada.

“Even if the oilsands didn’t grow, it’s going to be extremely difficult [to meet our targets] given the time that’s left.”

In addition to oil pipeline approvals, Trudeau has also granted federal permits for major liquefied natural gas (LNG) export terminals in B.C. The Pacific Northwest LNG terminal is projected to be Canada’s single largest point source of emissions (11.5 to 14 Mt), producing more carbon pollution than even the giant Syncrude oilsands mine (12.5 Mt).

Assuming only one LNG export terminal is constructed in B.C., increasing oilsands emissions to 100 Mt would require non-oil and gas sectors — i.e. the rest of Canada — to contract by 47 per cent in emissions intensity in order for Canada to meet its climate target.

Federal Climate Policies Uncertain and Insufficient

So is that major reduction in non-oil and gas sectors going to happen?

The federal government insists that a potential increase in oilsands’ emissions will be negated by ‘upcoming climate policies.’

Problem is, no one as of yet knows what those supposed ‘upcoming’ policies are. The Prime Minister will meet with premiers at at First Ministers’ Meeting on December 9 to discuss the details of a much-anticipated pan-Canadian framework for climate action.

Stephen Guilbeault, executive director with Equiterre, said he hopes the government will finally release its climate “balance sheet” at the meeting.

“Without a balance sheet there is no way of knowing if this plan is delivering on what it says it does. What is enabling Canada’s emissions to go down? Why are they going up? To be able to adjust that plan over time and to have a genuine understanding and reassurance that we do have a plan that will put us on a path towards emissions reduction is needed for credibility,” Guilbeault says.

“Without the plusses and minuses it’s impossible for us to say whether premiers and the Prime Minister have delivered on that plan.”

He added the 2030 climate target gets a lot of attention but is by no means the end point for Canada’s climate commitments.

“Really 2030 isn’t the end. We have to totally or almost totally decarbonize our economy.”

Adam Scott, senior campaigner at Oil Change International, told DeSmog Canada that plan remains a mystery.

“The federal government has not demonstrated publicly in any way how their plan adds up,” he says.

Erin Flanagan from the Pembina Institute said nearly 100 Mt worth of emissions reductions can be pieced together from various mitigation measures: 30 Mt from a new clean fuel standard, 20 Mt from methane reductions, 18 Mt from the $50/tonne carbon price, 15 Mt from the coal phaseout and eight Mt from hydrofluorocarbon gas regulations.

But most of the meaningful emissions reductions are coming from the provinces, not federal leadership.

When it comes to phasing out coal, for example, only five Mt of emissions reductions will specifically occur due to federal policy (a number which Hughes describes as “absolutely trivial” compared to the anticipated gap from the 2030 target). Alberta and Ontario will take credit for the lion’s share of coal-related reductions.

But despite those gains made at the provincial level, continued oil and gas development, as anticipated by the NEB, means Canada’s emissions will only be reduced to around 715 Mt by 2030.

Under the Paris Agreement, Canada committed to a target of 524 Mt by 2030, leaving a gap of 191 Mt.

“That is a very different than the reality of of Canada living up to the Paris Agreement,” Flanagan says. “To meet that we need to fuel switch our entire economy. We need to run our homes and lives on clean electricity.”

Liberals Have Already Flip Flopped on Key Election Issues

Flanagan says the federal government has an excellent opportunity to present an updated plan at the First Ministers’ Meeting that details all sources of emissions, current and proposed policies, how those policies will reduce emissions and what further measures will be taken to reach the 2030 target.

But the federal Liberals have established quite the track record as of late for ignoring reports and findings, resulting in major flip flops on issues from electoral reform to marijuana legalization.

When it comes to pipelines specifically, cabinet seemed to totally disregard the six questions posted to it by its ad-hoc environmental review panel that asked the federal government how it intends to build new pipelines as well as fulfill its climate commitments.

So what the federal government intends to do nationally to reduce emissions in light of anticipated oilsands production increases is anyone’s guess.

The Liberals may be plan on allowing 115 Mt of oilsands emissions while attempting (somehow) to cut total emissions to 524 Mt by 2030.

Or perhaps they’re planning to dramatically increase carbon pricing to the $150/tonne or $200/tonne range experts say is necessary to bring emissions in line with national climate targets.

At this stage, we simply don’t know.

