It’s been 18 years since the Kyoto Protocol was signed, and world leaders have again come together to set the global agenda for reducing emissions and fighting climate change. We take a quick look back at the years since Kyoto’s ratification, from an Alberta perspective:
Canada takes battle plan to Kyoto
Sheldon Alberts, Calgary Herald and The Associated Press, Dec. 1, 1997
OTTAWA — The federal government will unveil a national strategy for cutting greenhouse gases this morning — while Canada’s negotiators, halfway across the globe, prepare to tell the rest of the world.
After months of delay, disagreement and confusion, Prime Minister Jean Chretien gave approval Sunday evening to Canada’s negotiating strategy for a global climate change conference that begins today in Kyoto, Japan.
”We wanted to make sure we had consulted widely, domestically and internationally, before we did this,” said David MacInnis, assistant to Natural Resources Minister Ralph Goodale.
”We have developed a position that we think is well thought-out and will help find consensus in Kyoto.”
Canada’s position — expected to include calls for a reduction in greenhouse emissions to 1990 levels between 2007 and 2010 — will land on a stack of other proposals that are up for debate at the conference running until Dec. 10. Canadian and Alberta government officials will join representatives of 160 nations to negotiate a 21st-century insurance policy for the planet.
The talks are expected to be highly technical and complex and the politics challenging as nations try to agree on the best method for protecting Mother Earth while protecting their competitive interests back home.
The conundrum: While greenhouse gases released in the burning of fossil fuels such as coal, oil and gas are widely believed to contribute to global warming, many nations fear that controlling them will have ruinous economic costs.
For Alberta, the stakes are especially high. The province’s booming oil and gas industry — which has pumped billions into the Alberta treasury — has been the biggest contributor to Canada’s rising emissions.
Energy Minister Steve West and Environment Minister Ty Lund will travel to Kyoto this week seeking a treaty that recognizes Canada’s economic dependence on fossil fuels and flexibility on reductions over a longer time.
Some observers have suggested there’s only a 50-50 chance the international community will reach a deal in Kyoto. Almost every feature of this 21st-century plan — including who should act, how and when — is in dispute.
Powerful opposition has developed, especially among oil-producing countries and U.S. coal, oil and other interests likely to be hurt.
Alberta oil and gas producers will be part of the Canadian delegation. Chris Peirce, vice-president of the Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers, acknowledged that the task of protecting his industry amid global politics is daunting.
”In terms of the global game, our particular sector is a bit player. But it’s little bits that make up the whole,” said Peirce, who leaves Tuesday for Kyoto. ”The direction we go in Kyoto will have real implications for Alberta and Canadian economy.”
Canada produces just two per cent of the world’s greenhouse gases. But it’s among the world’s worst per-person polluters.
Today in Ottawa, sources said, Goodale and Environment Minister Christine Stewart are expected to again reassure Alberta that the federal government will not impose a carbon tax to enforce emissions cuts.
Canada, like the U.S., will press for participation of developing nations in the treaty process — a demand which threatens to cause the most rancor during the 10-day negotiations.
Industrialized nations contribute 60 per cent of the gases, but developing nations are expected to lead growth in emissions in the next century.
”The unknown factor is how this will all settle out, with the gaps that exist between nations — if it will immediately become a confrontational matter with countries playing their most extreme home audiences or whether it will settle into constructive talks,” Peirce said.
The 10 days of negotiations could lead in a decade to shifts toward new-technology automobiles and fuel-saving driving habits and away from coal-powered electricity plants.
”There are times when only an act of courage can spur progress in world affairs,” United Nations Secretary-General Kofi Annan said when opening the conference.
Deal helps Earth – but `hurts Alberta’: Minister condemns gas treaty
Sheldon Alberts, Calgary Herald, Dec. 11, 1997
KYOTO — Canada adopted an historic and controversial global treaty today to reduce its greenhouse gas emissions by six per cent, but Alberta Energy Minister Steve West warned of huge job loses and industry closures.
The legally binding treaty — reached after tense 24-hour negotiations among 160 nations — is being hailed both as an historic environmental achievement and condemned as potentially disastrous for the Alberta and Canadian economies.
Canada’s cuts will be twice as deep as originally planned by the federal government.
