As you and I wrestle with the thousands of little ways that we can improve our pro-environment actions, it can be VERY frustrating when the powers-that-be seem to be using that power to be doing the exact opposite of what we’d like them to do. But who are these ‘powers’ – and how do I get me some!? 

“If I was King of the Forest…..” sang the Cowardly Lion on the road to Oz. Well, if I was King of this forested land called Canada, I know that I would take legislative steps on a myriad number of issues near and dear to me and my vision for a greener, healthier tomorrow. What kind of steps, you ask? Well, don’t mind if I do!

I’d take steps to reduce our carbon footprint and increase our caring footprint. I’d take steps to ensure that we have less oil pipelines siphoning the last of the dead dinosaur juice from our sacred grounds – and I’d sure as heck have more freshwater pipelines bringing aqua-vitae to the First Nations communities across the North who have to live without water all too frequently. I’d take steps to ensure that those most impacted, most vulnerable, to the growing pain of the climate emergency are given more voice in the decision-finding and decision-making, and that we, as a country, measure ourselves to a higher standard of living within the means of Nature.

But, truth be told, I really don’t know that much about politics, or the inner workings of the system. I’ve voted most of my life and have occasionally dabbled by assisting a friend with a campaign – but it has never gone beyond that. And it’s not as if I’m not an opinionated SOB who may be guilty of an over-fondness for the sound of his own voice. But despite my lived experiences as a white male of acceptable means, I remain intimidated and afraid to break through my barriers in pursuit of something that has always percolated in my mind.

Thankfully, some friends shared with me a link to the FLIP 2.0 summit – and it was like flipping a switch in my mind as I pivoted from “I can not” to “why the heck not”. I will be spending my Saturday learning from those in the know, those who’ve walked paths that I seek to explore. I will listen and I will learn from people of all backgrounds as they share their wisdom for summoning the courage to be king or queen of a forever-forested land.

I may never be a powers-that-be but, by the end of day Saturday, I’m pretty certain that I’ll understand that power and how best to work together with my friends and peers to affect positive change on a local, provincial and federal level. And that’s a pretty powerful way to spend the day.

The post FLIP the Script appeared first on A\J.

Whether you would classify yourself as a political person or not, there is no denying that political change is an essential piece of the puzzle for environmental change. If you’re interested in making positive environmental changes, it is critical to learn about and/or contribute to how politics can be used as an effective method of change. But no one has to do this alone. GreenPAC is a Canadian non-profit, non-partisan organization that focuses their efforts on enhancing environmental decision-making, building environmental leaders, and creating spaces for the public and for future environmental leaders to contribute to these causes. 

This year, GreenPAC is hosting their second annual FLIP Summit (Future Leaders in Politics) – on Saturday, January 22nd. The FLIP Summit is an all-day event that presents a diversity of speakers, presentations, networking opportunities, and participatory sessions with the theme of breaking barriers for environmental political change. This event is a great opportunity to learn about Canadian politics and its essential tie to environmental advocacy as well as hear from local politicians, interact with other like-minded people, ask questions, and learn how to get involved. 

“This year’s theme is breaking political barriers for environmental progress. We chose this theme because there are many barriers that still exist for environmental change-makers to enter or engage in politics, and we believe focusing on those barriers will make the conversations more fruitful and impactful.” -Coco Wang, GreenPAC’s 2022 Summit Director

The FLIP Summit is not only for those who know about politics or have an interest in running for office. This event is for everyone. It’s for citizens. It’s for youth whose voices need to be amplified and empowered. It’s for older folks who may not know how to break out of the red and blue dichotomy that has been entrenched in our minds (and that environmental change can happen in any party). It’s for people who love politics, want to get involved with and inspired by current politicians, and aspire to be an environmental leader. It’s also for people who don’t know what politics has to do with environmentalism but want to learn. The point here is that this event is for anyone of any age or experience-level, looking to get involved, network, or just simply learn how the system of politics can work to enhance and increase positive environmental change. 