‘This Takes Us Completely In the Opposite Direction’

Whatever the federal government’s plan, they have plenty to do to show their work.

Sure, in the meantime uncertain, external forces could redefine the playing field.

Global oil prices may never bounce back, resulting in a natural slowdown of oilsands expansion as president-elect Trump expands U.S. domestic production.

Or, amazing new emissions-reducing technologies may be developed in the next year or two, allowing for 4.3 million barrels per day to be developed in 2030 without seriously undermining climate commitments.

The Trans Mountain and Line 3 pipelines may even be constructed but barely used, failing to deliver on promises made to company shareholders.

But one thing is certain: the urgency of the climate crisis will not wane. The power of the oil and gas lobby in Canada isn’t likely to subside and the challenge of increasing emissions from the oilsands while meeting our climate commitments isn’t likely to resolve itself.

“I don’t think it’s possible for Canada to meet its targets if it allows the tarsands expansion that this pipeline will facilitate,” Scott concludes.

“We know Canada’s target is already super weak. They’re really struggling to find all the pieces that would get them to their target.

Building new pipelines, Scott said, “takes us completely in the opposite direction.”

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.

Since the Liberals formed government last November, Enbridge and Northern Gateway Pipeline have lobbied Ottawa an astounding 86 times, federal lobbying reports reveal.

Fifty-one of those meetings have taken place since August — which, funnily enough, is around the same time Prime Minister Justin Trudeau started backtracking on his commitment to ban oil tankers on B.C.’s north coast, a policy that would leave Enbridge’s Northern Gateway pipeline proposal dead in the water.

Since October last year, representatives from Enbridge and Northern Gateway Pipeline met with representatives from the Prime Minister’s Office eight times, Transport Canada 10 times, Fisheries and Oceans Canada 10 times, Indigenous and Northern Affairs Canada 12 times, Natural Resources Canada 31 times, and mostly Liberal Members of Parliament 39 times to name just a few.

During this time Enbridge and Northern Gateway Pipeline lobbyists met with more than 130 top-level chiefs of staff, policy directors, and ministers, records show.

Diesel Spill Off B.C. Coast Creating New Urgency Around Promised Tanker Ban

The issue of oil transport along the B.C. coast has been thrust back into the spotlight in the wake of ongoing diesel spill recovery efforts near Bella Bella.

Coastal residents were in a state of disbelief last night after learning an emergency response vessel, sent to B.C.’s central coast to retrieve the diesel-leaking Nathan E. Stewart, sank beside the sunken tug in windswept waters.

Since October 13, cleanup of the diesel spill in the traditional waters of the Heiltsuk First Nation has been slow and unsuccessful, hampered by a lack of response equipment, relief crews and favourable weather.

This has heightened criticism of the federal government and Trudeau who made a clear commitment to enact an oil tanker ban for the north B.C. coast during his election campaign last year. Trudeau even included formalizing the tanker ban on the list of ‘top priorities’ in Transport Minister Marc Garneau’s mandate letter in early November last year.

When pressed on his promise to ban tanker traffic — a proposal some say is not nearly comprehensive enough to protect the coast from vessels like the Nathan E. Stewart —Trudeau awkwardly dodged the question.

“Over the past year there’s been a lot of underinvestment by the federal government in marine safety and spill response. That’s something we’re absolutely committed to turning around,” Trudeau told Breakfast Television.

“And one of the symbols of that — as someone who knows Vancouver and the Lower Mainland as well as I do — one of the first things we did was reopen the Kits coast guard base because we understand that having responders there if something happens is absolutely essential.”

Jess Housty, tribal councillor for the Heiltsuk, took to Twitter to express her dismay with the Prime Minister’s comments.

“Saw your interview today,” Housty tweeted. “You know Kits is ~650km away from Bella Bella and Seaforth Channel, right?”

Nathan Cullen, MP for the Skeena-Bulkley Valley region in B.C. and environment critic for the NDP, said it is incredibly frustrating for coastal people to have the federal government stall on the tanker ban.

“When we are talking about protecting the coast out here, for the people who live here, that’s life and death,” Cullen told DeSmog Canada.

“The insult is twice because the promise was twofold: one, to bring in a tanker ban. It’s been a year and we’re still waiting. Two, to establish respectful relations with First Nations.”

“This is literally killing two birds with one stone,” Cullen said.

He added Trudeau’s inability to follow through on his promises is indication of a dangerous duplicity.