”If we ratify this agreement, then you can go home and start the checklist of which industries and which jobs you’re writing off,” Alberta Energy Minister Steve West said after being briefed in Kyoto by federal negotiators. ”This is not acceptable.”
The United Nations treaty imposes ”differentiated” targets on nations and will require Canada to slash emissions such as carbon dioxide six per cent below 1990 levels by 2008-2012.
The United States, Canada’s largest trading partner, agreed to a seven-per-cent reduction.
Some countries will be allowed to increase their emissions. Australia, the world’s largest coal producer, can emit an extra eight per cent in greenhouse gases.
As recently as Monday, Canada had vowed not to take on cuts deeper than three per cent.
But Canada got swept up in the 11th-hour momentum for a global compromise that would start the process of cleaning up the atmosphere, said Natural Resources Minister Ralph Goodale, who said Prime Minister Jean Chretien gave final approval to agree to the treaty.
”It would have been absolutely untenable to just stand aside. We wanted to be part of the solution,” said Goodale. ”We were looking for a sensitive balance between our environment and the realities of our economy. We achieved that balance.”
Greenhouse gases are produced primarily by burning fossil fuels like coal, oil and gas and are widely believed to contribute to rising global temperatures and severe weather.
A panel of 2,500 scientists has predicted the planet’s temperatures will rise between 1 degreesC and 3.5 degreesC by the year 2100, with potentially disastrous climatic consequences.
”It’s not everything we need to protect the environment, but it’s a good first step,” said Robert Hornung, a director with the Alberta-based Pembina Institute, an environmental research and advocacy group. ”We went further than we expected to go.”
The Alberta government and oil industry worry the new target is unreachable, especially since Canada’s emission are more than 10 per cent over 1990 levels. They also fear Canadian industries could flee to developing countries.
”Are we pleased about the number? No,” said David Manning, president of the Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers. ”We haven’t seen any analysis of how much this will cost.”
The treaty includes a plan for a system of emissions trading that will allow energy-intensive countries like Canada — which might have a tougher time cutting emissions — to buy pollution credits from countries that beat their target. It also includes a ”clean development mechanism” that will allow industrialized countries to receive credit for investing in energy-efficient technology in the Third World.
But Canada failed to win a number of key ”flexibility” elements. The Americans rejected a request to give Canada emissions credits for shipping clean-burning natural gas to the U.S. to replace dirtier coal as an energy source.
Canada and the United States also failed to convince China and other developing countries to agree to voluntarily limits in their emissions. Canadian negotiators failed in Prime Minister Jean Chretien’s goal to make deeper reductions than the U.S.
”Frankly, we didn’t get everything we would have liked,” said Environment Minister Christine Stewart.
Chief U.S. negotiator Stuart Eizenstat called the 11-day conference ”the most complex international negotiations ever held” because of the number of countries involved and the intricacy of the climate-change debate. The final elements of the treaty — including decisions about the depth of cuts — were drafted in the last hour of negotiations after a U.S.-China standoff.
China and India feared an emissions trading system would allow industrialized countries to buy their way to continued prosperity and leave poor countries unable to afford to buy emissions in the future.
Eizenstat argued the treaty’s inclusion of emissions trading allowed countries like Canada and the U.S. — the world’s largest greenhouse gas producer — to set far tougher targets. Countries will hammer out the rules for trading next year in Buenos Aires.
The final treaty will require cuts in three naturally occurring gases — carbon dioxide, methane and nitrous oxide.
It will also force countries to cut three synthetic gases — hydrofluorocarbons, perfluorocarbons and sulphur hexafluorides.
Alberta green plan defies federal rules; Environmental groups jeer, oilpatch cheers
Jason Fekete, Calgary Herald, Jan. 25, 2008
The Stelmach government unveiled a new climate change plan Thursday that allows Alberta’s greenhouse gas emissions to rise until 2020, and puts the province on a collision course with Ottawa over whose strategy takes precedence.
The Alberta plan — which falls well short of what’s demanded by both the Kyoto Protocol and the federal government — was welcomed by the oil and gas industry as a good first step. But it was immediately panned by environmental groups and opposition parties.
