Dear Ottawa: pick a lane on climate and hit the accelerator

CHELSEA, QUE.—Forget the long-promised federal cap on oil sands emissions, now expected (maybe) in September. Forget the “just transition” or “sustainable jobs” strategy: the Trudeau government’s recently-released plan to devise a plan to find new, well-paying jobs for Alberta’s supposedly endangered oil workers. And, while we’re at it, not another word about ending (inefficient) subsidies to the oil and gas sector, first agreed to in 2009, because it is complicated to define “subsidy,” after all, never mind “inefficient” subsidies. By the time the federal government and industry agree on terms, the entire country could be burned to a crisp. Meanwhile, last week we got the national climate resilience and adaptation strategy, both a confession of defeat and another list of targets, deadlines, and painstaking statements of the obvious. “We all recognize Canada is not ready to face the impacts of climate change,” federal Environment Minister Steven Guilbeault acknowledged recently. (Whose fault that is, he didn’t say.) One proposed goal: to “prevent heat-related deaths in 80 per cent of health regions by 2026 and eliminate them by 2040.” Those leisurely time-lines don’t exactly scream, “we’re on it!” Does it really take that long to set up more cooling centres? And the biggest heresy of all: forget the 2015 Paris targets and those predictably disappointing American climate conferences, in which all the parties agree to do as little as possible and usually end up doing even less. Maybe don't forget them entirely, as it is worth sending delegations, if only to allow bureaucrats and academics to learn first-hand the latest devastating news. All these measures—the meat-and-potatoes of “official” climate response and media coverage—are too little, too late. They are, in some cases, stalling tactics; in others, belated attempts to allay mounting public concern about the inescapable and various environmental catastrophes we are living through. The situation is urgent; the pace of Canadian governments’ action, languid. What the emergency demands is the same single-minded focus and dispatch that Ottawa brought to its pandemic response. A lot of government money has been pledged in the climate fight, but it is so widely dispersed that it has had little discernible impact. It should be clear by now that “Big Oil” runs climate policy in this country, while governments (federal, provincial, municipal, Indigenous) try plaintively to persuade the industry to stop killing ducks, or poisoning Indigenous lands and water, or moving their head offices to Denver or Houston. The only thing that is going to slow—if not stop—the production of oil and gas, and the greenhouse gas emissions that are killing this planet is market forces: specifically, a withering of demand for the product. It is beginning to happen, thanks largely to the efforts of European and other governments, persistent pressure from environmental groups, and the growth of clean, and affordable, energy alternatives. But Canada, with its vast fossil fuel reserves, is a conspicuous laggard. So, since Canadian governments are afraid to impose production cuts—afraid of the loss of jobs, revenues and political blowback—why not concentrate, instead, on diminishing consumer demand for fossil fuel products, starting with gasoline? Transportation, after all, accounts for 25 per cent of our national emissions, only slightly less than the oil sands at 30 per cent. That means getting the majority of car drivers into electric vehicles, accelerating the transformation of commercial vehicles to non-fossil fuels, and doing it yesterday. Canada does have ambitious goals: 20 per cent of cars sold by 2026 are supposed to be zero-emission; that jumps to 60 per cent by 2030, and 100 per cent by 2035. But today, at least, these targets look ridiculously unreachable. Consider the distance to be travelled: national electric vehicle (EV) sales amounted to 6.9 per cent of total new vehicles purchased in the first quarter of 2023, a slight decline from 8.4 per cent in the last quarter. British Columbia continued to lead with 19.7 per cent of new cars sold, followed by Quebec at 14.4 per cent. The laggard was Ontario—inconveniently, the most populous province—where EV take-up was only 6.2 per cent. Why? Because the Ford government was a late convert to electrification, but also because of an incomplete and unreliable network of public EV chargers. That, and the usual problem of a loose federation of 10 squawking provinces sharing one nest, making a seamless drive from Victoria to St. John’s in an all-electric vehicle very challenging, if not impossible. But some will say: isn’t the federal government investing $1.2-billion to build 84,500 charging stations by 2027, with funding for specific projects, announced almost monthly? Yes, but what message does that send would-be purchasers? Wait a few years. Don’t buy yet, even as car manufacturers produce more EVs every season, with some 50 models now available domestically. Progress on building the charging network has been slow, uneven, unpredictable: a trickle charge when fast-chargers are urgently needed. The feds provided $18-million to British Columbia in February for 2,500 more chargers; Nova Scotia, we learn, is adding eight; and the Ontario government boasts of 20 fast chargers at Onroute stops along highways 401 and 400. Twenty. Along the busiest traffic corridor in the country. As EV drivers will attest, public chargers are not always reliable or maintained, and large parts of the country remain unserved. There are, according to federal websites, currently 200,000 chargers at 8,700 locations; by comparison, there are some 12,000 gas stations. But, by some measures, Canada will need at least 900,000 chargers by 2050, if that famous net-zero pledge is to be met. The private sector is gearing up, and Tesla—noted for its well-managed existing network of 12,000 chargers around North America—just announced agreements with Ford, GM, Volvo and others to share its facilities in its bid to become the North American industry standard. Tesla CEO Elon Musk aside, EV drivers can only wish them success. At the same time, Telus is installing 5,000 public fast chargers across the country in collaboration with Australian firm Jolt. Chevron stations between Vancouver Island and Calgary will soon offer 50 new EV chargers. And IKEA, which has charging stations in all 14 Canadian stores, is adding 25 more in Ontario and Quebec with federal assistance. But there are still large gaps. Some provinces and cities, especially in British Columbia, now require EV ports in new or redeveloped condos, apartment buildings and townhouses. They should also be a requirement at all major shopping malls, cinema complexes, community centres, downtown parking lots and behind, or near, older rental units. But the national building code, which is supposed to be a model for provincial codes, is silent on the issue and won’t be updated until 2025. According to experts, EV sales need to grow by more than 200 per cent to meet the federal targets between 2026-2030. That won’t happen without a massive, organized, sustained investment in reliable charging stations in every hamlet, and every condo, in the country. You’d expect the federal government to lead this effort. But, distracted and over-committed, it appears willing to abdicate the climate file to forces beyond our borders: the Biden government in the U.S. with its massive new climate spending, or an oil industry nervously eying the exits, given the industry’s uncertain future. But, by all means, keep churning out those lofty plans, Ottawa: even if they are outdated before the ink is dry. Susan Riley is a veteran political columnist who writes regularly for The Hill Times. The Hill Times