“Every year, we encounter countless people who recognize that there is a disconnect between the kind of change they want in the world, and the progress that’s actually happening. Politics is the missing piece, especially environmental leadership in politics. It doesn’t matter what issue you care about, it doesn’t matter where or how you want to make a difference, politics is there. We may not like that, but we need to engage with politics so we know how to navigate it, how to shape it, and where necessary, how to change it completely.” -Brittany Stares, GreenPAC’s 2021 Summit Director

It is especially critical that youth feel invited to this event – and more broadly, to conversations about environmental politics – because the future of our world is the future of our youth. The next generation of decision makers need to be heard today and every day looking forward, especially when talking about long-term sustainability. We have a world of passionate youth who want to improve the world in whatever ways they can, and GreenPAC is an organization that is working to uplift those voices, and facilitate knowledge sharing, mentoring, and inspiration between current and future politicians.

“Research has shown that young people are the most engaging demographic in taking advocacy actions like signing petitions and raising awareness on issues, particularly climate change and other environmental issues. But the reality is that young people also have the lowest rate of voting in elections and have little political knowledge in general. To transform the energy and will for change, understanding and entering formal politics is crucial for our generation to push for the real changes we need.” -Coco Wang, GreenPAC’s 2022 Summit Director

Check out more details about the event, including the agenda and speakers, here: https://bit.ly/GPflip2022 

Registration is open until 1:00 PM (EST) on Friday, January 21st, so be sure to get your ticket now and be prepared to be empowered this weekend. Never underestimate the power of a speaker, a conversation, an idea – those things can spark movements, and this event is THE place for sparks to fly. We’ll see you there!

The post Breaking Barriers with GreenPAC appeared first on A\J.

What is the main reason for this decline and rapid movement towards the extinction of the Right Whale? The answer is simple, fishing lines. However, a solution is not as straightforward, as it is shrouded in the interests of many different people who must collectively determine the fate of these animals–whether it be extinction or restoration. 

This is explored in the new documentary Entangled directed by David Abel, a reporter at the Boston Globe and a previous Pulitzer-prize winner. The movie will “dive deep” into the history and current status of the North Atlantic right whale, a species on the brink of extinction. It will also explore the collision between fisheries (particularly the North American lobster industry), environmental activists, and American and Canadian governmental institutions in the save the whales movement. 

We were able to speak with David Abel about the upcoming film and its purpose.

“I think the film has already raised awareness about the threat to North Atlantic Right Whales and the impact we, as human beings are having on them. Particularly, the threat of entanglements.” He stated. 

Abel added that this film is already the motivating factor for many conservation efforts, such as the release of a biological opinion on the status of right whales by the U.S. federal government. Additionally, Abel thought it important that this film, in pressing for the protection of this whale species, also gave everyone (regardless of their position in the save the whales movement) a chance to speak on the issue.

“My goal was to present, in as much nuance as possible, the different points of view on each side of the debate. There are just so many different perspectives.”

This debate, Abel added was complex as it divided the central groups amongst themselves; there are pro-whale and anti-whale fishers, conservations who want to ban all fishing lines and those who believe that some should remain for the fishing industry, and politicians who land on either side of the movement to save the right whales. 

“My hope is by portraying the conflicts in as human terms as possible, with as many facts as possible, with empathy for all the different sides, that there will be a recognition that we need to balance these important interests to reach an actual resolution on saving the whales,” Abel stated.

Abel explained that the North Atlantic right whale has seen its population collapse by over 25% in a decade, because of human activity, and something must be done to stop this. He wanted the film to allow everyone (including the industry) to understand that this is not a “fictitious threat”. However, Abel also wanted to detail how important the lobster fishery business was to many people and to the economy. And how this was being impacted by climate change, such that fishing was chasing lobsters deeper into cooler parts of the ocean and colliding with the whale populations. 

Of course, the film’s focus was also to showcase the brutality of the right whale’s extinction and, as Abel stated, “did not sanitize” the vicious way in which these animals died. Tied up in fishing lines that cut deep, drowning from them, and finally washed up on the shore. There was no way to ignore the fact that these deaths were happening and the documentary wanted audiences to be incumbent of that information. And hopefully, these audiences might take the emotions felt by watching these mortalities to act in saving these magnificent animals. Abel added,

“The UN actually estimated that by the end of this century, we are likely to lose as many as a million species. I was blown away by that statistic…how do you even begin to convey something like that? I thought if you could tell the story of one species in this large that people could empathize with, that would be the story of the right whale.” 

Abel concluded the conversation with one of his favorite lines from the documentary,

“If you can’t save a great whale from extinction, what can you save?” 

