The UN climate talks seemed to grind to slow motion this week with the much-hyped, much-anticipated arrival of U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry.

Kerry arrived late for his scheduled talk, striding in with that celebrity dignitary air, surrounded by a posse of private security guards and long-lens photographers. An inexplicable apocalyptic plume of black smoke rose from the Marrakechi cityscape behind him.

From along the corridors of the conference venue adoring bystanders yelled, “We love you Secretary Kerry!”

I swear I saw Kerry’s teeth glisten like a Disney princess as he smiled and waved.

The moment was perfectly American, unfolding like a scene from a high-budget Hollywood film. In this conference mashup of international attendees it really did feel like the whole world was watching.

But they weren’t.

Secretary John Kerry at the UN climate talks in Marrakech, Morocco. Photo: Carol Linnitt

In fact, the whole of the giant complex making up the 22nd Conference of Parties seemed only to gaze up at the commotion before carrying on with its work.

At most international diplomatic events, the U.S. takes up a disproportionate amount of the sociopolitical bandwidth.

With the recent dramatic unfolding of the U.S. election — and the elevation of sideshow performer Donald Trump to one of the most powerful thrones in the world — this is truer than ever.

The reverberations of Trump’s win are still being felt in Marrakech where delegations from some 200 countries are deliberating the details of the Paris Agreement, a historic international treaty to limit global warming to as close to 1.5 degrees Celsius as possible.

Trump, who said he believes climate change to be a Chinese hoax, has vowed to pull out of the Paris Agreement and unleash America’s fossil fuel corporations on the nation’s remaining hydrocarbon deposits.

Here’s Trumps 100-day energy action plan:

Trump's 100-day action plan for energy #climate #cop22 "cancel Paris Climate Agreement" and stop payments "to U.N. global warming programs." pic.twitter.com/p0BvVXzyrf

— Graham Readfearn (@readfearn) November 9, 2016

Many responded by announcing the end had come, the planet will fry and we’re all screwed.

As a Canadian watching the U.S. election furor descend into ever-deeper madness from north of the border, I’ll admit it was hard to ward off the end-times thinking.

Yet arriving in Marrakech after extracting myself from my self-referential cesspool of a Facebook feed, it was clear just how much of the world is… well… not America and preoccupied with very non-American things.

In an interview at the climate talks Erik Solheim, executive director of the UN Environment Program, said the leadership gap left in America’s wake will simply be filled by other countries.

“The small talk here in Marrakech was, of course, completely overshadowed by the U.S. election, as everyone knows,” Solheim said. “But I’m very optimistic that whatever happens in the U.S., China and others will provide the global leadership that we need.”

China, responsible for 25 per cent of the world’s emissions while also being the world’s largest solar energy market, seemed eager to wave its diplomatic finger at the U.S. It backed up the gesture by announcing a new climate partnership with the European Union.

Lutz Weischer, leader of international climate policy at Germanwatch, said the EU/China collaboration is a game changer. He suggested Trump may have inadvertently strengthened the international community’s resolve.

“The Chinese have made statements that read to me they believe this is a global challenge…indicating the EU and China can move forward on this together,” he said. “Trump was sort of a wake up call to everybody. Countries seem even more committed than in the past.”

Solar installation in China. Photo: The Climate Group via Flickr.

Australia, Pakistan, Italy, Saudi Arabia and the U.K. have all ratified the Paris Agreement since Trump’s election, putting an end to speculation the U.S. shakeup might cause a climate treaty exodus.

Mohamed Adow, climate lead from Christian Aid International, said it’s a significant sign that even a post-Brexit U.K. isn’t abandoning the agreement.

“During a week in which the international climate negotiations have experienced the shock of the U.S. elections, this backing by America’s oldest and strongest ally shows that support for global action to tackle climate change remains resolute,” he said.

“If the election of Donald Trump as President of the United States can’t shake countries’ resolve then nothing will.”

Beyond pure political and economic leadership, many have expressed concern that the real loss will be felt in the absence of America’s moral leadership. But Weischer doesn’t see it that way.

“The strongest moral leadership in this process has always come from the vulnerable countries,” he said. “And not just in providing that leadership but in actually committing to do more.”

Bill Hare, climate scientist and director of Berlin-based Climate Analytics, said Trump’s surprise victory did dampen the mood in Marrakech — for a day.

“People bounced back quickly, thinking ‘well, okay, we can also do tough.’ “

New climate possibilities are opening up in new ways, Hare said, “because the geopolitical and technological dynamics have changed.”

Slowing emissions in China are the most obvious example.  

“From our technical analysis, we’re beginning to think China has peaked its carbon dioxide emissions from fossil fuels,” Hare said.

“It’s the second or third year in a row where carbon dioxide emissions have reduced and new policies announced by China should continue that trend.”

Earth to America: Trump’s Not the Centre of the Universe (Or the Climate) https://t.co/hNspoMRXIx #cdnpoli #ClimateAction

— DeSmog Canada (@DeSmogCanada) November 18, 2016

But Hare said the real news story is coming out of India, which is responsible for 6.96 per cent of the world’s total emissions and has millions of residents still without power.

For several years the world has been left to wonder if India’s solution to its energy poverty would be coal or cleaner alternatives.

Hare said news that India cancelled four ultra, mega coal plants —“which are as bad as they sound” — is a positive sign, as is the country’s massive growth rate in renewable energy.

“I think that’s the biggest story on the planet right now: will India make that transformation away from coal towards renewables bringing hundreds of millions of people out of energy poverty in a clean and sustainable way?”

