The Nature Force is of extreme importance as according to the Insurance Institute of Canada’s (IIC) 2020 report, the average cost of claims associated with extreme weather is expected to rise by 138% annually, growing up to $5 billion. As you can see, this is an issue that must be addressed now, and that’s what The Nature Force intends to do. As mentioned, this will be done through increasing natural infrastructure through the conservation and restoration of the wetlands that help attenuate flood risk.

Source: The Nature Force

I was provided the opportunity to speak to Mark Gloutney, national director of science for Ducks Unlimited Canada about this project and had a great conversation about it. When asked how this initiative was started, Mark said that this industry-first initiative came about as a result of Ducks Unlimited Canada realising the opportunities that a partnership between themselves and insurance companies would bring. They recognised that there should be a linkage between the insurance industry and the work they do due to the flood attenuating impacts of Ducks Unlimited and because the risk of flood loss and damage is only going to increase in the years to come. This resulted in conversations between Ducks Unlimited Canada, and Tina Osen, President of HUB Canada. Mark stated that Tina was extremely instrumental in the success of planning and organising this project. Tina realised that this project could be catalytic in its nature, and set out on gathering other insurance industry players. They realised that this is a way to do something that would help demonstrate how natural solutions and infrastructure can be part of the solution to climate change, and as a result, 15 insurance companies are now partnered with The Nature Force. Mark said that what’s especially great about this is that Ducks Unlimited Canada will be forming an advisory, or oversight committee with key representatives from HUB to ensure that the vision of The Nature Force stays on track and that there’s good dialogue, traction, messaging and vision between the insurance sector and Ducks Unlimited Canada.

Moving on, I had a few questions for Mark surrounding the planning and execution of this project. Mark went on to elaborate that they would be setting up three pilot projects. One in Ontario, one in Quebec, and one in the Fraser Delta in British Columbia. These projects will demonstrate that natural infrastructure is part of the solution, and allow them to build models which will help understand what features in a particular watershed will have the most consequence for flood attenuation and climate resilience. The plan is that once these are identified, Ducks Unlimited Canada will come in and complete restoration work on these sites. Once completed, they can take the results to the government, policymakers, and municipal planners so that this knowledge can be integrated into future land use planning decisions. This information can then also be shared with other conservation authorities to demonstrate how natural infrastructure can be integrated. Importantly he noted, once this is done it won’t be solely on the insurance industry to pay for the investment, but society as a whole, as all levels of society will recognise this as a solution, over time increasing investments and increasing climate resiliency across the Canadian landscape.

Now that I understood how the project would work, I was curious about any case studies, or examples that were worked on while preparing. Mark explained that Ducks Unlimited Canada had done a lot of modeling in Ontario that looked at the capacity of wetlands in terms of their ability to store water and function on the landscape like a sponge. He then goes on to outline that they had done quite a bit of work with Dr. Blair Feltmate, Head of the Intact Centre on Climate Adaptation. With Dr. Feltmate’s, help they modeled the Credit river in Toronto, observing what would happen in two different storm events with differing instances of wetland environments, and seeing how the flood level changed with these variables. Dr. Feltmate and the Intact Centre on Climate Adaptation have access to economic consequence information, and with their help, it was possible to show the economic consequences of these differing flood events. This was formative in their research because it was clear that as you modelled the loss of the wetlands on that watershed you saw property value loss increasing dramatically for both storm events. This was completed about three years ago and the team in Ontario has been working with these results to create The Nature Force. 

The Nature Force begins its planning stage this April 2022, as such, I asked Mark if there are any timelines in place for this project. He stated that the initial stages starting in April will be a period of planning where watersheds to be modelled will be chosen, conservation and planning partners will be assembled, and then a model will be built that states the four or five restoration solutions that will have the biggest impact in reducing the floods. This will take a little while and it is expected that they will be doing restoration in Ontario and Quebec by around next spring. He goes on to say that the Fraser Delta may take a little longer due to the complexity of the landscape it is situated on. This complexity is due both to land interest, as well as the topography of the land and proximity to the ocean of the delta, which results in differing conditions to those found in Ontario or Quebec. 

Understanding how the project was planned to take place, I was curious about any challenges that The Nature Force has faced, or anticipate in the future, and how they planned on dealing with these. Mark outlined that one of the main issues anticipated is surrounding land ownership. In an ideal scenario, you can find a watershed with the right assembly of partners to make conservation easy, however, this is often not the case. Instances of conservation efforts on agricultural land require models to show what is gained and lost for society through this conservation. Private land ownership is always tricky as well as this is of course, on private property – in these cases the landowners are negotiated with to try to suit the needs of the landowner, as well as the needs of society by attenuating flood risk. Another challenge is associated with the regulatory environment which is always rather uncertain, and there are always elements that cannot be anticipated. Another challenge that was of interest was whether or not species at risk are situated in these areas. Due to the regulatory environment, these species are protected on an individual basis, rather than looking at the population. This means that while a project may be beneficial to the species in the long term if an individual, or individuals in the area are impacted by the project, it may need to be adjusted to suit this regulatory environment. 

As evidenced through the resources provided on The Nature Force website, as well as the conversation with Mark Gloutney, it is clear that this project is of extreme importance, and also being set up well for success. Hopefully, this project will indeed be catalytic in its nature and spark more conversations and projects around climate change mitigation and adaptation, especially through the use of natural infrastructure and wetland conservation. With the planning stage under-way as of this April, I look forward to seeing the projects begin next spring and share the same excitement as Mark and The Nature Force in seeing the results from these projects turned into positive, climate change mitigating action over the coming years.

The post The Nature Force appeared first on A\J.

The green new decade is underway!

The EcoFair’s 4-day online event showcases environmental non-profits and environmentally-friendly businesses, film screenings and discussions, webinars, games night, mix ‘n mingles and more. All for free!

• Don’t miss the EcoFair Launch Event Webinar.
• Enjoy a fun Eco-Games Night!
• Join exhibitor Facebook livestreams and eco-Humber bike ride
• At the EcoFair Finale meet exhibitors and learn more in interactive workshops.

Visit the EcoFair website to sign up for the EcoFair newsletter to get updates and event details  direct to your inbox. While there, enjoy family-friendly activities at the Fun & Games tab, explore EcoTour Maps that highlight sustainable features in neighbourhoods across Toronto, and learn about this year’s environmental non-profits and eco-businesses at the Exhibitor Showcase.

Together let’s celebrate the wonderful people, environmental groups, and eco-businesses that are helping create a greener and healthier City for us all. Everyone can share and learn tips on ways to live more sustainably, and be inspired to make a difference. The green new decade is underway!

As always, the EcoFair is organized 100% by volunteers. This event is the 13th Annual EcoFair at the Barns – now online!

Co-hosted by Green Neighbours Network of Toronto and Transition Toronto.

