|
|
|
Update:
Our Latest Forum Schedule
|
FREE
Email
Newsletter
Monthly
Magazine
Member Of
Download
Our
Issues
|
POLLUTION REDUCTION
What Kyoto and Emission Reductions Mean For Canadian Industries
By Tania Henvey
By the end of this year, Canada is expected to ratify the Kyoto Protocol, a treaty designed to reduce global greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions in industrial nations. For Canada, this would mean a total GHG-emission reduction of about 240 megatonnes (MT) by 2012 (one megatonne is one million tons).
In December 1997, Canada met with 160 other countries in Kyoto, Japan to speak about reducing GHG emissions worldwide. The agreement that was reached, and the options available to these countries to meet targets, is known as the Kyoto Protocol. This agreement will become legally binding when 55 countries sign it.
Canada only emits two per cent of the world's GHG emissions, even though on a per-capita basis, this country is the third-worst polluter. Since Canada will need to reduce its GHG emissions by 2012, the government needs to make cuts. A study shows that 100 MT can be reduced if consumers conserve and use energy more wisely. Through municipal action and improved forestry and agricultural practices, 80 MT should be reduced. The oil and gas sector are to be responsible for reducing emissions by 55 MT. Of the 60 MT that are left, a possible solution might be to swap them as credits for exporting clean energies, such as natural gas that goes to the US.
The Canadian government is counting on 20 per cent of older homes and buildings being upgraded by 2010 to reduce energy waste. This would include caulking windows or other upgrades to be more efficient. In Nova Scotia, a new wind turbine has been erected which will reduce GHG emissions by 3,200 tonnes per year. In addition, within a decade, Ottawa is hoping to have 30 per cent of all buses powered by some sort of alternative form of fuel.
Steps have already been taken by the Canadian government to reduce GHG emissions. In its Action Plan 2000, measures were created to take Canada to one-third of its target. After five years, the government will have invested a total of $1.1 billion to address climate change, building on the $850 million that the government spent on emissions reduction during the last five years.
Although Prime Minister Chretien is supportive of the treaty, Alberta Premier Ralph Kline is against the idea. In Alberta, where the financial system is dependent on fossil fuels, this treaty could destroy the emission-intensive energy industry in the province. But Alberta wouldn't be the only part of Canada that would experience an economic slump. The federal government is expecting a yearly loss in the economy of 0.4 per cent for Canada as a whole. The Canadian government has announced that in a worst-case scenario, ratification of the accord could cost 240,000 Canadian jobs and $21 billion over a decade.
Critics of the treaty believe Kyoto will spell disaster for jobs and wages in the country. Incomes after inflation will most likely drop by 5.5 per cent, as wages are cut and prices rise to pay for the accord. When the treaty is signed, Canada will have until 2005 to reverse its decision, which many hope will happen when Chretien steps down.
US President, George W. Bush has refused to sign Kyoto because he believes the economy will suffer under this agreement and says there are other ways to reduce pollution. His solution is to create emission trading, a system where a cap would be placed on the amount of emissions an industry can produce. Industries that do not create high levels of emissions can sell, bank or transfer "credits" to other businesses. Companies that produce an abundance of pollution could try to reduce their levels by switching to a cleaner-burning fuel, decrease their pollution amounts or buy these credits from the smaller producers.
Theoretically, each Canadian adult is responsible for one tonne of carbon dioxide emissions per year. Regardless of what the solution might be, by signing the Kyoto Protocol, Canada is under pressure to reduce emissions. Since the US is not signing the accord, companies to the south do not have to worry about pollution as much as Canadians do, meaning Canadian companies could start heading that way. Then the country will have bigger things to think about other than the reduction of GHG emissions. ET
|
|
|
|
|
LATEST ISSUE