“That would be the biggest transformation the world has seen should it come about,” Hare said.

“So despite the depression that many people feel about the Trump election, and rightly so, in the climate policy space we see a lot of potential for things to move forward rapidly despite the turbulence from the U.S. political system.”

Liz Gallagher, senior associate with the UK-based climate analysis group, E3G said Secretary Kerry’s remarks to conference attendees may have provided some measure of comfort by emphasizing the role of pure market forces in deciding the fate of the climate.

Over 360 businesses and investors have also called on Trump to stick with the fight against global warming, saying it simply makes good business sense.

The Paris Agreement calls for a worldwide decarbonization by 2050, something that is going to require what Trump might term ‘tremendous’ amounts of renewable investment dollars.

“That’s the paradox of what president-elect Trump is proposing: he’s going backwards on policy that could make it harder for the U.S. to retain or grow its place in the world,” Hare said. “The economic benefits will be lost to the United States.”

Weischer had a similar sentiment: “This is the first time the federal U.S. government has actively decided to take the U.S. out of an emerging industrial revolution.”

Emissions in the U.S. will likely be affected by Trump’s victory but it’s not yet game over for the universe.

So maybe all that apocalypse talk emanating from the U.S. is really about something more specific: in the coming clean energy rapture, America is the one who risks being left behind.

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.

Last year the Canadian government enjoyed a positive reception at the UN climate talks in Paris. After 10 years of climate inaction under a Conservative government, the international community anticipated the new Liberal government would mean good things for the nation’s climate governance.

But Canada’s contribution to the world’s first climate treaty remains “inadequate” according to a new report released by the Carbon Action Tracker in light of the climate talks.

The Paris Agreement, designed to limit global warming to as close to 1.5 degrees Celsius as possible, was signed in France last year and ratified, with incredible speed, less than one year later on November 4. Although a proud signatory of the agreement, Canada will not meet its climate targets, according to the new analysis.

Prime Minister Justin Trudeau adopted the same climate targets as the previous Stephen Harper government, pledging to reduce Canada’s emissions 30 per cent below 2005 levels by 2030.

“Under its current policies, Canada will miss both its 2020 pledge and its 2030 [Nationally Determined Contribution] targets by a wide margin,” Climate Action Tracker states.

The group estimates that based on current climate policies Canada’s emissions will increase by three to 18 per cent by 2030.

Last month Trudeau announced a national carbon tax that will price carbon at $10/tonne in 2018 and increase to $50/tonne by 2022.

But according to the analysis of four prominent environmental groups, Canada’s fossil fuel subsidies eliminate the supposed benefits of that carbon tax.

Canada Must Phase Out $3.3 Billion In Fossil Fuel Subsidies

“It makes no sense to put a price on carbon while continuing to give handouts to oil and gas companies,” Alex Doukas, senior campaigner and author with Oil Change International, told DeSmog Canada. 

“That's like pouring water on the fire with one hand while spraying gasoline on it with the other.” 

Doukas added Trudeau promised to eliminate fossil fuel subsidies when campaigning last year.

“Now his government has to deliver.”

Canada first committed to phasing out fossil fuel subsidies in 2009 along with other G20 nations. That commitment was later affirmed at a 2015 G7 meeting and named as a priority for Finance Minister Bill Morneau in a mandate letter from Trudeau.

“Unless Canada phases out massive subsidies to oil and gas companies, Trudeau’s carbon price will do little to encourage polluters to cut carbon emissions,” Dale Marshall, national program manager with Environmental Defence, said in Marrakech.

“The three billion dollars in annual subsidies could be put to much better use by investing in climate action, health care and other initiatives.”

In Marrakech, Minister of Environment and Climate Change Catherine McKenna participated in the Carbon Pricing Leadership Coalition, an international group pushing for more integrated market-based climate solutions.

“In light of Minister McKenna’s participation…we take the opportunity to remind Canada that leadership requires coherent fiscal policies,” Annie Bérubé, Director of Government Relations at Équiterre, said.

“Finance Minister Bill Morneau must announce a predictable phase-out of all remaining preferential tax treatment to the oil and gas sector starting in Budget 2017.”

Canada’s #ClimateAction Called ‘Inadequate’ at UN Climate Talks in #Marrakech https://t.co/KpTN378mXJ #cdnpoli @cathmckenna @JustinTrudeau

— DeSmog Canada (@DeSmogCanada) November 15, 2016

More Opportunity for Canadian Leadership at UN Climate Talks

She added there is some work to be done, however, to bridge the gap between Canada’s international climate commitments and decision-making domestically.

“This is a core question that Canada has to reconcile,” she said.

“Can we build a national climate plan that allows us to achieve the 2030 target with deeper reductions over time?”

Canada has come under harsh criticism recently for approving the Pacific Northwest LNG export terminal on the coast of B.C.  The LNG facility is estimated to be the largest single point source of emissions in Canada, adding the equivalent of 1.9 million cars to the roads.

Analysts have pointed out the approval of the LNG project is a serious obstacle to Canada meeting its climate commitments.

Flanagan said she sees an opportunity for Canada to really “do the math” on its climate targets.

“That’s really what this COP is about,” she said. “It’s about taking the rhetoric and turning it into plans that will drive the change we need to see.”

Image: COP22 signage in Marrakech, Morocco. Photo: Carol Linnitt/DeSmog Canada

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

Some corporate sponsors of the COP21 Paris climate talks are failing to properly report their greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions a new report reveals.