Start Date: November 4 2021 & Start Time: 7:00 PM

End Date: November 7 2021 & End Time: 4:00 PM

email: ecofairtoronto@gmail.com

twitter and instagram: @EcoFairToronto

MailChimp subscription: 

https://us13.list-manage.com/subscribe?u=3530d69eb9e3c548dfc46f70c&id=fa7904884c

The post 2021 EcoFair Toronto Nov 4-7 appeared first on A\J.

What changed 

Everything about our world has changed since the 1970s. First off, the world’s population has basically doubled from 3.7 billion in 1970 to well over 7 billion today. More people are consuming resources, but more resources are also being consumed per person. On average, wealthier, developed countries in the Global North are each burning more fossil fuels than we were in 1970, eating more meat, and traveling more than ever before. All that consumption adds up to a 90% increase in CO2 emissions since 1970, which after being trapped in the atmosphere, has contributed to ocean waters warming 0.6 °C and sea levels rising more than 5-6 inches. And if that’s not enough, average global temperatures have risen more quickly since the late 1970s (0.29 to 0.46°F per decade since 1979).

What now 

“Earth Day today is about more than just saving our planet – it’s about saving humanity.”

Throughout the decades, Earth Day has been about saving species, ecosystems, and natural habitats from threats like air and water pollution. While these aspects are still focused on, Earth Day today is about more than just saving our planet – it’s about saving humanity. This generation of climate activists has grown up thinking of themselves as truly global citizens. We are more aware of the immediate threat that is facing us, and we’ve made it clear that there is no planet B. The first Earth Day may have started as protest, but it sparked a global movement that is now the vehicle for taking urgent and immediate climate action. 

Earth Day 1970 March // Source: Earth Institute, Columbia University 

With the COVID-19 pandemic causing public health lockdowns around the world, Earth Day 2020 went entirely digital for the first time in its history. Billions of people took part, allowing technology to connect us from all corners of the planet. While the coronavirus forced us to keep our distance, it couldn’t quiet our voices. Over the 24 hours, the 50th anniversary of Earth Day filled the digital landscape with global conversations, calls to action, performances, video teach-ins and webinars, workshops and more. This year, Earth Day remains largely digital. No matter where you are, you can still make a difference. 

Earth Day 2020 Flyer // Source: EarthShare

April 22nd, 2021

The theme of 2021’s Earth Day Canada celebration is Take Care of the Planet. Earth Day Canada is looking to raise awareness among Canadians about the urgency of taking action for the environment and to encourage us to continue taking concrete actions to take care of the planet on a daily basis.

The Media Campaign 

This year’s campaign plays on the irony that animals have to clean up their polluted environments themselves. That may sound funny, but looking at these animals should spark a thought in each and every one of us. They shouldn’t be dealing with this, we should. There are many simple things you can do every day to take care of the planet. It can be as small as picking up one piece of trash every day or as large as participating or organizing a beach cleanup (health measures permitted). 

The Earth Day Canada 2021 campaign invites Canadians to share the actions they are completing to take care of the planet through video testimonials on social networks. You can post to Instagram, Facebook, Twitter, TikTok, and more, using the hashtags #TakeCareOfThePlanet #EarthDay2021. 

Since Earth Day 2021 will be virtual for most parts of the world, Earth Day Canada has developed an amazing list of suggestions for what you can do at home and in your community. At home, there are ideas on food, energy, waste, sustainable mobility, and nature. In your community, there are ideas for whether you are acting on behalf of a school, municipality, organization or just yourself. Earth Day Canada has an online calendar where you can register your activities and find out about virtual or local events. 

For the second year in a row, Earth Day Canada is calling on municipalities to play a role in the ecological transition. Cities and towns across Canada are mobilizing to take action towards creating healthier environments, using April 22nd in particular to make a positive impact. These municipalities are also contributing to the ecological transition by organizing and supporting actions in celebration of Earth Day in an effort to encourage everyone in their communities to join the movement. 

Download Earth Day Canada’s 2021 Media Campaign and get started, because the world won’t wait for you – it can’t. 

Source: Earth Day Canada

This article is part of a 3-part editorial series, in collaboration with Earth Day Canada, titled ‘The Past, Present, and Future of Earth Day’. Check out the full series here!

The post Earth Day: Today appeared first on A\J.

We can see this complexity playing out in the way wolves in some regions are caught in the paradox of adapting to anthropocentric change while contributing to the demise of caribou herds, at risk of extinction in multiple jurisdictions throughout Canada and the United States. In response, the B.C. government has expanded wolf culls as a way of managing growing threats of extinction while negating responsibility for addressing the deeper issues behind alarming rates of wildlife habitat loss in these same jurisdictions. Both criticized and upheld as an imperfect solution, wolf culls are in fact not a new practice and part of a well-worn colonial management approach that harkens back to its first appearance on this continent in 1630 in the Massachusetts Bay Colony.

Almost 400 years later, what has changed? Amid growing concerns from scientists, First Nations, ranchers, conservationists, hunters, animal rights activists and citizens on all sides of the debate, governments continue to overwhelmingly reach toward this expensive and controversial management approach for a solution to the threat of extinction. Have we stopped to consider the value placed on holding some creatures in the world and not others? In a recent in-depth report, journalist Sarah Cox revealed the B.C. government spent upwards of $2 million last winter on initiatives to kill 432 wolves, the most expensive of which was in the Kootenay region where, according to the B.C. Ministry of Forests, Lands, Natural Resources and Rural Development, they spent $100,000 to kill 10 wolves. Perhaps we need to step back from the zero-sum game of ‘yes versus no’ to think more deeply about who bears the true cost of turning away from the deeper issues behind our current crisis of wildlife extinction? More importantly, what we are willing to do about it as a society?

What often gets missed in the perpetual loop of applying wolf culls as so-called short-term solutions, is the long story of failed policy mechanisms that were supposed to prevent us from getting here in the first place. One of these is the North American Model of Wildlife Conservation (NAM), which positions wildlife as a resource to be managed on behalf of what is referred to as the public trust. Whose voices are taken seriously as constituting members of the public trust is a question that needs greater attention? Who do governments manage wildlife for and who gets consulted in the process?

Figure 1: Wolf track in snow. Photo taken during carnivore surveys, Salmo, B.C., Selkirk mountains. January, 2017. Credit: Rhiannon Kirton

While competition between caribou and other cervids (e.g., moose or deer) can lead to increased caribou predation by wolves, this is simply the most recent proximate cause of declines. Historically, caribou decline has been attributed not only to predation as a result of habitat augmentation and apparent competition, but also to high levels of legal and illegal harvest in the 1960s and 70s and adverse weather, amongst other factors (Environment Canada). While predator and moose reductions have been shown to increase caribou numbers in the short term, at best they have been shown to be a band aid solution versus a viable long-term strategy for success. As awareness of the ultimate driver of dangerous levels of caribou decline grows, there is an increasing recognition of the central issue being one of habitat loss, by those both for and against the wolf cull (Fig 1; Bridger, 2019). Although conservation and other advocacy groups continue to push for protection of old growth caribou habitat, the question of why government decision makers continue to drag their heels along such an ineffectual path gets harder to ignore. Why continue to allow habitats to be degraded and logged at the expense of both caribou and wolves? Whose voices do governments prioritize in the process of continued failure to protect caribou habitat? (Palm et al., 2020; MCRI, 2009). Is failing to do so a breach of NAM’s principle of acting on behalf of the public trust? What, if any, mechanisms exist to hold those in power accountable?  

