Above is an excerpt from an article called “A Being in Nature” that I wrote for A\J about a year ago when I was working as a full-time co-op student. I so clearly remember the day I wrote it. It was a busy work day, online and remote, and I was feeling overwhelmed with stress, screen-fatigue, winter blues, and eco-anxiety. When I ventured outside and heard the call of the mourning dove in my backyard, all the negatives of the day melted away, and it was just me and the bird. 

Birds have a special relationship with us. Graeme Gibson knew that and taught many of us about this bond through his life’s work of writing about birds and dedicating his time to bird conservation. Margaret Atwood, partner to Graeme, has, of course, been very active in both circles of Canadian literature and bird conservation as well. Together, they are the perfect, poetic pair of bird-loving writers and conservationists. 

As Grant Munroe wrote for The Walrus, “Other famous literary couples have shared pastimes—Vladimir Nabokov collected butterflies to the delight of his wife, Vera; Sylvia Plath took up beekeeping with Ted Hughes—but few have been as well-paired for the activism that often attends birdwatching: Atwood’s interest, which seems cooler and slightly ironic, tempers Gibson’s gregarious fanaticism. Rather than rail against cat owners, as some do, they have adopted a balanced collaborative angle: driven yet compassionate, cut with humour, grounded in science, effected through appeals to emotion and intellect.” 

Atwood and Gibson achieved huge bird conservation wins in their life together. The pair played an important role in founding the Pelee Island Bird Observatory in 2003, and consistently worked to support and bring attention to the organization whenever possible. In 2005, Gibson released his now most famous novel, The Bedside Book of Birds: An Avian Miscellany, all about bird life and behaviour, history and mythology, photographs, art, and stories. Graeme and Margaret were also co-presidents of BirdLife International’s Rare Bird Club.

As you may have already guessed, Graeme’s impact was far-reaching as he was known as a champion of birds across several environmental organizations. It seems as though wherever there were bird conservation campaigns happening in Ontario, the names Gibson and Atwood were involved. Nature Canada is one such organization that has put forward several bird conservation campaigns, including the Save Bird Lives campaign, which Graeme and Margaret were driving forces behind and that helped to inspire Atwood’s graphic novel series Angel Catbird. 

Another Nature Canada bird campaign that has gained a lot of support and traction is the Bird Friendly City Certification Program. This program gives municipalities the opportunity to reduce bird threats in their cities, restore and enhance bird habitats, and provide public outreach and education through citizen engagement. In 2021, Nature Canada certified the following 4 Canadian cities in Ontario: London, ON; Toronto, ON; Vancouver, BC; and Calgary, AB. The vision of this program is that certified “bird-friendly” areas will grow and the Canada’s cities and towns will provide the necessary habitats for birds to not only find refuge during migration periods but also thrive.

“In the last 50 years, we’ve lost three billion birds in North America — 25% of the population — gone. Beloved species that live in or pass through our towns and cities, our fields and forests, have been pushed to the brink. At Nature Canada, we’re organising the effort to bring them back with organised, science-backed action.” – Ted Cheskey, Naturalist Director of Nature Canada

To learn more about this program and the work Nature Canada is doing to protect bird species in urban and suburban spaces, explore here.

Graeme and Margaret were supportive and involved in the work Nature Canada has done over the past several decades, and now, in 2022, Nature Canada’s highest honour – the Douglas H. Pimlott Award – is being awarded to both Margaret Atwood and Graeme Gibson.

Douglas H. Pimlott, sometimes known as the founder of the Canadian environmental movement, was a key environmental leader in conservation, wildlife biology, and ecology work. He paved the way for Canadian environmental protection and made huge contributions to environmentalism in his lifetime. His award suitably honours individuals who have made similarly outstanding achievements and contributions to conservation in Canada. 