———-

The film Entangled will be released in select Canadian markets on June 18, 2021, and will expand nationally on July 2, 2021, in collaboration with the Sherry Media Group. This film will be launched as the premiere of the second season in the IMPACT SERIES–an original film and speaker series focused on educating and connecting consumers to take action in solving social and environmental issues.

Keep a lookout on the below social media platforms so that you can be the first to watch Entangled and the other incredible films in the Impact series! 

Connect to The Impact Series:

Facebook: The Impact Series 

Twitter: @iACTseries 

Instagram: @TheImpactSeries

The post The Battle for Right Whales – Watch Entangled in Season 2 of The Impact Series appeared first on A\J.

During the Cold War Russia had created a base called the Nagurskoye airbase that included a weather station and a communications outpost in the Franz Josef Land archipelago. Originally, the runway could only handle planes that would be equivalent to the B-52 American airplane. The air base has now been expanded to include icebreaking submarine nuclear missile bombers called the Delta IV. It can have up to 12.8 megatons of nuclear firepower with only 4 missiles. Russia also possesses almost 40 icebreakers with more on the way, making it the largest fleet of icebreakers in the world.

Although this military base is the main threat to Canadian and other Western countries, Russia’s goal is to discover the untapped natural resources and new shipping routes that are being uncovered from the melting snow. According to Administrator Alexander Moiseyev, chief of Russia’s Northern Fleet,

“The complex ice conditions make it necessary to organize safe shipping, so Russia insists on a special regime of its use.”

 Russian President Vladimir Putin has cited estimates that put the value of Arctic mineral riches at $30 trillion. This is part of the first plan for Russia’s climate change mitigation in terms of lowering the threat of climate change to their country. Russia’s two-year plan to mitigate climate change has also written that there are positives to climate change, and finding the untapped reserves in the Arctic is one of them.

This has been the most activity the North Arctic has experienced and has caught the world’s attention. With Russia’s high military presence, it would be difficult for other countries to be active without conflict.

U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken said it “increases the dangers of accidents and miscalculations and undermines the shared goal of a peaceful and sustainable future for the region. So, we have to be vigilant about that.”

Russia views the Northern Sea Route (NSR), as a domestic passageway, while other countries see it as an international passageway. Blinken has also made it clear to the Arctic Council that it is warming 2.5 times as fast as the rest of the world. According to predictions, the Arctic is assumed to be completely ice-free by 2050. The Arctic is responsible for regulating the climate for the rest of the world and absorbing dangerous UV rays the sun emits.

With current testing of the nuclear missiles Russia carries, it can have an impact on the environment if ever launched. Nuclear bombs decimate anything that is within the radius of the missile’s potential. Effects from fallout can include future genetic mutations. In this case, to be surrounded by water may have a greater impact when Russia is testing in the Arctic to the eggs and larvae of marine organisms.  The fallout can cause immense darkness [to the area] and cause plant death-causing starvation up the food chain. The Arctic already has a scheduled lack of daylight annually, and it could be made worse if the activity continues.

Authors of an article published in “The Atomic Scientist, further speculate even small-scale use of nuclear warheads could deplete the ozone layer, shorten the growing season, increase temperature, and hasten the effects of global warming.

However, despite these warnings, it seems that Russia is on a steadfast mission for economic growth regardless of the environmental costs. Though it is important to note that it is not alone in doing so and many other countries are also in the process of developing in the Arctic, including Canada. 

This story is not new in the current era of development, although there is one difference. This time people are noticing and cautioning against such a move if anything to protect a testament of time. The Arctic, stubborn, beautiful, cold, and, with hope, untouchable even by the hands of cruel progress. 

The post Russia “Rushes” to the Arctic Circle as Ice Recedes 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.

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.

While voting is important in placing environmentally conscious political leaders in office, we need to have reliable candidates to vote for in the first place. If your options are between a candidate who approved a pipeline expansion and a candidate who left the Paris climate agreement, one could feel at a loss for a viable choice.

We need solid, environmentally sound options to vote for.

But just like encouraging youth to vote, this side of the coin poses its own challenges. I was recently on a call with a former MP who mentioned that one of the greatest challenges in solving the environmental problems of our time will be ensuring representatives in the House of Parliament are environmentally literate. During her time as MP, she relied heavily on a team of environmental scientists and researchers to ensure that she understood the issues pertaining to the environment as clearly as possible. This is reasonable. An MP cannot be an expert on every topic they are expected to speak and vote on- they are human too! Moreover, many of the individuals who enter politics have backgrounds and degrees in political science or law, and not necessarily environmental sciences.