Figure 2: Caribou habitat. South Selkirk mountain range close to White Water Ski. Resort photo taken during aerial caribou survey. February 2017. Credit: Rhiannon Kirton

NAM denotes a public ownership of wildlife resources which “is held in trust for the benefit of present and future generations by government”, although in real terms, this public often is rarely inclusive of First Nations and Native American peoples, a problem unto itself that we cannot do justice here (Eichler and Baumeister, 2018). The prospect of such entitlement being translated into a meaningful, productive public stewardship is uncertain, given “governance model for wildlife conservation decision making is typically at the (elected) ministerial level”, while boards and commissions exert limited impact. Despite governments admitting the need to modify the model for a greater participatory decision making, the caribou case manifests minimal progress in this respect. Unfortunately, caribou being federally listed as a Species At Risk in Canada has not translated into provincial habitat protection outside of federally owned lands. Why? Part of the reason is that voices of those outside of the decision-making structure might not only be ignored, but also be rendered silent. What does it say about our society in a time of ecological crisis to prioritize industry stakeholders above the value of a functioning ecosystem, which contains intact guilds of predators and ungulates alike? How, why and on whose terms is this discrepancy allowed to continue? 

In discussing the future of the North American Model (NAM), this statement is overwhelmingly instrumentalist: “the maintenance and fostering of landscapes that can sustain viable populations of all wildlife to ensure conservation of biodiversity and human use and enjoyment are of paramount concern”.  Among recommendations of applying and upgrading the model, citizen engagement in the conservation of biodiversity is stressed with grand and empty guidance. Why bend the goal of wildlife conservation to benefit industry stakeholders for short-term economic gain, if doing so erodes understandings of, and possibilities for, biodiversity as an integral component for our collective survival and prosperity? Given everything we now know about the importance of biodiversity in maintaining a healthy and sustainable world, shouldn’t we be promoting interdependency and reciprocity with nature as ultimate goals in public policy, for example, NAM’s wildlife management policy frameworks and application? The model does not need to stress the paramount importance of “the maintenance and fostering landscapes that can sustain viable populations of all wildlife to ensure conservation of biodiversity” and “human use and enjoyment”, because once the former is secured, it enables the latter. There do not exist two natural worlds, an abstract one that is servile to profit-driven human needs and a real one with lives we’ve never been familiar with. The problem of the model, nevertheless, further entrenches a rupture between humans and nature.

Figure 3: Wolf tracks. Simonette River, Municipal District of Greenview, AB. August 2020. Credit: Narda Nelson.

At such a precarious juncture for many creatures and habitats on the brink of extinction, can the story of contemporary wolves be rewritten beyond polarizing figures of either hero or villain? More than simply an inflammatory topic of debate, wolf culls point to the deeper problem of a collective refusal to step back from polarizing debates to better understand and take responsibility for contributing to the very issues that define these challenging times. To restore and safeguard the ecosystems that our existence depends on, it seems increasingly obvious that we should look to Indigenous peoples who have successfully protected the land for millennia. Perhaps the NAM’s failing is in its application and exclusion of Indigenous voices and the centering of colonial forms of management. There are varied approaches and opinions regarding wolf culls within First Nations across Turtle Island. Some, like the Saulteau and West Moberly First Nations, are already succeeding in holding caribou populations in the world where governments have failed.  Perhaps it’s time to seriously reconsider alternatives to continuing to implement the NAM and instead follow their lead.

This article is part of our March 2021 Western Student Editorial Series – a series that showcases the works of students in the Collaborative Specialization in Environment and Sustainability program. Read more articles from this series here!

References

Brook, R.K., Cattet, M., Darimont, C.T., Paquet, P.C., & Proulx, G. (2015). Maintaining ethical standards during conservation crises. Canadian Wildlife Biology and Management (4), 72-79.

Lavoie, J. (2018, April 5). Seeking the Science Behind B.C.’s Wolf Cull. The Narwhal. https://thenarwhal.ca/seeking-science-behind-b-c-s-wolf-cull/ 

Mountain Caribou Recovery Implementation Plan. (2009) http://www.env.gov.bc.ca/wld/speciesconservation/mc/files/progress_board_update20090213.pdf  

Palm, E. C., Fluker, S., Nesbitt, H. K., Jacob, A. L., & Hebblewhite, M. (2020). The long road to protecting critical habitat for species at risk: The case of southern mountain woodland caribou. Conservation Science and Practice, 2(7), e219.

The post Wolf Culls: Public Trust or Failed Policy? appeared first on A\J.

The United Nations SDGs // Source: UN

The SDGs, adopted in 2015, outline seventeen interconnected goals that acknowledge that efforts to end poverty must go hand-in-hand with strategies that improve health, education, reduce inequality and tackle the challenges of climate change. Assessment of the first five years of SDGs implementation suggest that the world is off track to realize the set objectives by the 2030 target. Meanwhile, extreme weather events, wildfires and related environmental challenges, particularly, over the past few decades necessitate accelerated action if a planetary catastrophe is to be avoided. Given these ongoing and persistent challenges, the UN in September 2019 called on all sectors of society (global, national, local and individuals) to mobilize for a ‘Decade of Action’ on the SDGs. This call emphasizes the need for cross-sectoral coordination and collaboration in the implementation of the SDGs with a call for faster and more ambitious responses to stimulate environmental, social and economic transformation. Maintaining focus on the SDGs implies a holistic approach to development that focuses not only on the wellbeing of humans but also safeguards the planet upon which human lives depend. Actions to accelerate progress on the SDGs are even more urgent now because of the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic which threatens to derail SDGs implementation.

Non-state actors, specifically community-based organizations promoting conservation, are relevant stakeholders with activities that contribute to the objectives of the SDGs. Organizations promoting sustainable development present an opportunity to pursue a path of green recovery from the negative impacts on the economy and the planet.

Community-based organizations reflect a change in focus from these top-down approaches to the bottom-up, where local goals tend to focus on regaining autonomy and control over natural resources and improving social and economic wellbeing. Community-based programs are generally based on the premise that local people have greater interest in the sustainable use of natural resource than outside actors, and thus can be more cognizant of the intricacies of local ecological processes and practices. While it is important not to essentialize or homogenize ideas of ‘community’ and ‘conservation’ without regard for local contexts, finding innovative solutions to complex environmental and development issues often requires outside expertise and training in collaboration with local knowledge. In this way, community-based organizations can help to ensure a holistic and cautioned approach to development. This approach is unique in that it often considers differing worldviews that may reflect alternative definitions of conservation and development, local systems of land tenure, and the gendered divisions of labour in economic activities, to ensure that rural communities really do benefit from these initiatives. Community-based approaches highlight the importance of local context and agency, and that there is no one size fits all approach to achieving SDG objectives.