On March 2, 2022, at Nature Canada’s Pimlott Award Celebration Margaret Atwood and the late Graeme Gibson will be honoured and recognized as champions for birds and nature. The event will feature Graeme and Margaret’s literary and bird conservation achievements, and their legacy that will live on to inspire the next generations to follow in their footsteps. There will be featured guests and speakers, and registration is free of charge, although there are limited spots. Will you choose to be a part of this story? A story of hope – for the world that future generations are inheriting, for the natural world, for the birds.

Graeme had a compassionate soul, showing kindness to the people he worked with and the birds he worked for. He will be missed and remembered by many. Now, it’s our job to take his wisdom, inspiration, and passion for birds, nature conservation, and literature and move forward into 2022 and beyond. It’s our job to listen for our mourning dove call and let it move us.

***

“By stepping outside, not only are you getting a good dose of fresh oxygen, serotonin, vitamin D, and maybe a pretty sunset out of it – you’re reconnecting with the earth. The ground you’re walking on. The plants and animals that you coexist with. The little delights that live and thrive and breathe and walk and live all around you. And if we keep connecting with these things, I hope we will feel a little bit more grounded in our own backyards, realizing that we’re part of nature and we can take care of it in the footsteps of people who have done so for many generations. We can get to know the names of the species around us, the bird calls, the texture of the grass outside, the smell of the soil in our gardens. These details are important – they are vital to upholding the connection we have to the Earth. And we will be able to fight for this planet and remedy our eco-anxiety if we keep tending to the relationship we have with nature.”

Stay tuned for next week’s FOR THE LOVE OF NATURE article on Gibson and Atwood’s love – for birds, for nature, and for each other.

For a more comprehensive list of Graeme’s achievements and Margaret’s tribute to him, follow the links below:

• The Pelee Island Bird Observatory – In Memoriam
• Remembering Graeme

The post Seeding the Spotlight 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.

Spring of 1970 – A shift in attitudes, values, and beliefs of 20 million Americans embodied through a movement of consciousness about our planet. 

Senator Gaylord Nelson of Wisconsin, U.S., created Earth Day as a way to give environmental issues a voice and put them on the national agenda. In December 1970, Congress authorized the creation of a new federal agency to tackle environmental issues – the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Since then, efforts to tackle environmental degradation and climate change have been adopted worldwide from introducing policy and legislation, to funding clean technologies and renewable energy, to manufacturing biodegradable materials. Here, we look at the honouring of this day through the decades. 

News headline from the first Earth Day, 1970 // Source: ETEE

In the decades leading up to the first ever Earth Day, industrialization took over North America and other parts of the world. Manufacturing (1900s), mining (1930s), transportation (1950s) and retailing (1970s), along with rapid urbanization and consumer culture, all played a part in developing our world as we know it today. North America was consuming vast amounts of leaded gas through massive and inefficient automobiles. Industry belched out smoke and sludge with little fear of the consequences from either the law or bad press. Air pollution was commonly accepted as the smell of prosperity. Mainstream North America remained largely oblivious to environmental concerns and how a polluted environment seriously threatens human health.

1980 – In the U.S., this year saw significant environmental legislative achievements. Just 10 years after the first Earth Day, government protections over the environment drastically increased. By 1980, the following U.S. government acts were passed: Clean Air Act, Clean Water Act, Endangered Species Act, Safe Drinking Water Act, and the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act. 

On September 11th, Paul Tinari, a graduate student from Queen’s University, launched the first Canadian Earth Day. Flora MacDonald, then MP for Kingston, Ontario and the islands, officially opened Earth Day Week, encouraging MPs across the country to declare a cross-Canada annual Earth Day. 

Through the 70s and 80s, Earth Day in North America focused heavily on pollution. By Earth Day 1990, organizers and environmental agencies shifted their focus to climate change. 

1990 – Earth Day goes global, mobilizing 200 million people in 141 countries and lifting environmental issues onto the world stage. 

The activities of the 20th anniversary of Earth Day in 1990 presented a huge boost to recycling efforts and paved the way for the United Nations Earth Summit in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, in 1992. The ‘Rio Declarations’ laid out 15 principles recognizing the impact of human activities on sustainability and committing to sustainability goals. In 1997, the United Nations Kyoto Protocol was signed setting commitments to reduce greenhouse gas emissions worldwide as well as establish the connection between human activities and climate change.