Fostering environmentally literate MP’s (and their teams!) leads the way to greener, science-based policies and legislation. GreenPAC understands this and have made it their mission to help elect environmentally educated leaders. As mentioned in my previous article, GreenPAC is a non-partisan organization which offers a Parliamentary Internship Program to youth between the ages of 18 to 30. The program places young environmentalists in the offices of host MP’s with proven track records as being environmental champions. For nine months, the interns learn about the inner workings of the federal government through an environmental lens.

This September of 2020, GreenPAC took on four new interns. The interns are positioned with MP’s from different political parties Canada-wide. With diverse backgrounds from agriculture to biology to engineering, the interns are assigned specific projects relating to the environment, as well as assisting their MP’s and the offices in which they work become more environmentally adept.

I wanted to check in to see how they were coming along, and to gain a better sense of what the future MP’s of Canada might look like! Here are a few of their stories…

Zhenglin Liu | Interning with MP Taylor Bachrach | NDP | Skeena—Bulkley Valley, BC

With a background in engineering and economics, Zhenglin Liu joined GreenPAC to gain experience in public service and federal politics with a future goal of a master’s degree, and then perhaps go to law school (wow, I know!).

“I came into the internship hoping to get sort of the vibe as to what environmental politics was like,” he laughed, “I think this internship has definitely been helpful in that. I was not hugely knowledgeable about the details of Parliamentary politics before starting this internship. For example, I didn’t know about the distinction between the work that is done in the House, versus Parliamentary committees, versus MP’s just informally talking to each other.”

Liu has been focussing specifically on issues relevant to his MP’s portfolio (infrastructure and transport), including green recovery policy, high-speed rail, aviation, and the incorporation of climate considerations into infrastructure funding.

Liu has also been researching historical policy with his MP’s office. “I was researching historical approaches to rural telephone connection in the mid-century as an analogy and potential source of best practices and recommendations. That was really interesting because it was something I had never done before; looking into policy that was decades old and trying to draw analogies for the modern day.”

“One thing that has really jumped out to me is how hard leadership (specifically in the political arena) is without knowledge or resources from civil society.” -Zhenglin Liu

“One thing that has really jumped out to me is how hard leadership (specifically in the political arena) is without knowledge or resources from civil society,” says Liu. “For me, working in an opposition party that currently has a small caucus, it can feel like even MP’s with strong environmental convictions (of which Taylor Bachrach is a great example), don’t really have the time, the staff, or the capacity to develop the technical or grassroots expertise stakeholders can provide on specific issues.”

“The experiences I have found most interesting and exciting have been hearing ministers answer questions posed from a progressive environmental perspective, whether that’s in question period or in committee,” he continued, “Through the office, I have had the opportunity to hear from really interesting stakeholders like the Canadian Federation of Municipalities and the Canadian Urban Transit Research & Innovation Consortium (CUTRIC).”

While his educational background has been in electricity systems, he is now learning about transport infrastructure from the perspective of planning, understanding the broader social benefits, and how politics and engineering intersect.

For the remainder of his internship, Liu hopes to learn more about which stakeholders play large roles in influencing policy. “Whether it’s industry leaders in clean tech, civil society, or experts within the civil service – who has the strongest impact?”

Jessie Mayes | Interning with MP Eric Duncan | Conservative | Stormont—Dundas—South Glengarry, ON

“All of this [was] really new to me,” says Jessie Mayes, speaking of her political experience prior to starting the GreenPAC internship. Coming from a background in Agricultural and Environmental Sciences, Mayes knew that she would face a learning curve when it came to navigating the ins and outs of everyday politics. But in the office of MP Eric Duncan, she also had a unique opportunity to work on projects that utilized her passion for agriculture.

“My office has been really great. They wanted to carve out specific environmental projects for me to work on while I’m in the office so they can use my skills, which is wonderful,” says Mayes. During her internship, she has also been conducting research on the impact of the carbon tax on farmers and the ways that farmers can be supported to adopt more sustainable practices.