Bamboo provides a prime example of a resource that has been increasingly promoted as contributing to sustainable futures, as it is sought-after in diverse industries of the growing global “green economy” as an alternative to timber due to its fast-growing and structurally durable properties. Bamboo is considered a resource that—when grown and harvested following sustainable management practices—can achieve positive environmental, social, and economic outcomes. Ecosystem services provided by bamboo include carbon storage and sequestration, soil and water regulation, and biodiversity conservation.

Bamboo forest // Source: Unsplash

In many bamboo habitat countries, the resource plays an important role in cultural heritage and provides socio-economic benefits through supplementary income for the rural poor. Due to these components, bamboo is promoted to contribute to at least seven of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) including: no poverty (SDG 1); affordable and clean energy (SDG 7); sustainable cities and communities (SDG 11); responsible consumption and production (SDG 12); climate action (SDG 13); life on land (SDG 15); and partnerships for the SDG goals (SDG 17).

Credit: Tamara L. Britton and Eunice A. Annan-Aggrey

Community-based bamboo development projects are taking place all over the world, ranging from bamboo charcoal projects as an economically viable alternative to wood charcoal in Madagascar; community-based bamboo nurseries in the Philippines; bamboo disaster relief building projects, construction and bamboo management training programs in Ecuador and Nicaragua; community-based bamboo processing factories in China; and community-based management of natural bamboo forests in Laos.

Due to small budgets, community-based projects like these often cannot compete with the wide scale promotion and ambitious claims made by larger-scale development initiatives. However, in practice, many community-based programs often have a greater long-term impact on community wellbeing and autonomy. Thus, there is a research gap to be addressed on the contribution of smaller-scale grassroots conservation movements and researchers from Global South countries regarding SDG objectives.  

Credit: Tamara L. Britton and Eunice A. Annan-Aggrey

In a post-pandemic world, if SDG targets are to be met amidst an increasingly uncertain economic future, it is crucial that conservation and development projects invest in building resilient communities through agroecological solutions and strengthening environmental stewardship to ensure that the rural poor are not completely dependent on external markets for their livelihoods.

The UN Decade of Action is a clarion call for an ‘all hands on deck’ approach to keep the wheels of development turning.

The SDGs include an ambitious target to combat climate change. The COVID-19 pandemic has exposed vulnerabilities of the economic systems upon which development is hinged. Thus, the need for integrated development that encompasses socio-economic and environmental progress is relevant now more than ever. The UN Decade of Action is a clarion call for an ‘all hands on deck’ approach to keep the wheels of development turning. Community-based organizations are rising to the task. Indeed, integrated solutions and green alternatives chart a course that holds optimism for a greener, more inclusive future.

This article is part of our March 2021 Western Student Editorial Series – a series that showcases the works of students in the Collaborative Specialization in Environment and Sustainability program. Read more articles from this series here!

The post Joining Hands: The Decade of Action on the SDGs appeared first on A\J.

Human activities have thrusted our planet into a climate emergency. This calls for an urgent need for adaptation—adjusting our natural and human systems to minimize climate hazards, exploit climate opportunities, and mitigate—the conscious actions to minimize the emission of greenhouse gases (GHGs) and to remove existing GHGs through improving carbon sinks. Climate change is real, and the consequences are vivid. From the melting polar caps of Alaska all the way to Kiribati’s dissipating beaches, climate change stymies our livelihoods and heightens vulnerability to environmental hazards. So, why is there even the existence of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC)? According to their official website, “the IPCC was created to provide policymakers on climate change, its implications and potential future risks, as well as to put forward adaptation and mitigation options,” (IPCC, 2020). Some of the solutions often floated around by this and other giant institutions include constructing greenhouses to support agricultural food systems in drylands, building reservoirs to collect excess runoff, and providing crop insurance to tackle crop failure. In their “infinite” wisdom, these bureaucrats placed a caveat that we should adopt these strategies in ways that support the national, regional, and local contexts. Interesting, huh? But with the lenses of reality on, how can Kiribati people, who have almost nothing, adapt to their rising sea levels and dissipating coastline, build reservoirs to tackle flooding, and provide farmland insurance for farmers whose farmlands turned into water bodies overnight?

Even though there is a lot of attention to tackle climate change, Nature-based Solutions (NBS)—using traditional and naturally producing resources to mitigate environmental hazards—have been side-lined for technocratic solutions, and sometimes retrogressive—climate wise—technological innovations. Moreover, much of these current approaches are usually bogged down in faulty rhetoric. For instance, everyone wants a better environment, at the same time, also wanting the comfort of owning a luxury and eco-unfriendly car.  Who takes the buses then? It cannot work that way; you must pick your poison! In retrospect, Greta Thunberg was precisely correct when she called economic growth ‘a fairytale.’ The questions that remain unanswered are: why are we so ever focused on the use of artificial methodologies in reverting the world to a more natural state? Would it not help to use a nature-based approach instead? For instance, in the illustration of Megan Leslie—President, and CEO of World Wildlife Fund Canada, the need for NBS could not be more apparent:

“If you think about the increasing floods we are seeing, for example, concrete culverts and breakwaters can only handle so much water. Silver maple can absorb 220 liters of water [an hour]! If we replace all this concrete with natural infrastructure, with green infrastructure, firstly, it can handle the floods. Secondly, it’s resilient… it bounces back.” –Megan Leslie

NBS have emerged as cost-effective mitigation and adaptation strategies that simultaneously provide socio-ecological and economic benefits while boosting resilience among people. According to the International Union for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN), NBS involves the intentional use of nature for sustainably managing ecosystems and tackling socio-environmental challenges. The nature-based solutions are rooted in the oxymoronic ideals of going back to move forward, looking into naturally occurring solutions that can be humanly instigated and controlled to increase resiliency and fight climate change. These suggestions are topical as they are relevant and include reimagining green housing, utilizing natural resources for construction and plant growth to fight climate change. NBS to climate change emphasizes harnessing the myriad potentiality of nature to reduce GHGs while also adapting to climate-related stresses such as human health, food and water insecurity. NBS to climate change is considered a win-win approach. We get to protect, restore, and sustain our ecosystem while efficiently addressing an existential threat. Further, NBS can be adopted in both rural and urban settings—an attribute which makes NBS more practical and comprehensive.

