World leaders should adjust their global CO2 emissions strategy

Carbon dioxide and other atmospheric emissions are a global issue not a parochial one. What you produce and send into the air doesn’t hang around where they were emitted. So why is the world using a country-by-country approach to dealing with them? Taiwan, China, and China’s administrative districts of Hong Kong and Macau contribute a net balance of around 30 per cent of global emissions, but they are also struggling to produce enough power to keep their economies going. Most of their power—56 per cent—comes from coal. Despite efforts to find and develop alternative sources of energy and reduce emissions, they are forced to continue to burn coal in the short term. This is evidenced by the hazy and eye-stinging atmosphere citizens deal with most days. The emissions contributions of the EU (9.8 per cent), Russia (4.7 per cent) and the U.S. (15 per cent) together account for about 28.5 per cent. This, despite Herculean efforts to reduce their carbon footprints and their access to cleaner fuel. Asia, on the other hand, is responsible for 53 per cent of global emissions. Why isn’t the world collectively looking for ways to get LNG to them as soon as possible while everyone works on a longer-term strategy? LNG produces 40 per cent less carbon than coal and 30 per cent less than oil. It does not emit soot, dust, or particles that cause lung and eye irritation. Such a strategy would reduce international emissions much sooner. Canada produces only 1.6 per cent of world carbon emissions, but we continue to restrict the sale of clean fuel such as LNG to the world. Why? Even if Canada were to stop using all fossil fuels tomorrow, it would not make one iota of difference to the world. Exporting cleaner fuel, however, has the potential to improve the lives of millions. There are many other areas that could be examined. It is estimated that militaries produce about 5.5 per cent of global emissions in their training, flying, shipping, and military exercises. Yet militaries are exempt from emissions targets. We don’t know exactly what the current wars are contributing, although estimates are staggering. It is also predicted that rebuilding, once the war ends, will add vast amounts of CO2 to the atmosphere (the production of cement is No. 3 on the pollution list worldwide). Oh, and by the way, everyday shipping and aviation contribute another 3.2 per cent. If the world’s leaders believe that CO2 is destroying the climate, then first-world countries must surely be obligated to deal with the big picture and take a leadership role in helping fuel-deprived countries to wean off coal and other dirty energies. Canada is a relatively clean-energy country. We derive 60 per cent of our electricity from hydro, 11 per cent from petroleum, and 14.6 per cent from nuclear plants. We are spending billions of dollars trying to curb our emissions through half-hearted efforts. Instead, we should be making billions of dollars and helping save millions of lives around the world by supplying cleaner energy to energy-deprived countries. The world’s leaders should be funding research on reducing emissions from concrete production, finding safer ways to use nuclear energy and reduce nuclear waste, developing better ways to harness wind (manufacturing and maintaining the big windmills are heavy users of fossil fuels) and solar power, and so on. There is, as so often has been said, no short-term answer to energy transition. Despite optimistic goals, that are continually being reset, it will take the better part of this century to seriously reduce fossil fuel use. Taking an alternative look at how to deal with the transition would be a better strategy than crying that the sky is falling while you hope to hold it up with your finger. Dorothy Dobbie is a former Progressive Conservative MP who represented Winnipeg South, Man., from 1988-1993. Dobbie is the immediate past president of the Canadian Association of Former Parliamentarians. She and a delegation of former MPs recently returned from a study tour of Taiwan and Hong Kong. The Hill Times