“I have a much greater appreciation for what can be done at the local level and how big of an impact that can have.” – Jessie Mayes

Before peering behind the curtain of politics, Mayes was often frustrated with the slow speed at which our political system operates.  “From the outside, I have been judgemental and perhaps too much so,” she says. “When I was doing more grassroots and local work, I thought, ‘wow, why isn’t this happening?’ Now that I have more experience here, I realize that it isn’t easy on this level either. I have a much greater appreciation for what can be done at the local level and how big of an impact that can have as well.”

In the meantime, Mayes says she is “interested in gaining more experience with policy analysis and how to develop strong policies while also being critical of them.”

Clément Badra | Interning with MP Jenica Atwin | Green Party | Fredericton, NB

GreenPAC intern, Clément Badra, feels he can make the most difference in the world by working in and around politics in the broad sense of the term. “The one sphere where I feel like we are lacking the willingness to take on [environmental issues] is the political sphere,” he says.

“Most of the people that are working in the offices [were] political science students or people with a background in administration. Which is extremely necessary because of the complex structure you are working in…but the more time I spend listening to what is happening, the more it seems the programs are not structured to properly help people working on the ground. There might be a disconnect there.”

“[An MP] cannot be an expert on everything, so you need your team to be experts for you and guide you through this.” – Clément Badra

Badra believes that without diverse backgrounds in the House or on an MP’s staff, “you might miss nuances on specific issues and can’t do the best work possible as an MP because your staff wasn’t able to bring the nuances to the bill… [An MP] cannot be an expert on everything, so you need your team to be experts for you and guide you through this. But diversity should not only be in regards to professional backgrounds represented, but should also include socioeconomic backgrounds as well as racial diversity.”

Badra hopes to learn more about committee work and the various kinds of procedures you can use to push for ideas and projects within the House of Commons. More specifically, “I would like to learn how the committee work translates to the debate in the House and pushing motions and amendments to a bill, the negotiations that happen around a bill when it is put in the House, and how you work to try and get the most out of it.”

In terms of impactful moments during his internship? “I have had some very interesting meetings…you get to understand the partisanship and the non-partisanship sides because some people in other parties do not share the idea of the party themselves,” says Badra. He says that another impactful moment is seeing the positive influence he and his team made on someone they were trying to help, “those are great moments”.

Joshua Swift | Interning with MP Catherine McKenna | Liberal | Ottawa Centre, ON

GreenPAC intern, Joshua Swift, found GreenPAC’s training prior to his internship helpful in preparing him for what was ahead. When asked what kind of training GreenPAC provided prior to the internship, Swift stated, “We had training with the House clerks. We learned how to do research that would probably be required in the office. We also learned about how the different branches of government work… We spoke with many speakers, some of whom having worked on the Hill before, some who had worked around it. We also began working on a GreenPAC related project before actually starting in our offices.”

“I have also gotten the chance to work on some local environmental projects,” says Swift. He has learned about environmental challenges specific to Ottawa including tree planting projects, and phasing out single use plastics, as well as working with local groups and smaller environmental initiatives within the community. “I have also done a lot of following and reporting on meetings for my MP,” says Swift, “I have been following [The Canadian House of Commons Standing Committee on Environment and Sustainable Development] at the federal level, as well as the city of Ottawa and the local sides environmental committees.”

“Climate change is a global issue, and I don’t think there is any better actor situated to be at the forefront and coordinate that approach than the federal government. They have the tools and capacity to make this happen.” – Joshua Swift

While he has a background in environmental policy, the GreenPAC internship is providing him with the skills to put his education to use in the real world. “This experience has strengthened my view that the climate crisis is so big, and in order to meaningfully combat it, we need a multifaceted approach,” says Swift. “Climate change is a global issue, and I don’t think there is any better actor situated to be at the forefront and coordinate that approach than the federal government. They have the tools and capacity to make this happen. This experience so far has just kind of fortified that view.”

When asked what surprised him during his internship so far, he stated, “I knew MP’s and ministers were probably busy, but I didn’t realize the extent to which their schedules are jam-packed! From my experience, everyone here is working extremely hard.”

“I would like to better understand the Parliamentary process,” says Swift, “The federal government is multifaceted, with so many departments, ministries, and checks and balances. The more well-versed I can become in those inner workings, the better prepared I will be to utilize that system to implement some of the many changes we need, especially around the environment…I am just trying to absorb all I can.”

—

Now that I have peeked behind the curtain myself into the work and workings of the GreenPAC interns, I’d say the future is in good hands.