Rural areas

Although climate change is omnipresent, there are differences in the intensity of these impacts because of two factors: (1) your location in the world and (2), the level of disposable resources with wealth at its core. Sadly, folks in the Global South or the developing worlds, are particularly more affected by climate change due to their heavy dependence on natural resources from which they derive their livelihoods, and their limited availability to adapt to the changing environmental conditions. As dire as these conditions may be, they are also being exacerbated by prevailing adaptation strategies. For example, to stimulate agriculture, the current use of high-nitrogen-fertilizers over time makes the land progressively barren while leaching nitrous oxide into the drainage system and polluting vital drinking water sources for millions of people. With NBS, however, simple practices like mulching (yes, good old mulching), could prove essential for revitalizing smallholder farmlands through soil moisture conservation and sustainably improving soil fertility. Typically, mulching involves collecting and applying decomposing organic matter (e.g. sawdust, wood, grass, food scraps) over arable lands’ topsoil. The best part is that mulching materials are free and readily available. This process could solve the triple problem of utilizing food waste, soil infertility, and improving biodiversity.

A smallholder farming household practicing mulching // Source: Bryan Waters

Another NBS that could be employed in these areas is the utilization of bamboo grass. Bamboo (Subfamily: Bambusoideae) is a fast-growing, drought-resistant grass. It can be the best crop that can grow in some environments. This ancient grass serves many purposes. In fact, there is evidence of its utility in building construction, making furniture, serving as windbreaks, and where native, could even be planted around your luxurious million-dollar home as a living privacy screen (you know, against those shady neighbors). In other words, bamboo is the gift that keeps on giving and there is something in it for everyone. As climate change continues to wreak havoc globally, substituting bamboo in place of plastic in privacy screens or in place of destroying mature Mahogany trees from the rainforest (which take 25 years to grow) are great strides toward reductions in carbon footprint. The bamboo plant thus serves as a stylish, classy, and sustainable alternative. As we begin to care for and incorporate bamboo use in our daily lives, we will also be indirectly preserving biodiversity since it serves as the main diet and habitat for some of the world’s cutest animals.

Locals putting bamboo to use // Source: Panos Pictures/Felix Features

Urban areas

Urban centers or cities are characteristic of high-density infrastructure—roads, bridges, airports, residential and commercial buildings, etc. Many cities like New York and Toronto, struggle with creating and developing spaces for nature. But with a switch to NBS, vegetation can be used to cover the walls or roofs of buildings in urban centers. Green roofs and walls have numerous benefits to the ecosystem and human health. Some of these benefits include insulation provision (thus reducing energy consumption), absorbing rainwater (potential to reduce floods), minimizing the urban heat island effects, and serving as carbon sinks. Green roofs and walls make urban settings aesthetically pleasing as well, which could reduce the stress associated with these busy, noisy, and chaotic systems. Roofs absorb rainwater and can cool the tops of buildings, thereby creating milder microclimatic conditions. The concept of green roofs has taken shape in some cities including Toronto, which in 2009 was the first city to promulgate a bylaw that regulates and governs the construction of green roofs.

 Green walling in urban structures // Source: WikiCommons

Green roofing in urban settings // Source: Urbanscape

Overall, NBS provide sustainable toolkits for adapting and mitigating climate change; they are available and accessible to people in all socio-economic classes. NBS is part of existing ways of life and requires minimal special initiatives to implement. They are cheaper to implement, good for the environment, utilize indigenous knowledge, and are often community based. This also leads to empowerment, which makes implementation and sustainability more feasible. Combating climate change is imperative in every dimension—politically, economically, and morally, because it embodies our collective attempt at saving the lives and livelihoods of billions of people.

This article is part of our March 2021 Western Student Editorial Series – a series that showcases the works of students in the Collaborative Specialization in Environment and Sustainability program. Read more articles from this series here!

The post Nature-based Solutions for Climate Change Mitigation appeared first on A\J.

Due to this strict lockdown, it is projected that the world’s CO2 emissions will drop 8% in 2020 (although at the time of this article, they are already projected to increase again). With this global pandemic being top of mind, there is another looming threat: climate change. In recent years, we have consistently seen record-breaking environmental disasters that have been made worse by the climate crisis. According to the UN, over 7,300 extreme weather events have been recorded since 2000. Simultaneously, nine of the ten warmest years on record occurred between 2005 and 2019, with the world’s five warmest years occurring from 2015 to 2019.

…this is our chance to get on top of climate change. The question is, how do we do that, and will we be able to rise to the challenge?

Since the COVID-19 pandemic began, Australia and California have experienced their worst wildfire seasons on record. Increasingly severe droughts in South America and Africa resulted in widespread famine this summer. Flooding in Europe and North America has continued consistently breaking the previous years’ records as storms continue getting bigger, more dangerous and more common around the world. Evidently, the short-term emissions decrease from the COVID-19 pandemic will not be enough to impact the very real threat the climate crisis poses. COVID-19 has been hailed as humanity’s chance to “click the reset button” to “build back better”, with the idea that this is our chance to get on top of climate change. The question is, how do we do that, and will we be able to rise to the challenge?

Man at a climate protest. Sign reads, “Now is not the time for business as usual. Climate action NOW”. // Source: Unsplash

Now is the time for governments to push ambitious climate policy when restarting economies

Although energy-related CO2 was expected to drop in 2020, what matters is what we do next. During the initial phases of the pandemic, government relief packages around the world have focused on sustaining livelihoods and providing immediate relief. Stimulus packages will now be focused on global economic recovery. From the last economic crash in 2008, many stimulus packages focused on propping up fossil fuel-based companies, and in 2010 global emissions saw the largest increase ever recorded.

To learn from our mistakes, and continue this trend of declining emissions, governments should consider three main policy strategies according to the International Energy Agency (IEA):  

1. Governments should ensure policy predictability and reassure investors of their energy and climate commitments. This will be crucial for industries to establish business plans focused on sustainability.
2. Governments should reduce administrative barriers to renewable energy projects by streamlining permits and other administrative tasks.
3. Renewables should be a key part of stimulus packages. Investments should prioritize industries that have high job creation and are building infrastructure that supports efficient, resilient energy systems that will lower greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. There should be a focus on the labor-intensive building sector, prioritizing renovation programs to increase energy efficiency and installation of renewable heat sources. In addition to labor intensive jobs, the government should focus on stimulating companies in the smart, digital, and resilient energy infrastructure industries.

Overall, short term policy actions should relate to ambitious medium- and long-term visions for emissions reductions.

There are additional measures that governments can take according to Dr. Fatih Birol, executive director with IEA. Incentives can be put in place to encourage consumers to upgrade large purchases to more energy efficient ones, such as cars and washing machines. With an increase in people working from home, emphasis can be put on upgrading electricity and internet infrastructure, basing these networks on clean, renewable power. Investment can be made in industries that will be vital in the clean energy transition such as batteries, hydrogen, and carbon capture to name a few. This can help scale up these technologies, so they become competitive in the current energy market. Governments can also bring in more private investment by providing clarity in the market. Investments may come in the form of carbon pricing, removing fossil fuel subsidies, and offering loans on renewable energy projects. These measures are crucial because governments drive more than 70% of global energy investments according to the IEA.