The Paris climate conference is sponsored by over 60 companies including big polluters EDF, Engie and BNP Paribas. And while countries continue to negotiate a deal on tackling climate change, what have these corporate sponsors brought to the table?

A new study published this week by French social research group BASIC and the Multinationals Observatory shows that very few of the COP21 sponsors are declaring their GHG emissions in a transparent way.

The report looked at the GHG emission reduction policies of ten COP21 sponsors: Accor, BNP Paribas, Carrefour, EDF, Engie, Kering, LVMH, L’Oréal, Micheline and Renault.

Of these, only one company – EDF – has actually reduced its overall carbon footprint in line with EU targets.

Corporate Transparency

Olivier Petitjean of Multinationals Observatory told DeSmog UK: “There has been a growing trend, especially when you listen to what the French government says, to suggest that corporations have all the solutions to deal with the climate crisis, and that they are the ones that will deliver on the objectives set in Paris.”

“But as we show in our report, private companies are not as exemplary as they'd like to pretend. Only a minority of them report on their emissions in a transparent, accessible way,” Petitjean said.

Only four of the ten companies examined actually publish their GHG emissions data: BNP Paribas, Carrefour, Kering and LVMH. However, none of these companies take into consideration the full impact of its business’ value chain – from raw materials to waste disposal.

And while half of the companies in the study – Accor, Kering, L’Oréal, Michelin and Renault – did commission a full assessment of their emissions over the value chain, none of them have shown any GHG emission cuts at this scale.

The failure to address a companies’ upstream and downstream emissions is troubling given that for these COP21 sponsors, the majority of their emissions are located in these areas which represent up to 85 percent of their global GHG footprint.

Where companies do make GHG reductions, many times this is done through carbon offsets elsewhere rather than investing in emission cuts at their home-operations in Europe.

EDF and Engie

In particular, Petitjean highlighted the contradiction between EDF and Engie’s prominence at the climate talks compared to their environmental performance.

“The French government has always been very explicit about its intention to use COP21 to promote the French ‘national champions’, Engie and EDF,” said Petitjean, noting that both companies have large-scale advertising campaigns going on which highlight their sponsorship of the climate talks.”

He continued: “When you look at the reality of their investments and their portfolio, the share of renewables is still really minimal, and it mostly comes from gobbling up smaller companies.”

Both also continue to invest in coal and have also just signed contracts with Cheniere to import liquefied natural gas from the U.S. starting in 2017.

Photo: UNFCCC 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.

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.

A coalition of vulnerable countries is pushing the global community to adopt a new 1.5 degree global warming target at the ongoing climate talks in Paris.

The group of countries, known as the Climate Vulnerability Forum, argues current efforts to limit global temperature rise to two degrees Celsius is insufficient to protect many nations from the dangers of climate change. The group came to this conclusion, which was announced on the first day of the climate talks, after two years of expert review and diplomatic consultations.

The groups said lives, rights and the prosperity of billions are at stake in the globally agreed temperature limit.

The two degree limit has been widely cited since the Stockholm Environment Institute released a major study on dangerous climate change in 1990. The limit did not become a formal target of global climate negotiations until 2010 with the signing of the Cancun Agreement.

For a more detailed backgrounder on the two degree target, read Carbon Brief’s “Two Degrees: The History of Climate Change’s Speed Limit.”

Thoriq Ibrahim, Maldives minister of environment and energy, said the danger of exceeding a 1.5 degrees target is “especially acute for the Alliance of Small Island States (AOSIS), a group of 44 low-lying island and coastal states from around the world.”

“AOSIS is of the view that the Paris agreement must be an ambitious, legally binding protocol capable of limiting warming to below 1.5 degrees Celsius,” he said, adding “immediate action is required before the treaty goes into effect in 2020 if we are to keep the window to 1.5 degrees open.” 

Recently Cyclone Pam and Typhoon Maysak destroyed homes and killed dozens of people in Vanuatu, the Solomon Islands, Tuvalu, Kiribati and in Micronesia, Ibrahim said.

“What’s worse, scientists expect climate change to make weather events like these far worse in the Pacific and oceanic regions worldwide, unless bold action is taken immediately.”

“Warming has now reached 1C,” the island nations said in a statement. “At the same time, our islands are experiencing the impacts of an ongoing extreme El Niño and the science is telling us that such events will occur twice as often over the 21st century if we do not act strongly and decisively. Additional magnitudes of warming will only increase the risk of such severe, pervasive and irreversible impacts.”

On Monday the island nations along with the coalition of vulnerable countries pressed the global community and France, the host of this year’s climate summit, for a binding treaty that limits warming to 1.5 degrees. The group also called for complete global decarbonization by 2050.

French foreign minister Laurent Fabius indicated France is open to adjusting the agreement to accommodate the 1.5 degree target.

“This agreement will need to be differentiated, fair, sustainable, dynamic, balanced and legally binding, and will need to ensure that … the global temperature does not rise by 2C — or even 1.5C — compared to the pre-industrial era because of greenhouse gas emissions,” Fabius said.

“Each of these terms refers to specific provisions on which we have been unable to conclude fully in the past.”

“We refuse to be the sacrifice of the international community in Paris. Anything that takes our survival off the table here is a red line,” Anwar Hossain Manju, Minister of Environment of Bangladesh, said on Monday.

Ethiopia State Minister of Environment, Forest and Climate Change Kare Chawicha added, “climate change does not affect us equally. Those countries which have contributed least to the problem are often affected the most. We are here to cooperate. We are here to share experiences.”