“We are a year in and one has to wonder if there are two Justin Trudeaus. One that campaigns and does public events and Twitter. The other that meets in the private backrooms in Ottawa with more oil lobbyists — one would imagine by a factor of 10 — than he has with environmental and First Nation leaders.”

Cullen said it isn’t just the diesel spill near Bella Bella that British Columbians have to worry about, but the pending decision on the Kinder Morgan Trans Mountain pipeline.

“You wonder if the West Coast is being thrown under the bus for nothing other than political calculation.”

John Horgan, leader of the B.C.NDP, said the response to what is unfolding in Bella Bella at both the federal and the provincial level has been “frustrating” and “astounding.”

“It does really speak to an Ottawa-based arrogance to believe that reigniting the much-needed Coast Guard base in Vancouver is somehow a benefit to the coast north of Vancouver Island all the way to Prince Rupert,” Horgan told DeSmog Canada.

When asked about Enbridge and Northern Gateway’s recent lobbying spree, Horgan said “the government should spend more time with the people of B.C. when considering these problems and less with those lobbying government offices.”

Lobbying Records Disclose the Bare Minimum: Watchdog

These high volumes of lobbying are troubling, according to Duff Conacher, co-founder of Democracy Watch, a government accountability watchdog.

“Everybody should be worried about the power of large corporations in terms of lobbying governments,” Conacher told DeSmog Canada.

“They not only have economic power in terms of threatening to sue under trade deals or to take their business elsewhere…but they also usually hire people who have connections to the ruling party to do their lobbying so they have undue and unethical political power as well.”

Conacher said Enbridge and Northern Gateway could be doing a lot more lobbying of the federal government without any disclosure due to vast amounts of lobbying loopholes.

The documented lobbying by Enbridge and Northern Gateway is likely just scratching the surface, he said.

“Only oral pre-arranged meetings are required to be documented in those monthly logs. So you shouldn’t think that’s all the lobbying: that’s just the lobbying they disclosed.”

– With files from James Wilt

Enbridge Northern Gateway Lobbying Aug 2015-Oct 2016 – Sheet1 by DeSmog Canada on Scribd

Image: Justin Trudeau 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.

Many Indigenous leaders have expressed disappointment that only the leaders of the national organizations representing Inuit, Métis and First Nations were allowed to fully participate in the talks at a climate strategy meeting with the prime minister and premiers earlier this month. Other Indigenous leaders in attendance for the meeting in Vancouver were relegated to the role of spectators.   “Limiting conversation to three Indigenous voices from over 600 Indigenous communities across Canada is a vast under representation,” Melina Laboucan-Massimo, a climate and indigenous rights activist, said. “At a bare minimum, the regional chiefs should be at the table as well, but also Indigenous leaders and experts who work on climate should be as well.”   Regional chiefs were also frustrated that their input into the pan-Canadian framework for clean growth and climate change is limited, despite Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s promise of a “renewed, nation-to-nation relationship” with Indigenous people in Canada.   “We thought we’d have a chance to speak, but it was the national chief who was permitted to speak for about ten minutes. Ten minutes for all First Nations in Canada? That is a slap in the face to First Nations and embarrassment for Canada,” Ontario Regional Chief Isadore Day told DeSmog Canada. “Climate change is a matter of life and death. Our kids and grandkids will suffer if we fail to act and we only have a 20-year window to act. Clearly, we all need to work together.”

Treaty 6 Grand Chief Tony Alexis, an Alberta regional chief, said First Nations had been merely “asked to come and visit” the climate meeting. Chief Allan Adam of the Athabasca Fort Chipewyan First Nation in Alberta declared the federal government and premiers had “failed terribly” in addressing Indigenous concerns about climate change and protecting the environment.