Divestment in Fossil Fuel is Trending

Source: Shuttershock 

This push for sustainability as a priority in rebuilding the economy comes at a time when many large institutions are pulling their money out of fossil fuels. BlackRock, the world’s biggest financial investment firm, announced in January that it would be pulling investments from coal. The CEO of BlackRock, Larry Fink, said that “climate change has become a defining factor in companies’ long-term prospects.” BlackRock states that it will make sustainability one of its key investment factors and will offer investment portfolios that exclude fossil fuels. Fink also stated that “in the near future – and sooner than most anticipate – there will be a significant reallocation of capital” citing the transition of investments away from fossil fuels, towards sustainable alternatives. This came after a 2019 report from the Institute for Energy Economics and Financial Analysis (IEEFA) found that BlackRock lost an estimated $90 billion over the past decade by ignoring the financial risk of investing in fossil fuels. BlackRock’s multi-billion-dollar investments in oil companies – such as ExxonMobil, Chevron, Shell, and BP – were among the reasons for the losses in the $6.5 trillion assets that they manage. Also, BlackRock was the biggest investor in the coal industry and one of the top three investors in big oil companies.

BlackRock joins a growing movement of divestment of fossil fuels. The approximated value of institutions who have committed to divest from fossil fuels is at $14.48 trillion worldwide, with 1248 institutions divesting. These institutions cover almost every aspect of society. There are huge banks, faith groups, countries, cities, non-for-profits, retirement funds, and the list is expected to grow continuously. This clearly shows a trend in society to stop funding fossil fuel projects, and COVID-19 has accelerated the clear need for divestment from fossil fuels.

How Governments are Faring in their Recovery Packages

Some governments are watching market trends and prioritizing sustainability in their recovery packages. On May 27th, the European Union unveiled their new economic recovery plan in response to COVID-19, which highlighted a €750 billion ($1.163 trillion CAD) economic stimulus package and featured a considerable investment in Green initiatives. EU representatives earmarked 30% of total expenditure for spending to effectively achieve climate-oriented goals outlined in both the Paris Agreement and UN Sustainable Development Goals. Green spending laid out in the stimulus package is comprised of five main elements including: building efficiency, clean technology investment, low-carbon vehicles, agriculture & land, and a category for miscellaneous investments to foster a ‘just transition’. Each of the five elements aim to create and maintain thousands of jobs while improving the carbon footprint of each nation and establishing a foundation for future green industries.

Compared to the intensive COVID-19 response plan of the EU, Canada has failed to establish a defined response plan or actively fund green industries. The Canadian government has reportedly spent $18.12 billion CAD in supporting the fossil fuel industry since the beginning of the pandemic in the form of supporting fossil fuel infrastructure, suspending requirements for environmental reporting, and tax relief for petroleum producers. This spending comes despite many banks and insurers pulling out of Canadian oil and tar sands projects, and BP oil forecasting that oil demand peaked last year. Additionally, the United Nations Environment Program has stated that current national government plans would lock the world into 120 times more emissions than what is needed to stay below 1.5 degrees Celsius global temperature increase, and that 85 percent of planned oil and gas development is in North America.

This fossil fuel spending is in contrast with $15 billion CAD in supporting sustainability projects. A total of $2.5 billion CAD has been provided to fund two separate energy related initiatives. $1.72 billion CAD was allocated to clean up retired oil and gas wells, maintaining some 5,200 jobs in Saskatchewan, British Columbia, and Alberta. Another $750 million CAD was allotted to launch the emissions reduction fund that aims to support workers and reduce emissions in Canada’s oil and gas sector. On November 19th, the Canadian Net-Zero Emissions Accountability Act was presented by Prime Minister Justin Trudeau and outlines a system for which future Canadian governments must establish 5-year targets and reviews moving forward to achieve net-zero emissions by 2050. Despite the creation of this system requiring future governments to create emission targets and reviews, there are no binding rules or penalties for failure to meet targets.

Canada’s COVID-19 response creates a framework for a review system but fails to define a plan of action and set into motion specific goals and projects. The Net-Zero Emissions Act creates a framework for future governments but does not address current industry issues during the pandemic the way the EU COVID-19 response stimulus package does. Advocacy groups have criticized the Prime Minister’s new bill, claiming it is an empty plan that fails to spur immediate action or create penalties for missed targets. Comparatively, the EU’s stimulus package illustrated an organized and structured plan with specific goals moving beyond the pandemic. The recovery plan and stimulus package presented by the EU should serve as a model upon which Canada could immediately begin to construct a sustainable economic future.

This article is part of our March 2021 Western Student Editorial Series – a series that showcases the works of students in the Collaborative Specialization in Environment and Sustainability program. Read more articles from this series here!

The post “Now is the Time” appeared first on A\J.

The Chippewas of the Thames First Nation

The Chippewas of the Thames First Nation is located 25 km southwest of London, ON close to the west banks of the Thames River. The Thames River is of cultural, livelihood and historical significance and is a major feature in terms of hydrology as it impacts the water table in the flood plains. The water supply in Chippewas of the Thames is considered as Wellhead Protection Area-E based on evaluation methodologies outlined in Ministry of Environment technical rules for municipal Groundwater systems that are Under the Direct Influence (GUDI) of surface water. The Chippewas of the Thames’ water intake comes from an underground infiltration trench located within the floodplain of Thames River, treated and disinfected using ultraviolet light and chlorine. This infiltration trench is considered a GUDI system, which are commonly known as surface water sources for water treatment and protection. Based on this unique feature of the water supply, monitoring the surface water is essential to detect and prevent contaminants and preserve the quality of the groundwater. Since the groundwater bed is close to the surface water, when the surface water is contaminated, there is high likelihood of groundwater contamination as well.

Over the years, surface water quality has continued to deteriorate due to various agricultural activities in the First Nations community. Recent monitoring efforts carried out in the community revealed that the water quality at the Chippewas of the Thames was graded C indicating low aesthetic quality, with high concentrations of nitrogen, phosphorus, bacteria and elevated biological oxygen demand resulting from agricultural activities, storm water outfalls and wastewater treatment plant discharge from upstream communities. To abate these potential water quality problems, regular monitoring of the surface water passing through the community is essential. Furthermore, investigating the effects of land use on the Chippewas of the Thames’ water quality is desirable to propose best management practices.

Attawapiskat First Nation

Attawapiskat First Nation is a community in Northern Ontario with a history of drinking water problems. Their community has two sources for water; a reverse-osmosis purification system with two taps where residents can fill up jugs and bring drinking water to their homes, and heavily chlorinated lake water that can be used for cooking, cleaning and bathing. In July 2019, high levels of toxic disinfection by-products and chemicals from over-chlorinating water that is high in organics were found in both water sources. While organic matter is found in all surface and groundwater and has no direct impact on the consumer’s health, it affects water treatment processes and the resultant safety of drinking water. When a source water is high in organics, the disinfection ability for chlorine is lessened. As a result, more chlorine needs to be added to the water, and disinfection by-products can develop.