Canadian Federal Green party leader Elizabeth May said she hopes Canada will join efforts to implement the 1.5 degree target.

“I think I t would be helpful for Canada to say the world can stabilize at 1.5 degrees,” May said.

Saleemul Huq, director of the International Centre for Climate and Development, told reporters Tuesday the difference between a temperature increase of 1.5 degrees and two degrees “is roughly 1.5 million people who will fall through the cracks and most of them will be in vulnerable and developing countries.”

Huq said a recent assessment of the two degrees target found it will fail to protect some people, countries and ecosystems.

“The 1.5 degree target is endorsed by 106 countries,” Huq added. “That makes them a majority of UNFCCC which is just over 150 countries. If this was a democracy they would win.”

“But unfortunately these are not very powerful countries,” he said.

“The pushback we get is that [the 1.5 degree target] is unrealistic.”

Huq added that current national climate commitments are projected to increase global temperatures by three degrees.

“It will be difficult. But difficult is not impossible,” Huq said.

We believe there is sufficient technology and money. There is insufficient political will. We have 13 days to generate that political will.”

The Climate Action Network, a group representing more than 950 non-governmental organizations worldwide, welcomed the call for a strengthened target.

“If our goal is not to secure the survival of whole countries, then what is it?” the group stated.

“This is a simple moral imperative that should unite us all.”

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 told international dignitaries that “Canada is back,” Monday in his speech at the opening of the COP21 climate talks in Paris.

Trudeau told the crowd, “our government is making climate change a top priority and our actions will be based on five principals.”

Trudeau promised first to proceed with climate policy “based on the best scientific information and advice” adding, “second, we will support and implement policies that will contribute to the low-carbon economy and this will include carbon pricing.”

"Third and very importantly, we will work with our provinces, territories, cities, and indigenous leaders who are taking a leadership role on climate change,” he said.

“Indigenous peoples have known for thousands of years how to care for our planet. The rest of us have a lot to learn and no time to waste.” He added that Canadian cities also have much to teach government how to “create clean growth and combat climate change.”

Video: Zack Embree

On Tuesday environment and climate change minister Catherine McKenna hosted a working lunch with Canadian indigenous leaders including Okalik Eegeesiak, chair of the Inuit Circumpolar Council, Chief Bill Erasmus from the Assembly of First Nations and David Chartland, vice president of the Métis National Council.

“Fourth, we will help the developing world tackle the challenges of climate change.”

Canada impressed the international community by announcing an increase in contributions to the green climate find to $2.65 billion from a previous $300 million under the Conservatives.

“Many of the world’s most vulnerable countries have done little to contribute to the problem but face the most significant consequences,” Trudeau said. “And all countries deserve the right to develop and this development can and should be base on access to clean energy technologies.”

Bill Gates congratulated Canada for increasing its pledge to support developing nations in their transition to clean energy.

Canada joined Gates and a handful of other investors in Mission Innovation, a collaboration of 20 nations to accelerate the clean energy revolution.

Trudeau said Canada is ready to “take on a new leadership role internationally.”

“We will participate in collaborative initiatives, such as Mission Innovation and the carbon pricing leadership coalition and we will seek out opportunity to work bilaterally or multilaterally beginning with our North American partners.”

“Finally, we view climate change not just on the challenge it is but also as an historic opportunity: an opportunity to build a sustainable economy based on clean technology, green infrastructure, and green jobs.”

“We will not sacrifice growth: we will create growth.” 

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.

As the COP21 climate talks get underway in Paris, Canada is enjoying a newfound place in the international spotlight.

Canada announced today it will contribute $30 million to finance climate projects in the world’s least developed countries as part of a larger $2.65 billion pledge that will support the transition to low-carbon energy sources in developing nations.

This contribution is a significant overhaul of Canada’s previous $300 million pledge under the Conservative government.

“Canada recognizes the importance of supporting adaptation action in the most vulnerable countries, which are struggling with the impacts of climate change,” Catherine McKenna, environment and climate change minister, said. “We are proud to be part of this joint effort to further support the Least Developed Countries Fund.”

Even Bill Gates expressed his appreciation for Canada's larger pledge.

With @BillGates & @JustinTrudeau before "mission innovation": mobilisation for research in clean energy #COP21 pic.twitter.com/c8fdoqMySt

— Ségolène Royal (@RoyalSegolene) November 30, 2015

Prime Minister Justin Trudeau also told media Canada still has work to do.

“We have a tremendous level of action and commitments made, and we know we have work to do, which is why we started the work of getting together even before coming to Paris," he said.

Trudeau added Canada has an opportunity to become a “purveyor of solutions” and put forward “innovative thinking” at the climate talks.

Speaking alongside other heads of state, Trudeau said, "Canada is back my good friends we’re here to help!" to applause.

Federal Green party leader Elizabeth May said Canada’s broad delegation to the talks, which includes Premiers, Ministers and members of the opposition, points in a positive direction.

“First Nations and NGOs are invited to participate the way they used to,” May said. “It’s back to normal. It’s how it used to be.”

“I think we and all Canadians should work as hard as we can to put together new targets, new commitments to financing, and re-ratify the Kyoto protocol in order to have access to new clean energy.”

"Everyone is waiting to see what 'New Canada' will do."

May added she hopes to see Canada’s delegation push for a strong agreement, including a mandatory review of countries’ progress every three years.

She also hopes to see more legally binding language in the treaty.