“We Were Not Welcome At The Table": Chief Day   Two days of meetings took place in Vancouver: a meeting on March 2nd for Indigenous leaders, premiers and the prime minister and a meeting the following day exclusively for the provinces, territories and the federal government. Last-minute invitations to join the Alberta and Ontario provincial delegations allowed Day and Alexis to be present at the final meeting.   “We were not welcome at the table. If the meeting is an indication of how things will proceed moving forward, Indigenous peoples and Canadians should be concerned,” Day said.   Not all provinces appear comfortable with Indigenous leaders playing a significant role in the crafting of a Canadian climate framework either.   “From what I heard some provinces indicated during the meeting they would like to limit Indigenous involvement in the climate framework. I find this very concerning, not to mention deeply disrespectful,” Laboucan-Massimo told DeSmog Canada. “It is of immense importance for Indigenous governments to be engaged from start to finish at the four climate tables, and I hope that all levels of government respect that.”   Before the summit in Vancouver had begun, the federal government came under fire for failing to invite two other national Indigenous organizations — Native Women’s Association of Canada and the Congress of Aboriginal Peoples — to the talks. NDP Leader Tom Mulcair blasted Trudeau in Parliament for the “slight” and Manitoba Premier Greg Selinger pointed out in the past all five national organizations have been invited to attend first ministers meetings.   Indigenous Peoples To Be Consulted On The Climate Change Framework   A “broader engagement process with Indigenous peoples” is meant to take place alongside the work of four federal-provincial working groups studying key climate policy areas such as clean technology, carbon pricing mechanisms and greenhouse gas reductions strategies. If the recommendations are approved at a first ministers meeting this fall, they will make up the bulwark of a national framework shaping Canada’s responses to climate change.   The details of the consultation process have not been made available yet, but both Day and Laboucan-Massimo agree the process needs to be as comprehensive as possible for Indigenous concerns to be heard and incorporated.   "I think a climate change accord in Canada is necessary going forward. It would spell out how a constructive dialogue between Indigenous people and the federal government could take place," Day said.   Indigenous knowledge could also strengthen a national plan to address climate change. Scientists have already begun using Inuit knowledge and observations for studying weather patterns in the Arctic. Firsthand information like this can be used to test climate models.   “Because of the innate connection to the land, Indigenous people notice changes in the ecosystem, animals and water that others may dismiss. We’ve had centuries of observation, experience and intimate relationships to the land that has built this unique knowledge and sensitivity,” Laboucan-Massimo told DeSmog Canada. Laboucan-Massimo is a member of the Sakaw Nehiyawak (“Northern” or “Bush” Cree in English).   Laboucan-Massimo also sees the low-carbon economy as much more in line with Indigenous worldviews than fossil fuels economies.

“For the first time since the age of industrialization, there finally exists a technology that produces energy that is not in complete contradiction with Indigenous values and our way of life,” Laboucan-Massimo said. “The time is now for our communities to begin integrating renewable energy technology such as solar photovoltaic to help us become less reliant on fossil fuels.” 

Image: Melina Laboucan Massimo at a solar installation in her community of Little Buffalo in northern Alberta.

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 stands at the threshold of building our clean growth economy,” the opening line of Canada’s new declaration on clean growth and climate change states. The declaration was endorsed by the prime minister and premiers in Vancouver Thursday.   “We will grow our economy while reducing emissions. We will capitalize on the opportunity of a low-carbon and climate-resilient economy to create good-paying and long-term jobs. We will do this in partnership with Indigenous peoples based on recognition of rights, respect and cooperation,” the Vancouver Declaration continues.      The document itself is not a national climate plan, but rather lays the foundation for one to be finalized in the fall. The document represents a major change in the political tide for Canada, with the federal government, provinces and territories working together to reduce Canada’s production of global warming greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions.   “Politicians coming together and talking about this is a great step for Canada,” Dave Sawyer, a leading environmental economist in Canada, told DeSmog Canada. “It is very positive that first ministers are setting up a process to align provincial climate policies and look to fill holes in policies across the country.”

Provincial Climate Policies Hold the Details

Canadians looking for meaningful climate action from the federal government since the signing of the Kyoto Protocol ­— the world’s first climate treaty — in 1997, may be disappointed the Vancouver Declaration lacks specifics.   The six-point document contains no renewable energy targets, sector specific regulations on GHG emissions, or any mention of Canada’s number one contributor to climate change: the oil and gas sector. The sole national target mentioned in the document is a commitment to meet or exceed Canada’s 2030 target of 30 per cent cuts in emissions levels compared to 2005 levels — a target established under the previous federal government that has been criticized as weak.   Sawyer argues many of the details missing in the Vancouver Declaration are actually contained in existing and emerging provincial climate policies and regulations.   “In the past, we have had this tendency of pledging to ambitious targets and then backsliding from there,” Sawyer said. “Over the last ten years of federal policy inaction, we have had a fair amount of provincial policy put in place to drive down emissions.”   In late 2015, Alberta released plans to cap oilsands emissions and phase out coal-fired electrical generation and Saskatchewan adopted  a 50 per cent renewable energy target for 2030. Ontario and Manitoba announced last year they would adopt cap and trade carbon pricing systems.   Building on the success of provincial and territorial policies is a cornerstone of the Vancouver Declaration which recognizes “the commitment of the federal government to work with the provinces and territories in order to complement and support their actions without duplicating them, including by promoting innovation and enabling clean growth across all sectors.”   "What is different this time around is we have a credible federal back stop," Sawyer, who is the CEO of the consultancy EnviroEconomics, told DeSmog. "A subtle reminder to the provinces and territories that if they don't find a way to drive down their emissions the federal government will find a way for them."