Attawapiskat declared a state of emergency in July 2019; residents were told to drink only bottled water, and not to use the other water for cooking or bathing as disinfection byproducts can get into the air, and boiling the water does not clear them. Canada’s Minister of Indigenous Services promised a new water treatment system but did not give a timeline or dollar amount other than $1.5 million for temporary measures allowing residents access to safe drinking, cooking and bathing water. There is a long list of repairs before the water will be safe for the community, including changing the source water from the lake to the lower in organics Attawapiskat River. Attawapiskat is not currently considered to be under a long-term drinking water advisory.

The Chippewas of Nawash Unceded First Nation

The Chippewas of Nawash Unceded First Nation has a population of 816 (2009) and is in Southern Ontario on the eastern shore of the Bruce Peninsula, about 26 km from Wiarton. The community has been under a boil water advisory since January 21, 2019 and the Government of Canada has set a resolution date of March 2021. Drinking water is delivered to residents either via the distribution system from the existing Water Treatment Plant (WTP) on Georgian Bay, trucked delivery to cisterns, or private wells. Marshall et. al. (2019) showed that groundwater quality of wells have been impacted at various depths by septic systems on the reserve. This groundwater contamination results from the aging septic systems and lagoons leaching their contents into the groundwater and contaminating the water being pumped from nearby wells. Fresh water aquifers that are near the surface and below fractured rock are particularly vulnerable. This is because the contaminants can travel rapidly through the few fractures in this formation instead of being given the necessary time to be filtered out as they would be through a finer subsurface. This kind of near-surface formation is found along the Bruce Peninsula and makes this area one of the most vulnerable to bacterial groundwater contamination in southern Ontario.

The Chippewas of Nawash Unceded First Nation continues to await a permanent fix that will ensure clean drinking water is provided to all members of the community. The current solution is the construction of a new WTP that began on September 23, 2020; however, completion of the WTP construction is not expected until 2023, long after the Liberal government’s target for all boil water advisories to be resolved. Interim measures will continue to operate until this is resolved and alternative wastewater treatment technologies should be explored for communities such as these to address the vulnerability that the region has to groundwater contamination.

Historically, First Nations peoples have been excluded from decision-making and this colonialist legacy has reshaped and degraded waterscapes and landscapes across the nation.

The water quality of the communities discussed, and First Nations across Canada are disproportionately threatened in various ways from different sources such as GUDI, over-chlorinated water and septic system leaching. Each community requires different solutions in overcoming the various water quality issues. WTPs are often the proposed solution as in the case of Attawapiskat and Chippewas of Nawash Unceded First Nations. For Chippewas of the Thames First Nation, constant monitoring of surface water quality is required, and implementing best management practices to reduce agricultural pollutant is recommended. However, these solutions are often technocratic and lack community engagement as discussed by Baijius and Patrick in “We Don’t Drink the Water Here”. Historically, First Nations peoples have been excluded from decision-making and this colonialist legacy has reshaped and degraded waterscapes and landscapes across the nation. The result of marginalization has often limited solutions to maintenance of outdated infrastructure and inappropriate land uses. Innovative and appropriate technologies may be a part of the solution if suitable for the challenges a community faces, but ultimately, recognizing and overcoming the persisting power imbalance and exclusion of Indigenous communities will allow for more sustainable solutions to emerge. 

This article is part of our March 2021 Western Student Editorial Series – a series that showcases the works of students in the Collaborative Specialization in Environment and Sustainability program. Read more articles from this series here!

The post Thirsting for Solutions appeared first on A\J.

The CBC article and podcast features Kevin Parkinson, a wildfire operations officer based out of Slave Lake, Alberta, who is one of the few trained experts within the province with an intimate knowledge of utilizing prescribed burns for combating large wildfires. 

As a highlight on the podcast series, this CBC article touches on a lesser-known side of wildfires, that is, that wildfires are not necessarily inherently bad. In fact, they can even be beneficial. Wildfires themselves are natural and the complete prevention of them is not always the “best solution”, even from a human-centric point of view. Massive, destructive wildfires can be devastating, as we’ve all seen in the media in recent years, with fires including the 2016 Fort McMurray fire in Alberta or the 2020 El Dorado fire in California. These large, out-of-control massive fires differ significantly from the prescribed burns described by Snowdon’s article.

Wildfires themselves are natural and the complete prevention of them is not always the “best solution”…

Prescribed burns, also commonly known as controlled burns, are fires set intentionally by experts for land or fire management. As mentioned by the article, these types of burns are done across Alberta each year, however, it is important to note that they are used across Canada and other parts of the world for the benefits they provide. Interestingly, they can be used for fire management, reducing the risks associated with subsequent fires on the landscape. They can also aid in greenhouse gas abatement, promoting regeneration and regrowth of forested areas, and the restoration or maintenance of habitats.

Re-growth on the forest floor after the 2017 Horse Prairie Fire in southern Oregon // Credit: Chelsea Uggenti

You may ask yourself: “How does starting fires lead to less fires?” Although it may seem counter-intuitive, prescribed burn fires can help reduce the risk of later, and often more severe and thus dangerous, fires. Over time, combustible materials such as dried leaves and branches can build up on the forest floor. This accumulation can make the forest more susceptible to a severe fire. Attempting to suppress and prevent fires indefinitely actually often helps enable excess combustible material to accumulate, thus increasing the risk of a severe fire later. Prescribed burns are used to clear this material away before the risk becomes too great. 

Cleaning up the forest floor litter after a prescribed burn in 2018 near Bend, Oregon // Credit: Chelsea Uggenti

Cleaning up the forest floor litter after a prescribed burn in 2017 in the Ochoco National Forest // Credit: Chelsea Uggenti

From an ecological point of view, fires can be important to maintaining certain habitats, and some ecological communities are even regarded as “fire dependent”. Without relatively frequent fires, these areas will not support the same species they otherwise would. Prolonged fire suppression efforts by humans have altered these landscapes, but we are realizing that fires can be important. Through prescribed burns, some of these ecosystems have been at least partially restored.

A few ways that prescribed burns can begin were also highlighted in the CBC article. One such method included dropping fireballs (ping-pong like balls filled with glycol that chemically react) from helicopters to ignite slow burning forest fires. However, sometimes a more intense fire is warranted during a prescribed burn. For these more intense fires, another aerial technique that is employed is called a heli-torch, a helicopter with a 45-gallon drum with gel that is ignited as it is dumped over the forest. Other tamer methods include using a drip torch – a canister that pours flaming fuel onto the ground, done manually while walking in the forest – which are a bit less intense but just as important for wildfire suppression. These are just a few of the hazard reduction technologies and techniques Parkinson uses to protect from larger wildfires, however, there is a lot more strategy involved than simply playing with pyrotechnics. As the article highlights, smaller strategic fires can be set to redirect wildfires in safer directions towards natural fire breaks and often, these fires are carefully planned and executed in detail.

