June 16, 2008
It's the break heard around the world. And it's happening in Canada, where the two most populated provinces have eschewed a plan by the federal government and are instead developing their own ideas to cut greenhouse gas emissions.
The premiers of Ontario and Quebec say that they are compelled to create mandatory standards whereby industry would have to cut its global warming pollution and use 1990 as a baseline by which to measure results. That runs counter to one submitted by the current Canadian national government that would rely on a "floating cap" but one in which it says greenhouse gases would be cut by 20 percent by 2020.
Ontario Premier Dalton McGuinty and Quebec Premier Jean Charest just signed a pact to establish a regional cap and trade system by 2010. Under their plan, the provinces would set firm limits on the amount of carbon dioxide that industries could release. Companies that would be unable to meet their targets would then have the right to buy credits from those that have achieved emission reduction goals. The system would be similar to one that now exists in Europe and one that has been proposed in the United States.
"We believe that working together on behalf of two-thirds of Canadians we can reach higher, we can go faster and we can go further than the options that are present at this time," Premier McGuinty told reporters. The two provinces are home to two-thirds of the Canadian population, or 20 million people. They also account for 60 percent of the country's gross domestic product.
Under the previous Liberal federal government, Canada signed the Kyoto Protocol and vowed to cut its greenhouse gas emission by 6 percent from 1990 levels. But the current leadership will only maintain its involvement until 2012 when the next phase of the agreement will take place. The federal Conservative government says that the protocol has largely been ineffective, noting that heat-trapping emissions have risen across the country by 25 percent from 1990 levels.
Prime Minister Stephen Harper says that Canada must balance its obligations to the environment with those of its own economy. And the nation cannot be disadvantaged if other major emitters in developing nations are not willing to agree to compulsory cuts in greenhouse gases. With that in mind, Canada has joined the United States, Australia, Japan, China, India and Korea in the Asia-Pacific Partnership -- a group that accounts for half the world's greenhouse gas emissions.
"The national targets established by this government are mandatory targets, and the provinces cannot avoid these targets," Harper said in the House of Commons. "For such a system to work to control greenhouse gas emissions, there are only a limited number of options. The option undertaken by the minister of the environment is to establish a regulatory mechanism. The provinces of Ontario and Quebec to date have not done that. The minister of the environment has."
Control Mechanisms
The Ottawa-based federal government, which will release the full details of its blueprint later this year, would cut greenhouse gases by 20 percent per unit of output by 2020. Such emissions would be reduced by 65 percent by 2050.
To do so, it would use "intensity-based" targets, which link greenhouse gas reductions to productivity levels. The goal would be to promote economic growth while at the same time clamp down on pollution -- a move that critics say is meant to appease western provinces that are rich with oil sands and which expect to play a major role in supplying global energy needs.
Along those lines, Alberta Premier Ed Stelmach and Saskatchewan Premier Brad Wall say that any policies that would advocate strict and calculated reductions in carbon dioxide levels would hurt the oil sands industry in their jurisdictions. They add that anything that would put a "price" or "tax" on carbon emissions would thwart their efforts to provide a valuable commodity.
They support in principle the Asia-Pacific Partnership, which is voluntary and which relies on free market approaches to fighting climate change. Like Kyoto's participants, it also would use trading exchanges to accomplish its goals. Participants, for example, could establish non-binding limits on emissions. Those nations that thrash pollution levels could sell credits to those that are unable to meet their obligations.
Advocates of stricter controls, however, say that the plan put forth by Ontario and Quebec -- modeled after the Kyoto Protocol -- would have a nominal effect on Canada's economy. They note that growth is expected to occur, but at 0.4 percent less than it would otherwise. Any economic risks pale in comparison to the environmental consequences of doing nothing, they add. Rising sea levels and massive floods present an even greater danger and would cause trillions in economic damages.
"We are concerned that the federal government is implementing a system that is not compatible with what exists in Europe and elsewhere, by choosing intensity-based rather than an absolute reduction in greenhouse gas emissions," says Quebec Premier Jean Charest. "They're out of sync with the rest of us," predicting that the U.S. policy on global warming with take a "180 degree" change next January.
Both conservatives and liberals have acknowledged that global warming over time could produce detrimental results. The discussion is therefore about how to achieve emissions cuts, as opposed to whether they should be made at all. It's a debate now occurring across the globe. And as regulatory certainties take shape, new pollution-control technologies will begin to emerge. Once they would become commercial, industry could then reliably reduce its emission levels.
More information is available from Energy Central:
Respond to the editor.
Ken Silverstein EnergyBiz Insider Editor-in-Chief
Read Ken's Blog