Alberta’s updated policy focuses largely on carbon capture and storage, with long-term goals of stabilizing emissions and beginning reductions by 2020, eventually cutting them 200 megatonnes by 2050 — equal to a 14 per cent reduction below 2005 levels.
“There’s already more than enough hot air surrounding the issue of climate change. I’m not going to add to it with empty political rhetoric and targets I know we can’t achieve,” Premier Ed Stelmach said at an Edmonton news conference.
“It’s a realistic plan that will bring about realistic reductions in greenhouse gas emissions.”
Stelmach said his strategy is a responsible approach for the energy-rich province that will allow Alberta to maintain its global competitiveness.
But the new plan was derided by the Alberta-based Pembina Institute, an environmental think-tank, which said the government is delaying much-needed measures to achieve absolute reductions.
“This current plan is, ultimately, shockingly irresponsible,” said Dan Woynillowicz, a senior policy analyst with the Pembina Institute. “We need to be taking more action now.”
The provincial strategy focuses on three key areas: using carbon capture and storage technology to cut industrial emissions, particularly in the oilsands; greening Alberta’s energy production by using alternative sources, such as solar and wind power; and promoting energy efficiency and conservation.
About 70 per cent of Alberta’s planned reductions by 2050 are expected to be achieved through carbon capture and storage, although government officials said it’s unlikely the system would be operational before 2011.
Alberta’s greenhouse gas targets lag far behind the federal government’s commitment to cut emissions 20 per cent below 2006 levels by 2020, and 60 to 70 per cent by 2050.
Ottawa plans to stop the rise of greenhouse gas emissions within five years, whereas Alberta is looking at 12 years.
Also, Alberta’s planned reductions are well below Canada’s Kyoto obligations of reducing emissions six per cent below 1990 levels over the next four years.
A federal-provincial showdown now looms over whose plan wins out. Both Stelmach and Prime Minister Stephen Harper have said their plan will trump anything introduced by another level of government.
Federal Environment Minister John Baird wasn’t available for comment Thursday. However, a senior department official said they welcome all provincial strategies that result in “real reductions of greenhouse gas emissions,” but noted provinces must fall into line with Ottawa’s plan.
“We support any actions that complement our mandatory national emission reductions standards,” said Garry Keller, director of communications for Baird.
The oil and gas industry, meanwhile, welcomed the Alberta plan as an “important next step,” specifically the focus on carbon capture and storage.
“It’s giving us more direction on what we need to do to manage our greenhouse gas emissions,” said David Pryce, vice-president with the Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers, who noted oil and gas companies are still uncertain about whose rules they should follow.
“There’s going to be a challenge there,” he said. “The levels of government are going to need to come together with some kind of common approach.”
The Calgary Chamber of Commerce also endorsed the plan, arguing it strikes the right balance between maintaining economic growth, investing in technology and reducing greenhouse gas emissions over the long-term.
Opposition parties reacted generally with disgust, although Alberta Green Leader George Read said he’s pleased government is progressing on the file — albeit slowly.
“At least we’re moving,” Read said, although he’s concerned the strategy isn’t a larger green plan that addresses water issues.
Liberal environment critic David Swann said he is disappointed with the government’s long-term plan for absolute reductions and noted Grit Leader Kevin Taft would implement hard caps within five years.
“I still see no reason to trust the government will show leadership on this most important issue to Albertans,” Swann said.
NDP Leader Brian Mason charged Stelmach is “gambling” potentially billions of public dollars on unproven carbon capture and storage technology, and is worried it will divert money away from renewable energy and efficiency efforts.
jfekete@theherald.canwest.com
Highlights of Tory Green Plan
– Alberta’s overall greenhouse gas emissions will rise until around 2020 as the government continues with intensity-based reductions;
– By 2020, stabilize greenhouse gas emissions and begin absolute reductions;
– By 2050, achieve absolute reductions of 14 per cent below 2005 levels;
– Alberta’s targets fall well short of what’s demanded by the Kyoto Protocol and Ottawa;
– The province will create a council of government and industry officials to craft a made-in-Alberta blueprint for carbon capture and storage, which will account for the majority of the province’s long-term reductions.