A scorched tree after a wildfire in Umpqua National Forest, Oregon // Credit: Chelsea Uggenti

These burns must be done responsibly, with careful consideration and planning of the present environment. Short and long-term weather conditions, the combustible material present, the types of ecosystems, and nearby infrastructure are all factored in when agencies create a “burn plan”. Parkinson mentioned the carefully planned and executed prescribed burn in Rocky Mountain House that took 10 years to occur while they waited for the right conditions. Although some people believe these burns are bad since they can create or increase smoke plumes in populated areas which can lead to uncomfortable breathing conditions or increased smoke-related illnesses, it is important to realize that the smoke generated by these burns is usually less intrusive and dangerous than the smoke generated by a raging wildfire.

What does this mean to us, exactly? We feel that articles like this give us hope. Although wildfires can be very dangerous and scary, there are some amazing preventative measures, like prescribed burns, in place that help to reduce their risks. It is inspiring to read about Kevin Parkinson’s flaming ping-pong balls technique and the other methods employed by fire fighters and crews. Moving forward, we hope to see better communication (I mean, we’re living in the digital age, right?!) between fire management agencies, fire fighters, and the public that continues to share and strengthen the knowledge that prescribed burns are necessary and effective. We hear the common “short-term pains for long-term gains” phrase ringing in our minds.

This article is part of our March 2021 Western Student Editorial Series – a series that showcases the works of students in the Collaborative Specialization in Environment and Sustainability program. Read more articles from this series here!

The post Fighting Fire with Fire appeared first on A\J.

The good news is that Canada, at this writing, has handled the crisis relatively well and our broad solidarity in the response suggests that our society has the capacity, in time, to emerge better than it was. We can aim for something beyond ‘getting things back to where they were’. With this very idea in mind, back in May, a coalition of Canadian civil society groups put forward six principles for a just COVID recovery:

1) Put people’s health and wellbeing first, no exceptions

2) Strengthen the social safety net and provide relief directly to people

3) Prioritize the needs of workers and communities

4) Build resilience to prevent future crises

5) Build solidarity and equity across communities, generations, and borders

6) Uphold Indigenous rights and work in partnership with Indigenous peoples.

A better future, as envisioned in these principles for a just recovery, requires significant environmental protection and social equity improvements. Recovery is thus both a challenge and an opportunity, since the three core needs of better environmental protection, greater social equity, and inclusive nationwide economic recovery, can be achieved simultaneously.

These changes are possible because this economic recovery requires investing to create new products and services, build new infrastructure, and alter many institutions.

Recovery is thus both a challenge and an opportunity, since the three core needs of better environmental protection, greater social equity, and inclusive nationwide economic recovery, can be achieved simultaneously.

The good news is that interest rates are low and almost certain to remain low for years, which will make this essential spending possible as public and private borrowing will be more manageable. Extensive recovery expenditures will allow a rethinking of many of the things we do and how we do them. It provides the opportunity to do more than just ‘restore’ what we had. COVID has shown Canadians that many aspects of our society and economy can and should be improved, with long term care facilities emerging as one of the most evident examples.

Almost all of us rearranged our lives over the past five months. We have collectively learned just how adaptive we can be, and we have also learned that we can function very well as a society under pressure. Leaders of almost every political stripe adapted to the task at hand and societal and community leadership emerged everywhere. We now know we can create and undertake a multidimensional recovery. Many components of that effort readily lend themselves to serving all three core needs. Why would we not improve the environment and social equity at the same time as we rebuild our economy?

Our economic recovery will need to create construction, manufacturing, and commercial jobs (restoring, in the latter case, many hard-hit small retail businesses). Many design and construction jobs are associated with green infrastructure innovations, from high speed rail in heavily travelled corridors to building complete streets that are safely accessible to cyclists, pedestrians, and cars. This is also an opportunity to retrofit houses and offices for energy efficiency and to manufacture and install improved heating and cooling systems suited to Canada’s climate.

One of the most important reasons green economic actions fit well with COVID recovery is that they require a broad range of skills and have the capacity to distribute work opportunities from coast to coast to coast within urban, suburban and rural settings. They also require innovation and new skills and products that can be used throughout the nation and elsewhere in the world. I will close with a few examples.

Renewable energy production and energy efficiency lend themselves to geographic distribution. Wind energy is abundant along Canada’s thousands of miles of coastline and throughout our rural landscape. From Newfoundland to the Great Lakes, to the prairies and the North, wind energy is supplying locations otherwise powered by high cost fossil-fuel generators. Solar installations and energy efficiency retrofits can create construction jobs in urban areas and First Nations reserves.

The job skills required for these renewable energy projects include everything from electricians, plumbers, carpenters, transportation workers and heavy equipment operators, to manufacturing workers, metal workers, researchers, engineers and technology innovators (especially in energy storage and new distribution systems).

Renewable energy is also a safe, consistent yield, investment opportunity. Geographically dispersed and innovative green COVID recovery possibilities go well beyond renewables and energy efficiency. I will mention four others, the first two just in passing: the electrification of transportation be it rail, buses, trucks or automobiles (where the key to success here is continuous battery advances), and the restoration of habitats including forested areas, grasslands and wetlands.

Also important is the potential for environmental innovation in Canadian agriculture. One possibility is small scale year-round vegetable production (or extended-season agriculture in the far North) with little or no fossil heating. Large greenhouses for cool weather and frost resistant crops like peas and spinach embedded below the frost line can be surprisingly productive. As well, carbon farming (storing carbon in the soil) improves crop yields while reducing atmospheric carbon and methane.

Green building design and construction can be another interesting area to develop, incorporating new and innovative building materials. Buildings can go beyond low or even zero energy. They can be carbon sinks that incorporate agricultural wastes or wastepaper that might otherwise end up in landfills, where they release greenhouse gases on decomposition. Embedded in building materials they add to material strength and insulation.

Green investments often produce more jobs and are better long-term investments than fossil fuels or other extractive industries that Canada has generously helped in the past.

Carbon-embedding hemp can become what is called hempcrete (See, for example, Chris Magwood, Sustainable Home Design). There are numerous embedded carbon building materials that could create new Canadian manufacturing opportunities. Green job and investment opportunities, perhaps aided by government infrastructure and research funding, are numerous. Green investments often produce more jobs and are better long-term investments than fossil fuels or other extractive industries that Canada has generously helped in the past. As many provinces begin re-opening and creating recovery plans, let’s ensure that we rise to the challenge of recovering a society better than the one in which we lived before the pandemic.

This article is featured in our latest issue: Invest in Change. For a limited time, Alternatives Journal is releasing FREE digital downloads, valuing at $250,000 for the first 50,000 interested Canadians! Check out this link to qualify!

The post Greening Canada’s COVID Recovery appeared first on A\J.