Countries around the world are taking up the “Net-0 challenge”, including ours. Why isn’t it common knowledge that Canada is already Net-0, or likely better, a net carbon sink today?
Humans add (emit) ~40BT Co2 to the atmosphere each year, half of which is subtracted (removed/absorbed) by lands and oceans, leaving ~20BT/year. That is the challenge that Net-0 targets aim to address.
One country, China, is responsible for more than half the current challenge. China adds 11 BT per year, more than half the problem. China is the Number 1 net polluter, with the United States a distant second.
Meanwhile, Canada is responsible for adding 0.58BT (according to the National Inventory Report) and our lands subtract 0.66BT for a net of -0.08BT. This means that Canada is better than Net-0, it’s a carbon sink today.
Ottawa’s declared ‘climate emergency’ is clearly located in China, not in Canada. This is not reflected in Canadian climate policy at any level of government. The prime minister has often stated that “polluters must pay” but his policies actually mean ‘Canadians must pay for the polluters’.
Consequences are far-reaching and now Ottawa’s policies are the emergency. Denying the evidence of Canada’s current Net-0 status, Ottawa is proceeding to burden us with carbon taxes as well as making billions of dollars in misguided “investments” to align the country with a flawed view of Canada.
Powerful interests, including the International Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) hold to the narrative that the rich industrial countries caused the “climate emergency” so those countries must now pay. The IPCC and many so-called “climate leaders” haven’t had to face the fact that one of the G-7 industrial countries – Canada – is a net carbon sink. This is largely because our prime minister refuses to speak up for Canada.
Trudeau’s approach has ramifications for Canadians across the whole country but is especially hard on folks living and working in provinces like Alberta.
There has been much heated coverage of Premier Danielle Smith’s response to these attacks via the Alberta Sovereignty Act. The Act serves to demonstrate to the country that Alberta is serious about leading Ottawa back to the constitutional path laid out by our current Prime Minister’s father in a signed agreement with the Premiers that included Premier Lougheed in 1982.
In the Supreme Court of Canada’s March 2021 split decision on the Carbon Pollution Pricing Act, dissenting Justices Rowe and Brown articulate how Ottawa’s carbon taxes have opened up unconstitutional intrusion into all areas of provincial jurisdiction. This “guided federalism” was never contemplated by the framers of the constitution and rewrites the rules of Confederation. The justices noted that Parliament had constitutionally valid ways to achieve its climate goals and that the government’s unconstitutional approach would lead to tension in the federation. Rewriting the rules of Confederation should be of major concern to all Canadians.
Although the Supreme Court sided with Ottawa’s carbon taxes on the basis of “good government”, no one involved in the proceedings was wise enough to either ask for or submit complete carbon accounts that include our natural CO2 sinks. Carbon taxes simply cannot be considered “good government” when the accounts are already balanced, but the Court’s decision was clearly not informed by evidence that Canada is Net-0.
Back in 2015, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau and former NDP Premier of Alberta Rachel Notley both came to power with aggressive climate leadership plans. Both neglected to include evidence of Canada’s balanced carbon cycle. Neither has shown any inclination to remedy that failure by pursuing policies that are compatible with balanced carbon accounts. So why are politicians like Trudeau, Notley, and others holding to half-truths when mounting evidence suggests their position is scientifically untenable?
Ottawa prepares a National Inventory Report (NIR) of Canada’s greenhouse gas emissions, which it submits to the United Nations each year. The NIR is used to measure Canada’s progress to Net-0, but it is an inadequate proxy. The NIR lays out our liabilities in detail but essentially excludes our greatest assets because only “managed lands” are recorded, while ignoring our vast natural lands like forests, tundra, inland waters, wetlands, etc. The Report of the Allan Inquiry identified that Ottawa’s failure to include assets is a problem.
Key to good government is a comprehensive, evidence-based set of national carbon accounts. The Chartered Professional Accountants (CPA) website claims that their members offer fair witness as a core value and that Canadians are known around the world as fair witnesses. Let’s apply that core value to this problem.
Would any auditor, let alone Alberta or Canada’s Auditor General, offer a positive, value for tax money audit in support of a $16 billion carbon capture and storage project (CCS) knowing the accounts were already balanced by nature’s ongoing CCS ‘project’? Could any corporate CPA justify the same project if the corporation weren’t pushed into it by Ottawa on the basis of deficient NIR accounts?
Perhaps, instead of CCS, we could invest $16 billion in something that would have a tangible impact on Canada’s energy transition, such as carbon-free nuclear energy! Why should Canadian taxpayers or shareholders be required to waste $16 billion on just one project when Canada’s natural lands have apparently already solved the problem? As long as politicians refuse to employ fair witness carbon accounts, waste on this scale will haunt generations of Canadians to come.
Alberta’s Premier Smith should not spend one more dollar on this CCS project or provide any provincial approvals until Ottawa presents full CO2 accounts, which Alberta must then audit as a basis for any future cooperation.
Only a view that misrepresents the nature of Canada explains why Justin Trudeau would turn his back on his father’s constitutional legacy or Rachel Notley, his willing partner, would turn her back on Peter Lougheed’s hard-fought provincial rights legacy.
There is little hope that Ottawa, on its own initiative, is prepared to correct the mistakes made in 2015. Alberta and the rest of the Provinces and Territories must lead by preparing complete carbon accounts and obtaining appropriate advice from scientists and seasoned CPAs. Alberta should invite Ottawa but not be deterred if the feds refuse. We need this national healing initiative to begin now where science and evidence are not arbitrarily selected to serve a predetermined political agenda but are used in the service of good government.
Surely knowing the scale of waste that is ahead of us, that Canada is a net carbon sink and that China is the primary source/location of the ‘climate emergency’ we can agree that complete, transparent national carbon accounts offer Canadians the proper basis for healthy, vigorous national debate and informed climate policy going forward.