The post A Peek Behind the Curtain appeared first on A\J.

How can I consider myself a “real environmentalist” if I’m not keeping up with the issues and solutions being discussed in the world around me? For me, Twitter and Instagram are often the first place where I find out about current and trending topics in the news. Recently, while browsing Twitter, I noticed that the hashtag #Billc69 was trending and saw a lot of comments about this bill, which proposes a new environmental impact assessment system. Being an Environmental Assessment student, these familiar words enticed me to dig in and find out why so many people had so much to say about it.

Bill C-69 was adopted on June 20th by the Canadian federal government. According to the Parliament of Canada, it is “an Act to enact the Impact Assessment Act and the Canadian Energy Regulator Act, an Act to amend the Navigation Protection Act and to make consequential amendments to other acts”. Essentially, this bill will introduce new laws governing environmental assessments, replace the National Energy Board with a new Canadian Energy Regulation and amend the Navigation Protection Act.

The federal government says this bill will rebuild public trust around decision-making by increasing public engagement, creating stronger rules for environmental protection, increasing engagement with Indigenous peoples, and requiring both early planning phases and shorter review timelines. The new impact assessment act is also seen as a way for the government to assess larger projects like pipelines and railways and their effects on human health, the economy, and the environment.

The Honourable Catherine McKenna, Minister of Environment and Climate Change, has naturally been one of the major voices promoting the bill through the media. In a promotional video, she says with Bill C-69 and the new impact assessment system, project decisions will be more closely based on scientific evidence and Indigenous traditional knowledge. The new system would allow for more opportunities for Canadians to participate in the decision-making process through the creation of simple summaries available to the public and by recognizing the rights of Indigenous people and their roles in decision-making.

But the bill has been facing a lot of criticism online, and unsurprisingly, most of the concerns are related to its impacts on the oil and gas sector. Conservative Party Senator for British Columbia, Richard Neufeld, called Bill C-69 “one of the most toxic, polarizing and divisible bills” he has ever encountered in his 10 years as a senator. In an official video, the Premier of Alberta, Jason Kenney, called Bill C-69 “a no-more-pipelines law” and said the bill is “attacking a major export of only one province, Alberta” and “is a prejudicial discriminatory attack” with “no defensible rationale”. Alberta’s Energy Minister, Sonya Savage said the bill “strikes at the heart of national unity”, suggesting it shows a disregard for jobs and the economy. But Alberta is not the only provincial government against it. Newfoundland and Labrador Senator David Wells says, in a guest column for St. John’s Telegram, that Bill C-69 “kneecaps the well managed and responsible petroleum sector supposedly in the name of the environment”.

Despite the loud criticisms, however, the bill also saw positive traction and feedback online. According to the National Post, Bill C-69 has been supported by industries such as the Mining Association of Canada. Many environmental organizations support the bill, while pointing out that it could have gone further in protecting sensitive ecological regions and accounting for greenhouse gas emissions. Several Northern Alberta Indigenous leaders have also supported the legislation. “Our intent with Bill C-69 is to ensure that it is robust enough to allow First Nations across Canada to have their rights considered without having to resort to courts,” said Chief Archie Waquan of Mikisew Cree First Nation tribe of Alberta, to the Canadian Press for Global News. West Coast Environmental Law, a non-profit group of environmental lawyers and strategists, have shown support for Bill C-69 as well. They hosted workshops around Canada on Impact Assessment, participated in expert review and debunked myths about C-69. They described the passing of this bill as “a huge step forward for environmental decision making in Canada.”           

So, what does this all mean? From the time it was proposed to after it was passed, Bill C-69 has been viewed as a threat to the economy by the oil and gas sector and  conservative commentators because of its tighter environmental regulations. Their pushback is understandable. With more serious action on the climate crisis being demanded in the last few years, people whose livelihoods depend on the oil industry are worried about how they will be affected every time an environmental bill is proposed. But the new impact assessment systems and regulatory bodies are not even up and running yet. We should at least give it an opportunity to work. After all, it only seeks to put more efficient regulations towards protecting the environment, as the Ministry of Environment is expected to do. 

The post Bill C-69: Assessing the impacts appeared first on A\J.

Many Canadians have become fed up with government inaction on climate, including a young group of Quebecers who recently filed a class action suit against the federal government for their insufficient response to climate change.