“We know the targets won’t be legally binding but the architecture of the treaty should be legally binding — and that’s still in square brackets,” May said.

She added, “everyone wants to see what New Canada will do.”

Canada has previously played a positive role in the climate negotiations.

“As the past has shown, Canada can punch above its weight for good, but can also punch above its weight for bad when it wants to sabotage progress,” she said.

“I think the public mobilization and citizen movements need to keep pushing government. In the context of the horrors of what happened in Paris people can get easily distracted by terrorism but as terrifying as ISIS is, climate change is a much bigger problem.”

“Climate changes is relevant to unrest in Syria through drought,” she said. “We need to keep pushing.”

Image: 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.

Earlier today at a meeting of Commonwealth nations in Malta, Prime Minister Trudeau announced that his government would increase its Green Climate Fund commitment to $2.65 billion.

Here's a quick rundown what that actually means.

The Green Climate Fund was set up as part of the United Nations climate negotiation process, with a goal of raising $100 billion from both the public and private sector by 2020. The wealthiest countries at the negotiating table have been under pressure to contribute more money to the Green Climate Fund. 

The idea behind the Green Climate Fund is to overcome a major sticking point in the UN climate treaty process, which is that developing nations are being asked to invest in renewable energy technology and take measures to reduce the impacts of climate change, but do not have nearly the money needed to do so. 

The money raised for the Green Climate Fund will be spent on projects that help developing nations in regions like sub-Saharan Africa adapt to the impacts of climate change, as well as put in place their own greenhouse gas mitigation plans.

Earlier this year, former Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper announced his government would commit $300 million to the Green Climate Fund. This announcement was not met favorably, considering Canada is the 10th wealthiest nation in the world, and that other countries have commitmed much more. The U.S. has pledged $3 billion and Japan, Germany, France and Britain have all pledged over $1 billion to the Green Climate Fund.

With today's announcement by Prime Minister Trudeau, Canada has not only become one of the largest contributors to the Green Climate Fund, but it also will put a lot of pressure on other wealthy nations at the upcoming UN climate summit in Paris, to commit for the first time, or re-up the commitments they have already made. Looking at the pledge tracker maintained by the Green Climate Fund, Trudeau's commitment (in U.S. dollars) puts Canada second only to the United States when it comes to overall amounts committed.

As for Trudeau, he will now be coming into the Paris negotiations on a wave of positive momentum, both domestically and internationally, but will still be put to task over other major issues that Canada is still considered weak on. Three big issues that remain unaddressed are:

1) Canada's overall reduction target and stated year to meet that target,

2) whether Alberta's oilsands will be included in any nation-wide greenhouse gas reduction commitments, and

3) if a cap-and-trade type system is to be implemented, at what "floor price" will taxes on emissions start.

All very big issues, and while it is unrealistic for a government so early in its mandate to commit outright to all these things at the Paris climate summit starting this Monday, observers will be looking for further details on what a final Canadian action plan on climate change might look like.

Image: 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.

Mark Jaccard is professor of sustainable energy at Simon Fraser University.

The other day I heard an environmental advocate argue that Prime Minister Justin Trudeau needed to make an ambitious commitment at the UN Paris climate summit (COP 21) to atone for all the “climate fossil” awards won by our previous prime minister. I’m not so sure.

Remember when newly elected President Barack Obama won the Nobel Peace Prize? He hadn’t yet done anything. Apparently the Nobel committee bestowed the award simply because he was not George W. Bush. In the same vein, Trudeau will be welcomed because he is not Stephen Harper.

I am not saying, of course, that Trudeau should just go to Paris and smile. But to make a real contribution, he will need to be brutally honest about why UN negotiations have failed for over two decades and equally honest about why Canada’s emission reduction efforts have also continuously failed.

For a start, politicians like Trudeau must see past the “fossil fuels are evil” rhetoric of some environmentalists. The reality is that coal, oil and natural gas are fantastic forms of energy that have played a critical role in improving humanity’s material conditions over the past two centuries, a period that has seen a doubling of human lifespans in wealthy countries.

Politicians from developing countries know about the wonders of fossil fuels. How can they not, after witnessing China’s remarkable transformation from one of the world’s poorest countries to an economic powerhouse in just two decades? From 1990 to 2010, its economy and its coal consumption grew apace at close to 10 per cent a year. As a result, its CO2 emissions grew almost as fast, making it the world’s largest emitter.

Trudeau must also grasp that reducing greenhouse gas emissions, especially CO2 from burning fossil fuels, is what policy analysts call a “global public good.” Within national boundaries, citizens pay for public goods like roads and national defence by sharing the cost through tax contributions to government. People don’t agree how much tax each should pay (rich versus middle class, corporations versus individuals), so government decides. If we had a global government, it would determine what each country should contribute to the cost of preventing climate change, with a binding mechanism to ensure compliance. But we don’t have a global government. So almost 200 countries try to agree on the contribution of each and on the compliance mechanism to ensure that contribution. They’ve been unable to agree for over 20 years.

They’re unlikely to agree at Paris.

Paris and the Self-Interest Bias

The main reason they cannot agree is that countries, like individuals, have a self-interest bias when viewing evidence related to fairness. Richer countries say they are willing to give a “fair” level of assistance to poorer countries, such as India, to avoid China’s CO2-intensive development path, thereby foregoing unrestrained fossil fuel combustion in favour of hydro, solar, wind, biofuels, nuclear and fossil fuels (if capturing the CO2). But their idea of a fair level of assistance is dramatically lower than what poor countries think it should be. So poor countries are unwilling to accept binding reductions.