– Government will introduce in the spring consumer incentives to become more energy efficient;
– Province will increase investment in clean-energy technologies, such as wind and solar power.
Climate accord falls short; Disappointment surfaces after marathon talks
Kelly Cryderman, Calgary Herald, Dec. 19, 2009
COPENHAGEN — World leaders tried to pull all the meaning they could from the tenuous deal brokered between the U.S., China and other major economies during the final hours of climate change talks Friday night and this morning — but the newly christened “Copenhagen Accord” elicited mainly resignation and disappointment.
The agreement is missing some of the hard targets seen in earlier drafts, but sets out an ambitious plan for providing $100 billion in climate aid to developing countries by 2020.
U.S. President Barack Obama, who held a key bilateral meeting with China on Friday afternoon to help usher through the deal, acknowledged “no country will get everything that it wants.”
Although many exhausted politicians from industrialized countries said they planned to sign the deal, there are still months — perhaps years — of negotiations ahead before the pact has any real impact.
The European Union signed on, even though it is disappointed with the deal.
“Let’s be honest to say this is not a perfect agreement,” said Swedish Prime Minister Fredrik Reinfeldt, speaking for the EU. “This will not solve the climate threat.”
Our environment writer is reporting from Copenhagen with Alberta’s perspective on the climate change conference the consensus view.
“This agreement needs fix-ing up as soon as possible,” said Graham Saul of the Climate Action Network Canada. “Negotiators need to go back to the table and deliver a real deal for people and the planet before the end of June. And Canadians need a government that puts climate change ahead of the short-term interests of the oil industry.”
Sudan’s Lumumba Di-Aping, chairman of the G-77, a group of developing countries, said the deal doesn’t go far enough in stopping climate change, or protecting poor countries from the impacts. He added it also doesn’t go far enough in securing long-term adaptation financing.
“It represents the worst development in climate change negotiations,” said Di-Aping. “It is nothing short (of) climate change skepticism in action.”
Early this morning, the small island nation of Tuvalu said it wouldn’t join the agreement, expressing concern the pact did not talk about the renewal of the legally binding Kyoto Protocol.
The key compromise of the accord is for China. The accord allows poor or developing countries that don’t take international financing to avoid international monitoring of their emissions. The move was a pointed concession to the world’s No. 1 emitter, which has fought strict controls.
Also under the accord, developing countries must set targets by February. The document said “nationally appropriate mitigation” targets will be applied to developing countries.
It also committed $30 billion in short-term adaptation funding over three years, beginning in 2010, to help poorer countries preserve forests and deal with floods, droughts and rising sea levels.
Manuel Barroso, president of the European Commission, said he was disappointed that countries accepted the premise of keeping worldwide temperature increases to below two degrees Celsius, but would not commit to a 50 per cent emission reduction from 1990 levels by 2050.
“There were long discussions about it,” Barroso said, “but that was not possible because there were many relevant partners that simply didn’t accept that reference.”
But the EU and others agreed to the deal, sensing there were few options. Late into Friday evening, most of the 119 world leaders continued to negotiate. The proceedings were at least a day behind schedule and rumours swirled of talks going well into the weekend.
For many tense hours, it was unclear whether an agreement was going to come out of the 11-day UN summit at all.
Earlier in the day, Obama chastised world leaders for allowing squabbling to leave the pact in limbo so late in the process.
“I have to be honest, as the world watches us today, our ability to take collective action is in doubt right now,” the U.S. president said in a speech in the conference centre’s main plenary hall.
“We are ready to get this done today, but there has to be movement on all sides.”
In his speech, Obama spoke of strong emission-reduction plans from developed countries, and transparency in emissions monitoring — a remark pointedly directed at China.
Obama also touted the long-term $100-billion financing plan for poorer nations announced Thursday by U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. But only a portion of the money, also mentioned in the accord, will come from Washington.
All three issues have been major sticking points throughout the talks.
“We know the fault lines because we’ve been imprisoned by them for years,” he said.
Obama also took time in his speech to reinforce the foundations of climate change, saying “we come here in Copenhagen because climate change poses a grave and growing danger to our people.
“This is not fiction, it is science,” he said.
That contrasted with remarks by Harper, who suggested the science of climate change is still open to some debate.