As politicians dither, the clocks on climate change are ticking. The Canadian government has continued to promise action on climate change—from the Kyoto Protocol to the Paris Agreement—but its commitment to change remains to be seen.

Many Canadians have become fed up with government inaction on climate, including a young group of Quebecers who recently filed a class action suit against the federal government for their insufficient response to climate change.

On November 26, ENvironnement JEUnesse, a non-profit environmental organization in Quebec, sued the Canadian government for its inadequate response to the growing global crisis. ENJEU says that the Canadian government is failing its youth, and that its passive approach to climate change is undermining fundamental rights of the younger generation.

“The government needs to adopt a more ambitious target and action plan,” says Catherine Gauthier, Executive Director of ENJEU, in an interview with A\J.

“The ultimate goal [of the lawsuit] is to make sure that Canada is doing enough to protect our future,” she says. “And by that we mean a more ambitious target that would prevent the worst impacts of climate change for all young people.”

Gauthier has been involved with ENJEU since she was 16, when she started looking at how composting systems could be implemented in schools, and later took part in the UN climate change negotiations in Montréal as a Canadian youth delegate.

ENJEU claims that the government targets aren’t sufficient to avoid the catastrophic effects of climate change, and its current framework won’t even allow Canada to reach these low-level goals. “The Canadian government is infringing on our generation’s rights to life and security, and also to a safe environment,” Gauthier says. “Canada’s target [is to reduce] GHG emissions by 30 percent by 2030 based on 2005 levels, which is a target that is clearly insufficient.”

According to a report released by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change in October, global temperature increases of more than 1.5°C will have devastating impacts on the environment. Without rapid action and specific planning, the Canadian government puts people under 35 at risk of suffering these consequences.

“Young people are really scared and also ashamed to see that Canada is not doing enough,” says Gauthier. She notes that impacts of climate change are already very real, citing a heat wave in Quebec in summer 2018 that caused nearly 100 deaths. “[It is] really urgent for the Canadian government to take action and to completely change the direction we’re going.”

Canada’s economic ties to fossil fuels are another part of the concern. Funds that could be put towards cleaner and more sustainable technologies are being used to subsidize oil companies and build pipelines.

“Fossil fuel companies are putting a lot of pressure on the Canadian government… which is totally unacceptable,” Gauthier tells A\J, pointing at their $4.5 billion investment in Kinder Morgan’s Trans Mountain pipeline last summer. “What it means for us is Canada prefers to protect the oil industry rather than the future of young people.”

Trudel Johnston & Lespérance, the firm filing the claim on behalf of ENJEU, has won the most class action cases in Canada since it was founded 20 years ago. They are acting pro-bono on this case.

“The Canadian government’s behaviour infringes on several fundamental rights protected by the Canadian and Quebec charters,” said Bruce Johnston, a partner at TJL. “We believe that we have a solid legal case that deserves to be brought before the courts.”

And the lawsuit isn’t the first of its kind. Youth around the world are taking action and calling on their governments for a more aggressive response to the changing climate. Similar proceedings are taking place in the U.S., Uganda, New Zealand, and the European Union, to name a few.

Gauthier notes how movements in other countries served as an inspiration for ENJEU’s recent legal action. “That’s really encouraging, to see how young people are taking climate change to the court,” she says. “Our governments are clearly not doing enough, and we need more than words in [these] times.”

Just last year, a case led by 25 young people in Colombia successfully sued the government, making it mandatory to halt deforestation in the Amazon within a five month window. In the Netherlands, another winning case legally bound the government to cut greenhouse emissions by at least 25 percent by 2020 (compared to 1990 emissions).

With youth and environment groups starting to take a stand, perhaps more ambitious responses to climate change can begin to gain traction. Young people are starting to lead more sustainable lives, says Gauthier, but government action is a big barrier to change.

“Whatever we do in terms of reducing our individual GHG emissions… if our government is purchasing pipelines, we won’t be able to limit global warming to 1.5 degrees,” she notes. “So we really need to see strong action from our government.”

The post From climate inaction to government class action appeared first on A\J.

Imagine catching a GO train to see, taste, and pick the best the world grows and prepares all in one place. Imagine picking your own berries and then drinking squeezed juice while watching some frisky goats. Then imagine sitting down to enjoy what can be done with the cheese they supply. That, and more, minutes from downtown Toronto: GO to food and food-to-go.