In Canada, this was the start of Earth Day Canada (Jour de la Terre Canada), combining efforts from both France and Canada, and the internationalization of Earth Day. Since 1995, Quebec has celebrated Earth Day through raising awareness on environmental issues. 

Earth Day Canada Logo // Source: EarthDay.ca

2000 – Earth Day goes digital. Through the power of connectivity, hundreds of millions of people in 184 countries celebrate the 30th anniversary of Earth Day, with a focus on clean energy. 

By leveraging the power of the Digital Revolution, Earth Day in the new millennium meant that environmental activities and initiatives spread faster to many parts of the world. Suddenly, awareness became the greatest tool in the fight against climate change. 

2010 – This was a challenging time for the environmental community as they faced climate deniers, well-funded oil enthusiasts with a not-so-environmentally-friendly agenda, a disinterested public, and neutral politicians. The Earth Day Network repositioned Earth Day as a day for environmental activism as the right time. On Earth Day 2010, over 250,000 people participated in a rally on the National Mall in Washington, D.C., and hundreds of millions of people observed Earth Day around the globe. Climate activism gained serious momentum. 

In 2015, the Paris Climate Agreement was drafted, going beyond the Kyoto Protocol, by setting a goal of achieving global net-zero emissions by 2050. In Canada, the French and Quebec teams joined forces to take the Earth Day movement to a new level for the French-speaking world. 

In 2018, Greta Thunberg acted as a voice for youth, by starting a protest in front of the Swedish parliament building, vowing to continue until the Swedish government met the carbon emissions target agreed by world leaders in Paris, in 2015. Students around the world quickly began following her lead, staging large protests and demanding change.

Greta Thunberg’s Climate Strike // Source: DW

In 2019, Earth Day Canada formed an alliance with EcoKids to enable environmental initiatives to be carried out across all provinces and territories. That year, I remember attending a climate rally in Ottawa and feeling empowered by the movement as a young adult living in the world today. 

2020 – Last year marked the 50th anniversary of Earth Day. The social and cultural movements that we saw in the 1970s rose back up again as we were hit with one of the largest crises of our time: COVID-19. The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic transcended almost everything in 2020 (the good and the bad), including the environment, from cancelled summits on climate and biodiversity, to a temporary dip in air pollution and greenhouse gas emissions, to greater awareness of the link between human health and climate change. As climate rallies and events were cancelled, Earth Day quickly pivoted from mobilizing millions on the ground to raising hundreds of millions of voices digitally. Fittingly, in Canada, the Earth Day theme was climate action with the main message being: “keeping our distance at home, but taking action for the planet together”. Now, we’re in the slow and gradual transition to a green recovery. 

Present day – The fight for our planet continues with increasing urgency. A\J has partnered with Earth Day Canada to shine a light on Earth Day celebrations through the years and explore the evolution of this day through this editorial series. This Earth Day will be spent at home, and Earth Day Canada has put together some practical, creative, and smart ideas for #EarthDayAtHome. The Earth Day Canada 2021 theme is Take Care of the Planet. The official campaign features “animals that have to clean up their polluted environments themselves”. The goal is to raise awareness about the urgency we are facing, and to encourage Canadians to #TakeCareOfThePlanet every day because it’s our responsibility to do so. 

Earth Day Canada’s #TakeCareOfThePlanet 2021 Campaign // Source: EarthDay.ca

Stay tuned for next week’s article for more about what Earth Day means for us this year, and how we can and should be celebrating the planet in the present day.

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: Origins   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.

Almost all environmental concerns lead back to greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. I mean, of course it all leads back to the climate crisis. Most people can agree that it is primarily caused by human activities such as resource extraction and use and agriculture. 