Carbon Pricing 'Mechanisms' to be Used 

Pricing carbon pollution emerged as a source of contention in advance of the First Ministers' Meeting. Prior to the Vancouver event, the premiers of Saskatchewan, Yukon, and Manitoba made it clear they would not support Ottawa imposing a national minimum carbon price on the provinces and territories.   During his election campaign Trudeau promised to implement a national price on carbon and indicated a carbon price was an intended outcome of the Vancouver meeting.   “I was happy to see the Prime Minister move away from an exclusive focus on carbon pricing. Carbon pricing alone won't get you there,” Sawyer said from Ottawa. “You need regulations, technology innovation, and other measures as well as carbon pricing to transition cost-effectively to a low carbon economy."   A compromise was found in the end. The Vancouver Declaration commits the premiers to “adopting a broad range of domestic measures, including carbon pricing mechanisms” but not an actual per tonne price of GHG emissions found in cap and trade or carbon tax systems.   What those mechanisms may include has yet to be defined. Any policy measure driving up the costs of burning fossil fuels for energy could be conceived as an aspect of carbon pricing. During the meeting, Nova Scotia Premier Stephen McNeil floated the idea that the high rates Nova Scotians pay on electricity fulfills a similar function as a price on carbon.

Working Groups To Study Climate Plan Over Next Six Months 

The Vancouver Declaration also created four federal-provincial working groups that will refine recommendations on the pillars of an eventual pan-Canadian clean growth and climate change framework. Over the next six months the working groups will study clean technology solutions, carbon pricing mechanisms, GHG reductions “opportunities,” and adaptation and climate resilience.   The declaration requires the working groups to “engage Indigenous peoples in the development of the pan-Canadian framework on clean growth and climate change," adding the work of the declaration should be "complemented by a broader engagement process with Indigenous peoples.”   National Chief Perry Bellegarde of the Assembly of First Nations urged Canada to move quickly toward consultation with indigenous peoples.   “We are the first ones to feel the impacts of climate change and we know this crisis is real and it is upon us. Working together we can succeed but we have to start working now,” Bellegarde said in a statement.   Recommendations from the working groups will be submitted to the premiers and the federal government who will then finalize the Canadian climate framework in October. In the meantime, the federal government has committed to funding green infrastructure, public transportation and energy efficiency in social infrastructure to kick start and support low-carbon initiatives across the country.

Image Credit: Screenshot CBCNews.ca

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.

Prime Minister Justin Trudeau confirmed Wednesday the federal government will meet with Indigenous leaders and premiers in Vancouver in early March in the hopes of laying out the framework for a national climate strategy.   “I look forward to working with the premiers on combatting climate change and moving toward a greener, more sustainable Canadian economy better positioned to compete globally in the areas of clean knowledge and technologies,” Trudeau said in a media release.

The Prime Minister announced he will meet with Indigenous leaders on March 2 to inform a national climate framework discussion with the premiers in a First Ministers' Meeting scheduled to take place March 3. First Ministers' Meetings did not occur under former prime minister Stephen Harper.

According to Clare Demerse, Ottawa-based energy policy adviser with Clean Energy Canada, the meeting provides an unprecedented opportunity to discuss Canada's renewable energy transition.   “The right people will be in the room to move forward on a national approach [to climate change]," Demerse told DeSmog Canada. "Whether it’s electrical production, or natural resources extraction, provinces make big decisions on energy in Canada."

Meeting to Capitalize on Low-Carbon Economy

According to the Prime Minister's press release, the Vancouver meetings "will focus on effective ways to adapt to climate change, reduce greenhouse gas emissions, and capitalize on the opportunities presented by a low-carbon economy to create good-paying and long-term jobs." 