These differing perceptions of fairness have plagued climate negotiations. At Copenhagen, in 2009, all countries agreed that humanity should limit global CO2 emissions so that the average temperature would increase no more than 2⁰C, a level beyond which scientists fear we may pass tipping points that lead to uncontrolled changes and horrific damages. But politicians at Copenhagen could not agree on how to parse the global limit into emission limits for individual countries.

So they punted this decision to this year’s Paris meeting — another way of saying “let future politicians figure this out, because we sure can’t.”

In the run-up to Paris, each country was asked to volunteer a target for its own emissions in 2030, what are referred to as “intended nationally determined contributions” or “INDCs.” (Each COP seems to create fresh terminology for old concepts. In this case, an INDC previously was a “voluntary commitment” or a “nonbinding emission target.”) Over 150 countries have set INDCs. Not surprisingly, however, analysis of these shows that even if all countries achieved their target, the resulting emissions path would rocket past the 2⁰C limit.

So there is the conundrum.

Countries are willing to set nonbinding emission targets. But these targets fail to meet our 2⁰C climate objective. Developing countries might be willing to tighten their targets if developed countries paid their costs of foregoing fossil fuels. But so far the amount on offer is not close to what developing countries say they require.

So what is likely at Paris? And what can Canada contribute?

Overcoming the Climate Stalemate

Continued stalemate that fails to achieve 2⁰C is one possible outcome, although this might be dressed up to appear like a success. This dress-up could include patting developing countries on the back for their first INDCs, substantial funding commitments from wealthier countries to help them deflect slightly from the fossil-fuel path, and a hopeful-sounding concluding document that talks about future processes for reviewing and tightening the INDCs of developed and developing countries.

A more promising outcome might already achieve some tightening and co-ordination of the INDCs of wealthier countries — perhaps through agreement on a minimum carbon price that each country should apply domestically — and an agreement by developing countries to tighten their INDCs in order to receive substantial (but still not sufficient in their eyes) financial transfers from wealthier countries. The sum of the combined INDCs of all countries might still exceed the 2⁰C path, but it would represent enough of a game-changer that the Paris negotiators could legitimately claim some success.

This may sound promising. But how can we be sure that it truly represents a game-changer in the global climate effort? In particular, do the INDCs really indicate what each country’s emissions will be in 2030?

How Can Canada Make a Difference?

This is where Canada can make a contribution. The reason, sadly, is that our prime ministers have been making INDC-type commitments for almost 30 years — with complete failure. We’re experts at setting voluntary targets and failing to achieve them. So we should be experts at spotting others who try the same thing.

In the late 1980s, Brian Mulroney set a voluntary target for Canadian emissions in 2000. We missed it by a country mile. But by then Mulroney was long gone. In 1997, at Kyoto, Jean Chrétien set a voluntary target for 2010 emissions. He too was long gone when we blew that target. Then, in 2007, Harper set a voluntary target for 2020. He too won’t be around for the day of reckoning, but the Auditor General already noted in 2013 that we won’t achieve his target (or even his 2009 revised softer target for 2020). One of Harper’s last acts was to set our INDC target for 2030 earlier this year (a 30 percent reduction from 2005 levels). Amazingly, he kept a straight face when making the announcement.

Unfortunately, it gets worse.

Hard Policies Are Essential. Everything Else is Fluff

Not only did we set INDC-type targets, we actually implemented major policy initiatives that were promised to achieve the targets. The big challenge was to give each new initiative a unique name; hence, the Green Plan (1990), the National Action Program (1995), Action Plan 2000, the Climate Change Plan for Canada (2002), Project Green (2005), EcoEnergy (2007) and Turning the Corner (2008).

Once he got a majority in 2011, Harper dispensed with the farce of creating new climate initiatives, although he saw no need to admit that his targets were fiction as they were for a future date probably beyond his political shelf-life. Like his predecessors, he was certainly right about the timing.

People who assess energy-economy policies — like me and my colleagues around the world —agree on why every single one of Canada’s policy initiatives failed.

Information and incitation campaigns, labels on fridges and cars, a few subsidies to energy efficiency and wind turbines, and a host of Rick Mercer commercials will not really reduce emissions.

The only policies that reduce emissions are: (1) a rising carbon tax, or (2) a declining hard emissions cap (probably with tradable permits), or (3) increasingly stringent regulations on emission-causing technologies and fuels, or (4) some combination of these three types of “compulsory policies.”

This is all that is needed. Everything else is fluff, including government spending programs.

If anything good is to come from Canada’s three-decade climate-policy charade it is the lesson that voluntary INDC-type targets are delusional unless intimately tied to one or two of the three compulsory policies listed above, and independent experts confirm that their level of stringency ensures achievement of the target. Canada needs to insist at Paris on the establishment of an independent policy review mechanism that reports annually on the likely achievement of each country’s INDC, given the policies that country is implementing. This would be a substantial contribution.

Trudeau should also tell the world that a reformed Canada now intends to be a model for effective climate policy that achieves targets. This won’t mean a lot at this stage, since people know about our track record. But the global climate effort is a long-run project.

If Canada produces domestic climate policy that, by design, is guaranteed to achieve its 2030 target, this will garner a lot of weight in the years to come.