Food and food-based travel have created thriving local economies in Niagara, Prince Edward County and Vermont. For that matter, Italy and France are often thought of this way. It is exciting to realize that another place in Ontario might emerge that is accessible to millions by public transit (GO train to shuttle bus).

In Toronto (and other large cities) fewer young people are buying cars. Instead, they take transit and rent cars now and then. My Toronto-based sons have never bothered to get driver’s licenses. Many such people can afford and would love nearby day or weekend family trips getting outdoors. If the Land Over Landings group’s vision happens, that experience will become a whole lot easier for millions.

Land Over Landings is the successor to People or Planes featured in an A/J cover story in the autumn of 1972! Both oppose a second Toronto airport on prime farmland just north of Pickering. Their superb study on the economic potential of the 9,600 acres adjacent to the new Rouge Valley National Urban Park, Canada’s first urban national park is now complete.

This priceless near-urban, high quality farmland could become the envy of most global cities. If this study’s vision comes to pass, the world will see the value of having that much farmland in one piece adjacent to a National Park, and close to a huge city. The land is already owned by the Canadian government and the economists who did this study think it should stay that way.

The study’s economic analysts Dr. John Groenewegen and Dr. Atif Kubursi offer six scenarios detailing the economic impacts of various management strategies. These lands annually produce cash crops like corn and soybeans valued at $3.7 million. This land, as well as the park’s land, were placed in reserve for an airport that was never built.

Because the land is leased in short-term contracts, no tenants invest in tiling fields, buildings for animals or equipment or anything like orchards, because these activities only make money after several years. Groenewegen and Kubursi suggest renewable 30-year leases to spur diverse crops. As well, long-term leases could attract relatively young farmers while avoiding high land purchase costs that all-but-exclude non-speculators. This scenario sees these lands generating over $100 million annually from crops and agricultural tourism. Potential crops include widely varied vegetables and fruits and diverse ethnic crops to serve the GTA population as well as livestock.

The economic impact estimates are conservative, as they should be in such a study, but the authors do suggest thoughtful policies to make the transition work. For more detail I highly recommend reading the study, one eminently readable by non-economists. It will open your imagination.

Here’s a little dreaming about what this area could become. Let’s start our dream with one word: branding.  This land will be branded, as well as the crops it produces, and the foods prepared on and near to it. Think of the Big Apple (further east on the 401), think of Ben and Jerry’s and what that one ice cream factory has done for Vermont tourism and Vermont’s economy.

Then consider the possibilities for ethnic food creations including Ethiopian, South American, Asian, Middle Eastern. The possibilities are endless. We can grow most of what is needed right there. Then imagine the possibilities for restaurants and branded products made from produce grown and prepared fresh daily on the doorstep of 10,000,000 people and whoever else wants to come.

These lands could also be a living lab for something else profoundly important: food security. We must be able to produce most of what we need.

There are four reasons to avoid excessive dependence on imported food. One: climate change is already affecting California, our leading source of fresh fruits and vegetables. These impacts will worsen over time. Two: today’s political attacks on immigrants threaten to leave California and Florida produce either unpicked or more expensive. Third, fully using local food production capacities reduces carbon emissions. Innovative farmers are now growing fresh greens in Ontario year round in low-cost passive solar greenhouses. Fourth, Trump’s government is systematically weakening pesticide and water quality regulations, likely affecting the safety of food from America.

The capacity to grow quality food locally (especially year-round) depends on involving young, innovative, diverse people into farming and, of course, on preserving quality farmland. Affordable access to land is essential. Leasing opportunities like the ones suggested by Land over Landings help open such possibilities. Many people want the chance to farm, but their dreams are often financially out of reach given the cost of land.

Food production in Canada will thrive if farming is profitable, visible and exciting. These special lands and nearby communities can blossom with crops and restaurants of incredible variety. Everyone can dine, buy take-away or rent bicycles (maybe electrified by barn roof solar) to go from farm-to-farm picking or buying.

With new places created for overnight stays, there would be more jobs than the study estimates, especially if excellent culinary creations are branded and marketed widely. Visitors who enjoy products or meals will be thrilled to find them available back home in Toronto or elsewhere. Truly, the possibilities are endless.

The post The GO Train to Farm Country? appeared first on A\J.