“We’d really like to see the conversation in Vancouver be about what we're going to build, not just about what we’re going to cut,” Demerse said. “How many electric cars will we see on the road? How are we going to make buildings more energy efficient? How much solar, wind and water power needs to be produced in 2020 or 2030?”   “This is not to say reduction targets shouldn’t be discussed. But the discussion needs to be more focused on the ‘how’ instead of just the number."   Canada was one of the only countries among the world’s top ten greenhouse gas gas emitters not to provide a national clean energy plan to the United Nations in the lead up to the Paris climate talks last December. Other heavy emitters like the United States, European Union, China and even Mexico submitted plans with clean energy targets along with their GHG reduction targets.    The $125 billion the Liberal Party promised during the federal election to invest in infrastructure could go a long way encouraging provinces and territories to adopt strong climate policies.    “The low-carbon infrastructure dollars could be used to reward a province or territory for raising its carbon price, or for adopting stronger climate policies,” Demerse said.   Green infrastructure and public transit were two priorities in the Liberals infrastructure spending pledge. The Liberals also committed to increasing Canada’s Low Carbon Economic Trust to $2 billion.

Feds Could Set a National Minimum Carbon Price

Carbon pricing could also play an important role during the first ministers meeting.   “The First Ministers will consider all policy measures at their disposal to make sure Canada can take advantage of the significant appetite for expertise in the clean growth economy,” the PMO announcement states.   Currently, British Columbia, Alberta, Ontario and Quebec all have some sort of carbon pricing system: either cap and trade or carbon tax. Last December, Manitoba announced it would join Ontario and Quebec’s cap and trade market, which is linked with California’s.   Unlike his predecessor, Trudeau is a supporter of making polluters pay for their greenhouse gas emissions. He is also an advocate of the provinces and territories choosing the system that suits them best.   The problem now lies with the different prices on emissions in different provinces. B.C.’s carbon tax is $30 per tonne of carbon, but Quebec’s carbon price, which is meant to fluctuate, is about half that.    “Eventually Canada will want one coherent national carbon pricing market. The bigger the market, the more diverse the opportunities to reduce emissions,” Demerse said.   “But we aren’t quite there yet, and certain provinces have done a lot of leg work to create their own carbon pricing systems. So, to create consistency between the different system and jurisdictions, the federal government should set a national minimum price on carbon."

Image Credit: PMO Photo Gallery

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.

After languishing in the darkness for ten years, a national climate policy in Canada could take shape during an anticipated first ministers meeting in Vancouver next month. The meeting fulfills a Liberal election promise “to establish a pan-Canadian framework for combating climate change” and meet with provincial ministers within 90 days of the UN COP21 climate negotiations in Paris.    “If there ever was a time this could work it would be now,” Jennifer Allan, PhD candidate and researcher with International Institute for Sustainable Development (IISD), said. “Canadians are mobilized and there’s more momentum for change than there’s been in the recent past, if ever.”   “The federal government and the provinces are not going to be able to sneak anything weak — or failure — out the backdoor,” Allan told DeSmog Canada.   Although Prime Minister Justin Trudeau has not officially announced the meeting to discuss a national climate plan with the premiers, the government of Newfoundland and Labrador published a media release earlier this week identifying March 3 as the date of the first ministers meeting to discuss a national climate change framework. 

Other sources confirmed the meeting will be held on March 3rd during the Globe Series, an international environmental business summit in Vancouver.

The early March date falls just within the federal government’s pledge to hammer out a climate framework with the provinces ninety days after the climate talks. The Liberal Party platform promised to meet with the provinces with the intended goal of establishing a national framework for combating climate change, “to develop real climate change solutions, consistent with our international obligations to protect the planet, all while growing our economy."   The task before the prime minister and premiers ­— figuring out how to rein in Canada’s rising greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions — will be a difficult one. The most recent emissions data from Environment and Climate Change Canada shows the country is way off course in meeting the weak GHG reduction targets set under the previous Conservative government.

  Source: Environment and Climate Change Canada, January 29th, 2016.

Under former Prime Minister Stephen Harper, Canada indicated it would reduce its GHG output only by roughly 14 per cent based on 1990 levels by 2030. The Trudeau government has said it wants to improve on this target, but has not said by how much.   Canada currently exceeds 1990 levels by 18 per cent.