Although Stephen Harper made it sound difficult to hit a national emissions target, it isn’t. You simply mandate a national cap on emissions that equals the 2030 target. Then you roll up your sleeves and allocate the cap among provinces or economic sectors, including a mechanism to ensure regional fairness in hitting the cap. Finally, but most importantly, you delegate the task of monitoring and review to an arms-length, highly visible oversight institution, like the Auditor General, and perhaps delegate some regulatory authority to ensure government achieves its legislated commitments, as California does with its Environmental Protection Agency. (I will elaborate in a subsequent article focused on domestic climate policies.)

Trudeau Should Bring His Transparency Agenda to Paris

While this focus on mechanisms for determining whether domestic policies will achieve the INDC promises would be an important contribution by Canada at Paris, it is not sufficient.

Canada should also argue for international mechanisms and actions that are realistic — as I noted at the outset — in view of the attractiveness of fossil fuels and the global-public-good nature of the challenge. Just as our domestic climate policy must strongly incentivize the use of technologies and fuels that do not emit CO2, the same is required of the global climate policy mechanisms issuing from Paris.

Thus, Trudeau should push at Paris for the creation of a transparent policy review process that provides an annual report card on the effectiveness of each country’s climate policies. And he should insist on a direct link between that policy performance and the slate of financial incentives offered by the international community.

For example, funding support for developing countries should be tied to the effectiveness of their domestic climate policies, as indicated by their annual report card. And countries with failing grades — whether developed or developing — should be threatened with and eventually subject to trade measures, such as higher tariffs on their goods. Some people don’t want to talk about trade measures. But those who are serious about an effective global effort know that we cannot avoid this discussion.

Indeed, the Waxman-Markey clean energy bill, which was passed by the United States House of Representatives in 2009 but not the Senate, included a mechanism to increase the effective tariff on imports from countries whose climate policies lacked the stringency of the U.S. policy.

Finally, while supporting the effort in Paris for comprehensive international mechanisms that apply to all countries, Trudeau should recognize the value of separate bilateral and multilateral agreements between jurisdictions willing to show real climate policy leadership. These “clubs” can provide models that other countries might one day emulate or join. In 2005, the Europeans constructed an emissions cap-and-trade system for industry.

While naysayers denigrate this policy, it is working fine and will be tightened rather than eliminated as new European countries join. And thanks to Quebec joining California’s cap-and-trade in 2014, and Ontario about to join next year, Canada has a golden opportunity to extend this system nationally, uniting 35 million Canadians with 35 million Californians in a cross-border cap-and-trade system applied to virtually all fossil-fuel-related greenhouse gas emissions. This 70 million-strong club could be a significant force for change — and other American states could well join.

You may notice that I have omitted one issue. I have not discussed the specific target Trudeau should commit to at Paris. Hopefully my reason for this omission is obvious. While the target should of course be achievable, it’s the policies that count.

That message is the most valuable contribution Canada can make at Paris.

@MarkJaccard

This article originally appeared on Policy Options.

Image: 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.

As leaders from around the world head to Paris in December for the COP21 UN climate negotiations, they do so with the burdensome knowledge that this is it: the big year. More than 190 nations will try to reach an internationally binding climate agreement to prevent the globe from warming to catastrophic levels.

Such high stakes haven’t pressed upon the negotiations since 2009’s Copenhagen climate summit, widely regarded as a failure after wearied countries fled the conference without producing a strong international agreement.

Perhaps that’s why this year there is little patience for the influence peddling of the world’s major fossil fuel companies, all of which are eager to play a role in the conversation.

Nearly 400,000 people have signed a petition to bar “big polluters” from the talks.

The petition, organized by Corporate Accountability International, argues the summit should be protected from corporate interests and becoming a platform for companies intending to “block progress, push false solutions and continue the disastrous status quo.”

The petition is just one of a number of public efforts designed to showcase the negative influence of industry groups on climate talks, their historic bad behaviour and a growing international impatience for meaningful climate action.

Corporate Bad Behaviour in Spotlight

The recent effort to limit the influence of industry at the upcoming talks come on the heels of an allegation that ExxonMobil intentionally deceived the public about the dangers of climate change.

Recent investigations reveal Exxon knew about the existence of ‘potentially catastrophic’ climate change since the 1970s but chose to keep that information hidden. The company is being widely criticized for misleading the public about the influence of human activity and the use of fossil fuels on the global climate.

Both Bernie Sanders and Hillary Clinton, leading presidential candidates for the Democratic party, as well as house Democrats have called for an official investigation of Exxon and now leading environmental groups, civil rights organizations and climate campaigners among others are spearheading an international call for further investigation.

Companies like Exxon are being spotlighted by Friends of the Earth France in a new ‘Pinocchio Climate Award,’ which targets industry groups most responsible for preventing or delaying action on climate.

The nominees are corporate sponsors of the COP21 climate talks, including BNP-Paribas, EDF and Engie — all of which will be judged in the Pinocchio Awards for their lobbying activities, promotion of false climate solutions and harmed caused to communities for the sake of profit. The ‘winners’ for each category will be announced at a public ceremony in Paris during the climate talks.

Industry’s “Charm Offensive” Little Help Against Critics

While members of the public cast their votes cast against major industrial polluters, companies also face an increased level of scrutiny for public relations stunts seemingly designed to purchase social favour in the lead up to Paris.

The Oil and Gas Climate Initiative, an effort of 10 top CEO’s from the energy sector, was called a “final charm offensive” before the climate talks by Reuters,

InfluenceMap, an organization that tracks the lobbying and activities of industry groups, called the initiative an attempt by leading energy companies to “improve their image in the face of longstanding criticism of their business practices” ahead of the talks.