By 2017, Canada became the 10th largest CO₂ emitting country. The oil and gas sector and the transportation sector were the largest GHG emitting sectors in Canada. These two sectors combined account for almost 52% of Canada’s total emissions. Of that, the oil and gas sector accounts for 27% of total emissions and the transportation sector accounts for 24% of emissions. According to Natural Resources Canada, between 1990 and 2017, oil and gas sector emissions increased by 84% and transport emissions increased by 43%. 

This past semester, I took a course called Energy and Sustainability and part of our first assignment was to simulate and compare energy models, policies and statistics for three countries. Using this knowledge and experience, I decided to take a different approach in this article and propose suitable energy policies that could reduce GHG emissions from these two sectors, if applied. With current measures in place, it would fluctuate between 745 to 775 from now to the year 2050. 

Energy Policy Solutions, the energy simulator applied to this research, was developed by Energy Innovation: Policy and Technology and the Pembina Institute. According to Energy Innovation, it was developed to assist policy makers in identifying and implementing cost effective policies towards a low carbon future. As they say on their website, “Well-designed energy policies can reduce pollution, cut consumer costs and minimize dependence on foreign energy suppliers. Done wrong, they can do the reverse and increase pollution, lock in carbon intensive  technologies and waste money”.

In 2017, Canada’s total GHG emissions were 716 megatonnes of carbon dioxide equivalent (MtCo₂eq).

One policy that could be applied to the transport sector is passenger transport and demand management (TDM). This policy is made up of a set of regulations that work towards reducing demand for passenger travel in private vehicles. Some of these policies include improving public transit systems, creating more walking and bike paths, zoning for high density transit, road and congested parking pricing and increased parking fees. These are already effective in municipalities across Canada and more should be encouraged. 

The city of Waterloo, for instance. In an attempt to meet a 2020 emissions reduction target, the city created a local car share system, a region-wide anti-idling bylaw, a regional electric vehicle charging network, an ION light rail transit service and much more. After applying this policy on a national level, CO₂ emissions in Canada for 2050 project to 739 mmtCO₂ from 752mmtCO₂ on the policy simulator.

Another policy that could be applied in the transport industry is an electric vehicle subsidy of passenger light duty vehicles (LDVs). According to Policy Solutions, this policy would make the government pay for a percentage of the purchase price of new electric passenger light duty vehicles. After applying a 50% electric vehicle subsidy, CO₂ emissions would be reduced from 752 mmt/yr to 728 mmt/yr.

For the oil and gas sector, one policy that could work is methane capture. This policy “reduces methane emissions for the industry sector by increasing the capture of methane currently being released into the atmosphere”. Methane is a type of GHG emitted during coal, natural gas and oil production, agriculture processed and the decay of organic waste.

If 97% of the methane capture potential is achieved, CO₂ emissions can fall from 752 mmt/yr to 682 mmt/yr. According to Policy Solutions, if 100% of the methane capture potential was achieved, process emissions in 2050 would be reduced by 81% in natural gas and petroleum, 8% for mining and 86% from the waste management sector.

Lastly, another possible policy for the oil and gas industry is cogeneration and waste heat recovery. As described by Energy Innovation, “this policy contributes to reducing fuel consumption in the industry sector by increasing the use of cogeneration, also known as, “combined heat and power” and “recovery of waste heat to perform useful work”. Simply put, it refers to a process where waste heat from coal fired power stations is used for space or water heating in our residential or commercial buildings. If this policy reaches its full potential, fuel use can be reduced by almost 8% across all industries in 2050. After applying this policy, CO₂ emissions will reduce from 752 mmt/yr to 734 mmt/yr by 2050. 

Only four policies have been selected for two of the GHG emitting sectors in Canada. What impact do they all have together? After applying these policies, passenger transport demand management, methane capture, light passenger electric vehicle subsidy and cogeneration and waste heat recovery, CO₂ emissions in Canada will reduce from 752 mmt/yr to 635 mmt/yr.

This research only answers the questions on “What effective measures can we take?” and not the “How do we do it?” part. Seeing how much impact four policies have means that the results would be outstanding if not only were more policies were applied but other CO₂ emitting sectors were analysed too.