Climate Action Creates Jobs 

Politically, the ground does not appear very fertile for the provinces, territories and federal government to all agree on a climate strategy that must include a plan on how to diminish Canada’s dependence on fossil fuels. Canada has agreed to phase out the use of fossil fuels by the end of the century and eliminate net carbon emissions by 2050.    Last month, Montreal-area mayors received criticism from Alberta and Saskatchewan politicians for refusing to support the proposed Energy East oil pipeline.   Even CBC personality Rick Mercer derided Montreal for suggesting the environmental risks of the pipeline outweigh potential economic rewards.   The low price of oil has sent the Canadian dollar on a downward spiral and triggered job losses in the oil patch. Many in Canada are concerned what a downward turn in oil production could mean for the economy.   “There’s unfortunately this old myth out there if the economy isn’t doing well it is certainly not the time to talk about environmental protection,” Allan said. “There’s been a lot studies done showing across the world climate action creates jobs.”   A 2014 report found the clean energy sector employs more people than the oilsands (also called tar sands), despite the $1.3 billion in subsidies the oil and gas industry receives from the federal government.   Globally, clean energy is a booming $300 billion industry right now.   Paris Agreement Should Guide a Canadian Climate Strategy

Under the Paris agreement, countries pledged to reduce GHG emissions in order to cap the rise in global temperatures at “well below 2C” (Celsius) and even “pursue efforts to limit the temperature increase to 1.5C.”   “The reference to 1.5 is a call for greater ambition than we’ve seen in the past,” Allan said, who attended the Paris talks as part of IISD’s Reporting Services Division.   “I think this will give some leverage for those within Canada who want to see the contributions put forward by the Harper government strengthened,” Allan told DeSmog Canada.   But the Paris agreement is light on details in regards to actual hard GHG reduction targets. The agreement allows countries to set GHG targets and reduce emissions in whatever way suits them.   Allan says this may be a blessing or a curse.   “The Paris agreement gives countries a tremendous amount of flexibility. In Canada’s case, the doors are open for us to come up with meaningful climate action in a way that is best for our economy and political structure. This is a good thing,” Allan said.   “This also means there is very little guidance in terms of policies and targets we should undertake,” Allan told DeSmog.   The commitment to keep planet’s temperature increase “well below” two degrees or even at 1.5 degrees (Canada was one of the countries pushing for the inclusion of 1.5 during the Paris talks) will have to be guiding principle in creating a national climate strategy if Canada is serious about breaking with past climate inaction and meeting international obligations.   Another nugget from the Paris agreement that could inform the first ministers meeting in Vancouver is the concept of no backsliding on previous commitments. Countries are expected to submit their plans to cut GHG emission to the UN every five years. Each plan is suppose to outdo, that is, outline deeper GHG cuts than in the previous one.   “So in a way the conversation starting now with the premiers is the first go around. Chances are they are going to have this conversation every five years or so to see what they can do that is more ambitious than the last time,” Allan said. 

Photo Credit: US EPA

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.

One month from now, arguably the most significant climate negotiations the world has ever seen will begin in Paris — and Prime Minister-designate Justin Trudeau plans on being there with a gaggle of premiers in tow, a show of Canadian representation unimaginable in previous years.

The COP21 UN-led climate summit is organized around one seemingly impossible outcome: a binding international climate agreement to limit global warming to 2 degrees Celsius.

B.C. Premier Christy Clark said she has been planning on attending the negotiations for several months. “I’ve already booked my ticket,” she said in a statement e-mailed to DeSmog Canada, adding she’s “delighted” Justin Trudeau will be in attendance.

“I’m delighted…we’ll have a real full contingent. I think almost all premiers are already planning to attend.”

Manitoba NDP Premier Greg Selinger confirmed he will attend the negotiations as well.

“Yes, I think you’re going to see a pretty good turn out this year,” he told DeSmog Canada.

Selinger added: “I just chatted with [Justin Trudeau] and I think it’s positive that Canada is going together. I think it’s good for the country and sends a positive message.” 

Alberta Premier Rachel Notley’s office also confirmed her attendance, as did the offices of Prince Edward Island Premier Wade MacLauchlan, Nunavut Premier Peter Taptuna and Quebec Premier Philippe Couillard.

Nova Scotia Premier Stephen McNeil will send Environment Minister Andrew Younger in his stead.