A recent report by InfluenceMap shows many top companies in the oil and gas sector publicly support climate action but subvert those same efforts through anti-climate lobbying and the work of trade organizations.

In September a group of European investor institutions worth a collective $66 billion called on nine multinational companies to sever relationships with EU trade groups known to lobby against climate policy. The companies pressured to cut ties with the anti-climate lobby include COP21 sponsor EDF as well as BHP Billiton, BP, Glencore, Johnson Matthey, Proctor and Gamble, Rio Tinto, Statoil and Total.

Corporate Europe Observatory, an organization exposing lobby power in the EU, has already criticized the “climate unfriendly” sponsors of this year’s event, indicating France may be making a critical mistake in welcoming corporate influence.

"Most of these companies are big emitters of the very greenhouse gases responsible for climate change, such as EDF or Engie whose coal plants alone are equivalent to nearly half of France's entire emissions," said Malika Peyraut of Friends of the Earth.

“Putting the most important climate conference of the decade under the patronage of climate-incompatible businesses does not bode well.”

Fossil Fuel Industry’s Controversial Influence at Climate Talks

Pushback against industry influence at the UN climate talks has been ongoing for years.

In 2011, the Polaris Institute released a report outlining how “multinational corporations and their lobbyists have infiltrated the United Nations and are influencing the outcomes of climate negotiations.”

The report demonstrated industry’s influence as a driving force behind market-based rather than regulatory solutions to climate change.

In 2013, civil society groups, trade unions and environmental organizations staged a massive walk out of the climate talks in Warsaw, Poland, arguing corporate sponsorship was threatening the independence and purpose of the event.

Last year at the COP20 climate talks in Lima, Peru, more than 53,000 individuals signed a document that called on the UN Climate Secretariat to ban fossil fuel corporations and lobby organizations from the talks.

“The fossil fuel industry is actively lobbying against climate action and standing in the way of progress. When you’re trying to burn the table down, you don’t deserve a seat at it,” Hoda Baraka, global communications manager for 350.org, said at the time.

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

It’s already big news that Canada now has a Minister of Environment and Climate Change, Catherine McKenna.

But it might be even more newsworthy that McKenna is promising that Canada will be a constructive player at the upcoming UN climate talks in Paris next month.

After years of international scrutiny for playing an obstructive role in international climate negotiations and a former environment minister who performed awkward linguistic gymnastics to avoid using the words "climate change," McKenna’s enthusiasm signals a new era for Canada’s role on the global climate stage.  

Speaking outside Parliament Wednesday after her first day in office, McKenna said she is “really excited” to get down to work on Canada’s climate file.

“It’s going to be a lot of hard work. This is a really important file. It’s a really important file to Canadians — both the environment but also tackling climate change. We need to be ambitious and I’m ready to work hard and get down to action,” McKenna told the CBC. “This is why I got into politics: to make a difference. I have three kids and this portfolio could not be more important to their future.”

When asked to reflect on the significance of adding climate change to the traditional Minister of Environment title, McKenna laughed.

“Well first of all because we can use the term climate change,” she said.

“We believe climate change is a huge problem we need to be addressing. We are certainly highlighting this and we’re going to be taking action right away.”

The Liberal government has yet to release specific emissions reduction targets for Canada, a point of concern for some onlookers who criticize the party for taking former prime minister Stephen Harper’s climate plan to Paris.

That plan, to reduce Canada’s emissions by 30 per cent from 2005 levels by 2030, has been criticized for being weak and inadequate when compared to commitments from other industrialized nations.

Canada’s submission to the UN relies on the use of forestry credits, something Climate Action International said allows Canada to avoid eliminating emissions from fossil fuel sources like the Alberta oilsands.

Currently there is no plan to reduce the climate footprint of the oilsands, Canada’s fastest growing source of emissions although a recent downturn in the global oil economy, paired with a rapidly growing and competitive clean energy sector, may already be changing the fate of high-cost, high-carbon oil reserves.

The first session of Canada’s new Parliament is scheduled for December 3, a few days into the Paris climate talks.

After being sworn into office Wednesday Prime Minister Justin Trudeau told a crowd outside Parliament, “Canada is going to be a strong and positive actor on the world stage including in Paris at COP21. That’s why we have a very strong minister, not just of environment, but Minister of the Environment and Climate Change.”

Although the Liberal government isn’t armed with the kind of targets most climate advocates would like to see, McKenna said she plans to demonstrate Canada is taking a new approach to climate change.

“Our priority is certainly to show we have an ambitious agenda,” she said, indicating the Liberal government’s full-fledged climate plan is in development.

“We’re going to figure out a plan to make a huge reduction in emissions and show that Canada is back, that we believe that climate change is a massive problem and we need to be playing a significant role to tackle it and that we’re there at the table to play a constructive role with the other governments.”

McKenna also said the federal government will work closely with the premiers to develop a national climate plan.

“We have to have a comprehensive plan.”

“The federal government can’t do this alone, so that’s why we’re working with the provinces,” McKenna said, indicating many of the provinces already have promising climate strategies in place. “We’re playing catch up at the federal level.”

McKenna and Trudeau will lead a team of delegates to Paris that include many of the country’s premiers as well as federal Green Party leader Elizabeth May.

“We’re going to have the provinces at the table and we’re going to come up with a plan that is actually going to make a difference,” McKenna said.

“I’m excited to work with amazing public servants at Environment Canada, working with civil society, businesses to really tackle climate change. It’s exciting.”

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.