***

The simulator is available to the public, so you can also try out how policies on different sectors can affect emissions in Canada, Alberta,  Mexico, Poland, Indonesia, India, China and the USA via this link: https://policysolutions.pembina.org

The post Energy Policy Options for Canada appeared first on A\J.

The environment has not been so front and center in Canadian politics since the early 1990s. October’s federal election suddenly has three parties (Greens, Liberals and NDP) looking to outdo each other on environmental concerns. It has been a long time since government in Ottawa made our glaringly obvious environmental problems a leading priority. What happened?

Increasing visibility happened: starved whales washing ashore with stomachs full of plastic, mass puffin deaths likely a result of climate change, above normal scale and frequency of wild fires and flooding and the recent devastating IPCC climate report. But also, crucially: Trump, Ford and Kenney determined to ignore our urgent environmental problems and, worse, to aggressively erase long-established protections and, perhaps most important to the green shift in priorities, the stunning worldwide political interventions of savvy young people.

Work to get young people thinking about their futures and older people thinking about their grandchildren’s futures. If we can do that, most Canadians will figure out the right thing to do in the voting booth.”

As in the 1970s, new environmental organizations are proliferating: the Sunrise Movement, Fridays for Future and Extinction Rebellion to name three. They take to the streets peacefully and playfully and are quickly changing global public consciousness. American Presidential candidates are endorsing the Green New Deal and green parties recently made big gains in the European Parliament and elsewhere.

Canada’s Green Party is also surging: electing provincial leader Mike Schreiner as Guelph MPP, winning a federal by-election in British Columbia, electing three members in New Brunswick and becoming the official opposition in PEI. Federally, Greens are now polling at 10-11% and, importantly I think, Elizabeth May will participate in this autumn’s televised leader debates. The Canadian political landscape could be moving toward a system with four major parties.

Regardless, a three-way competition for pro-environment voters is underway. The Liberals, doubtless reading opinion polls carefully, are 1) pushing hard on a carbon tax, 2) eliminating the captivity of whales and dolphins and 3) proposing elimination of single-use plastics by 2021. All are very positive steps. The NDP, also losing ground to the Greens, has offered bold proposals in the spirit of the Green New Deal advanced in the US and elsewhere. The NDP has included energy efficiency renovations of virtually every building in Canada by 2050. The Green Party, of course, has had broad and bold plans on climate in its platform for years and, of late, had pushed for the parliamentary initiative on whales and dolphins. The question remaining now is what do environmental voters do in the federal election to maintain this new momentum?

Absent electoral reform our decision as voters is not easy, all the options involve complications and unknowns. My own first choice in terms of outcome is for a minority government that includes any combination of the three parties that do not more or less exclude environmental action (other than cutting Environment Canada budgets). A ‘Minority government comprised of only the pro-environment parties’ is not, alas, a single ballot circle where one can put an ‘X’.

There are things to learn or decide before making one’s choice. Has the incumbent in one’s riding demonstrated environmental concern through past actions? What is in each party platform? Which candidates and parties emphasize aggressive initiatives on climate change? For those considering strategic voting, what is the prior voting history in your riding (does the best party have any chance)? Is the worst party competitive in the riding (if not, vote freely for your first choice)? What do current polls show about this time (how much have things shifted)? And, importantly, is it time to consider just putting aside strategic voting considerations?

These are all tough questions, but here are some suggestions. Work out a personal plan soon enough to participate on behalf of your choice early on so that you can help with a campaign. Even without a plan, go to all-candidates meetings and ask environmental questions. Talk to friends and family about why this election, and environmental issues, are urgent this time around. Work to get young people thinking about their futures and older people thinking about their grandchildren’s futures. If we can do that, most Canadians will figure out the right thing to do in the voting booth.

The post Environment: On Canada’s Agenda Again 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.

The Green New Deal (GND) has gotten a lot of attention since legislation was proposed in the U.S. Congress in February. The term derives from Roosevelt’s New Deal policies during the Great Depression. The Green New Deal, however, addresses today’s two most urgent problems simultaneously: climate change and rising inequality. This approach may lessen the current appeal of climate denying populism for some. Canadian jurisdictions should consider a similar approach.