“It's encouraging that the premiers seem to be interested in attending COP,” Torrance Coste, who will be attending the conference as a member of the Canadian Youth Delegation, said.

Coste added that he’s hopeful that attendance will “translate into serious commitments around carbon emissions reductions and climate action in every province.”

Trudeau Taking a Cautious Approach to Provinces and Climate

In addition to attending the climate talks, Trudeau has promised to convene the provinces within 90 days of the conference to “work together on a framework to combat climate change.”

“There is no one-size-fits-all solution,” Trudeau stated on the campaign trail.

The Liberal party has been criticized for failing to commit to specific greenhouse gas reduction targets — although the party platform does agree with the world’s top scientists and policy makers that temperatures must be kept from rising more than 2 degrees Celsius.

In the week before the election, Trudeau told the CBC he would not commit to specific emissions targets.

“Everybody has thrown out numbers and different targets, and what they’re going to do and what is going to happen,” Trudeau said.

“What we need is not ambitious political targets. What we need is an ambitious plan to reduce our emissions in the country.”

Canada’s current climate commitment, formed under the Conservative government, is to reduce emissions by 30 per cent by 2050 from 2005 levels, a target the Liberals along with climate analysts have criticized as weak and inadequate.

Critics also pointed out that Canada’s total lack of climate legislation means the country is unlikely to meet that target, even though it is much weaker than commitments made by other industrial nations.

Trudeau has promised to work with the provinces on case-by-case basis to address location-specific sources of emissions and appropriate solutions.

A New Post-Harper Era

The approach goes against the grain of the Conservative government under Stephen Harper, which was accused of taking credit at the federal level for emissions reductions achieved by the provinces.

Some provinces even expressed frustration that the federal government claimed to be consulting with the provinces in advance of last year’s climate summit in Peru when those consultations hadn’t actually taken place.

The Harper government also warned the provinces that Trudeau would impose provincial carbon taxes if they agreed to work with the Liberals. But with strong public approval of B.C.’s carbon tax and Ontario jumping on the carbon pricing bandwagon with Quebec, it’s clear that ship has already sailed.

Coste said Trudeau’s approach represents a major departure from the Harper government, “whose hostile approach on climate change was to do essentially nothing at all.”

He added he does have some concern, however, that a lack of consensus between the provinces might act as an impediment to Canada’s meaningful participation on the international stage.

“Will the premiers of, say, B.C., Saskatchewan, Ontario and Nova Scotia all be willing to commit to the same level of climate action? And if they did, would it be the serious commitments that climate scientists around the world are calling for? A big concern is that the new Prime Minister would use a lack of consensus among the premiers as an excuse to not sign a legally binding agreement in Paris.”

"Trudeau has an opportunity in Paris to remake Canada's reputation as an international leader," Tzeporah Berman, B.C. environmentalist and adjunct professor in the faculty of Environmental Studies at York University, told DeSmog Canada.

But to do so will require strong federal leadership, Berman said. "The essential question is whether [the new federal government] will step up to this challenge or leave the Provinces to do all the heavy lifting."

Berman said although it is clear Justin Trudeau will be a very different Prime Minister than Stephen Harper, more than strong provincial policies are needed to reset the stage.

"Our new federal government must set a level of ambition and a floor for the carbon price that ensures we have a coherent National climate plan that Canadians can be proud of in Paris and beyond."

Premiers Optimistic About Working with Ottawa on Climate

The provinces, for their part, seem excited at the prospect of fresh blood in Ottawa.

Premier Clark indicated she supports Trudeau’s province-by-province approach.

“I think that the federal government is really wise to take the course of allowing provinces to lead when it comes to addressing climate change,” Clark said. “Each of us has such different approaches.”

“I think what the federal government is wisest to do, and I think this is what Prime Minister Trudeau was talking about, is making sure the provinces are as coordinated as we can be, make sure that every province is doing everything that they can to lead, but not to start to fiddle with real success that we've seen in some places.”

“Climate change can be a source of innovation,” Premier Selinger told DeSmog Canada. “I think we’re all going to have to work together and I think we’ll see a variety of approaches across Canada.”

Selinger added he is looking forward to seeing a national climate target and more collaboration between provinces in achieving it.

“It’s not going to be perfect, but it’s going to be good to get started.”

Image: Justin Trudeau

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.