The inequality gap between the rich and everyone else has increased continuously since the late 1970s. Since 1978, controlling for inflation, most wages in America have only increased by 6% while executive’s incomes have gone up 937%. The upper 1% now make twice what the bottom half of the population do. Canada is slightly less unequal, but our CEOs earn 300 times the minimum wage — not enough, of course, to keep some of them from objecting to a $15 minimum hourly wage.

 The polar opposite of simultaneous progress are the policies of Trump and Ford who do all they can to increase fossil fuel consumption and the wealth gap.”

Climate change has been underway for at least 40 years. Yet global carbon emissions are still rising despite the efforts of some nations. In Europe and elsewhere, a few have achieved year over year reductions, but Canada and most others have not. The world as a whole has not even started on reducing emissions.

The GND urges rapid progress on both problems, an ambition that is wonderfully out of step with North American politics-as-usual. The norm on this continent as a whole is decades of delay (though B.C. and California have stepped up as did Ontario until recently). The polar opposite of simultaneous progress are the policies of Trump and Ford who do all they can to increase fossil fuel consumption and the wealth gap.

GND policies are labelled as radical merely because they assume that governments should, and can successfully, address both. Addressing the two jointly may actually be easier than taking them on separately. As Van Jones argued a decade ago, more good jobs are created addressing climate than are produced in continuing with a carbon intensive economy. Both America and Canada would gain more jobs building a post-carbon economy than would be lost in completely phasing out all fossil fuels. As a bonus, the jobs would be distributed geographically much more widely than fossil energy jobs. Renewable energy is also owned more broadly – often by homeowners, farmers, communities, utilities, non-energy businesses, coops and landowners.

America’s GND proposal includes an equality-building job guarantee, increased energy efficiency, regenerative soil management, energy storage research, and comprehensive retraining opportunities for those in vulnerable jobs. It even advocates a guaranteed annual income in response to the looming age of artificial intelligence and self-driving vehicles. Indeed, GND House of Representatives legislative sponsor Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez has said ‘no one should have to fear automation, but all should instead welcome it’.

A key political strength of the GND is that it explicitly opposes blaming job losses on scapegoats (immigrants or other nations). It understands that there is more than enough worthwhile work to do on better health care and education, healthier food, improved infrastructure, new technologies and, above all, on transforming our energy systems. Underfunding these needs are, in effect, needed jobs that never happen.

We will also need to deal with carbon removal from the atmosphere and protecting biodiversity and habitat. Crucially, everything mentioned above is only affordable before we are overwhelmed by the high cost of serious climate impacts.

Finally, the most important political argument for a Green New Deal is this: it can be adopted at any level of governance – globally, nationally, provincially, municipally or regionally. This is crucial because the progress we need only rarely has all governments on side simultaneously and continuously. To succeed globally many cities and nations must relentlessly demonstrate that positive change is possible.

Those who would deny the possibility of reversing inequality and the need to stop climate change must be proven wrong continuously. With most of the world moving forward on both fronts we can decisively reject political claims of harm to the economy or the non-importance of climate change. 

The post The Green New Deal: Our Best Chance on Climate appeared first on A\J.

Toward this end, the book outlines 100 climate solutions – 80 of which we can embark upon right away and 20 of which are “coming attractions” that will be available soon.

Drawdown has a wonderful embedded optimism. Hawken sees global warming “not as an inevitability but as an invitation to build, innovate, and effect change, a pathway that awakens creativity, compassion, and genius.” Mindful of the dangers, he nevertheless finds great opportunities for human advancement – moral and intellectual. This is not a book merely about carbon. The climate solutions generate good jobs, save trillions of dollars, empower women and create beauty.  

A staggering 84.6 gigatons of C02 are avoided because of reduced reliance on fossil fuels.

Building a movement

If the goal is movement-building, Hawken’s approach is smart. If he spoke only about GHG-reduction his readership would be narrow. It has the potential to be much larger because he emphasizes the solutions’ ancillary benefits. Even if one cares nothing about climate, one can see the value, for example, of renewable energy’s contribution to employment.

Some of the solutions are well-known. One of the most important – the second most effective overall – is expansion of wind turbines. The book models a plausible scenario in which onshore wind goes from providing about three percent of global electricity today to 21.6 percent in 2050. The result: a staggering 84.6 gigatons of C02 are avoided because of reduced reliance on fossil fuels. Drawdown quotes Bloomberg, and suggests that, by 2030, wind will be the cheapest of all electricity sources. No wonder that in Denmark, for instance, wind provides over 40 percent of the nation’s power.  This is renewable energy going mainstream.

Windmills also have a lesser-known benefit, one especially important in a warming world: they use “98 to 99 percent less water than fossil fuel-generated electricity.”

Another obvious solution is ramping up solar power, both utility-scale “farms” and smaller rooftop arrays. The carbon reduction is immense and – because the “fuel” is free – the savings in operational costs are enormous. The book estimates that, between 2020 and 2050, solar farms alone could bring five trillion (USD) in net savings compared to other forms of generation. A beautiful symbol of hope is the plan to build a massive one-gigawatt solar farm on the site of the former Chernobyl nuclear plant. Rooftop solar systems can also fight poverty through job creation. In Bangladesh, for example, they’ve led to 165,000 direct and indirect jobs.   

A lesser-known – but crucially important – climate solution is reducing food waste. The book reminds us that while 800 millions people on the planet go hungry, an astounding one-third of the food we produce does not end up in our stomachs, sending the equivalent of 4.4 billion tons of C02 into the atmosphere annually, including methane from landfill. Food waste contributes to climate change while potentially denying sustenance to the poor.

What causes this tragic situation? In rich countries, grocery store owners believe that bruised fruit won’t sell and consumers believe that a product isn’t safe to eat after the “best before” date. We need to convince the public that “ugly” produce won’t hurt us and institute laws, such as those in France and Italy, stipulating that unsold food must go to charities, be fed to animals or be composted.

Another solution which addresses hunger is restoration of farmland. World-wide, about one billion acres of this land is now degraded and abandoned. If it were restored – for example by setting up tree plantations or reintroducing native plants – it could again serve as a carbon sink. Drawdown believes 424 million acres could be brought back by 2050, resulting in billions of tons of CO2 being re-sequestered in the soil. And of course carbon contributes to soil productivity. So this plan could remove a massive amount of greenhouse gas from the atmosphere while creating nine and one-half billion tons of food that otherwise wouldn’t exist. We’ve long known farmland restoration is essential for humans; now we know it is also essential for the planet.  

A role for education

Finally, if we’re to make any progress on climate it’s essential we educate girls. This is the sixth most important of the 100 solutions and Drawdown deserves major credit for alerting us to it. Needless to say, we would want to pursue it even if it didn’t address global warming; young women’s schooling is a fundamental right. But it’s illuminating to learn that it’s also a powerful tool in constraining the number of babies born and therefore the quantity of GHGs emitted in the future. The book quotes the Brookings Institution: “The difference between a woman with no years of schooling and with 12 years of schooling is almost four to five children per woman.” And of course education is also a route out of poverty. Indeed Drawdown calls it “the most powerful lever available for breaking the cycle of intergenerational poverty…” Girls’ schooling is the paradigm of a great climate solution: it protects the Earth while lifting up humanity.   

Much about our current situation is frightening but one leaves Drawdown with a good measure of hope. This beautiful book – which includes a photo of a white spirit bear, one of the finest wilderness images I’ve seen – shows the astounding range of climate solutions now available. Implementing even a portion of them would put us on a healthier environmental path. At the same time – and this is Hawken’s great insight – it would do much in the immediate term to reduce human suffering and foster justice.

The post ‘Drawdown: The most comprehensive plan ever proposed to reverse global warming’ appeared first on A\J.