This editorial was written and published by the Globe & Mail on June 19, 2024.

Carbon dioxide and methane are not visible to the human eye. The greenhouse gases garner attention in the mind’s eye – and some sources attract more interest than others. Emissions in the oil sands were 87 megatonnes in 2022, according to the latest official figures, reported last month. Emissions in passenger transportation, from cars and trucks to planes and trains, were 90 Mt.

Each account for about an eighth of Canada’s total emissions. The oil sands of course attract a lot of attention – and money. Ottawa is set to provide more than $10-billion of subsidies for carbon capture, available to all industries but with the oil sands at the front of the line – even as the technology is untested at such a scale. Transportation also gets significant attention and funding, as government subsidies help drivers shift to electric vehicles.

Now consider buildings. Their emissions were 89 Mt in 2022, roughly split between residential and commercial. It’s as if the oil sands were scattered across the country in small dollops and few people took notice – yet the impact on climate is equal. A molecule of carbon dioxide or methane has the same climate-heating effect no matter its source.

In the work to deliver on Canada’s promise to cut total emissions by 40 per cent by 2030, buildings receive a fraction of the spotlight cast on the oil sands or transport. But that’s beginning to change. Some jurisdictions, such as California, are starting to modernize rules around how residential and commercial buildings are fuelled. Natural gas – which is mostly comprised of methane, an especially potent greenhouse gas – is burned in furnaces and boilers, to provide heat and to heat water. This is how buildings produce such large volumes of greenhouse gases.

The Canadian Climate Institute, a policy think tank, published a report last week about the urgency and challenges to reduce emissions from buildings. What it requires is an across-the-board look at how governments oversee the country’s energy systems, from elected officials and independent regulators to private companies. The institute warned that, for now, “inertia is prevailing” – and if it continues, the cost will be tallied in higher bills for consumers and businesses and missed climate reduction targets for Canada.

The report showed that methane heats about half the residential buildings in the country, led by Alberta, Saskatchewan, Ontario and British Columbia. Among commercial buildings, it’s more than 80 per cent.

The solution is clear, as it is in transportation: electrification. But to make it happen is more difficult, including generating greater levels of electricity and changing long-standing ways of doing things – such as always hooking up more buildings to new methane pipelines. A lack of co-ordination is a primary problem. The institute said no province has a clear plan about the future of gas for heating.

New builds should be easiest. Slow and stop the expansion of natural gas pipelines to heat buildings. Late last year, the Ontario Energy Board ruled on this, after a detailed review, and said new gas connections should be paid upfront, rather than amortized over decades. It was a smart decision, aiming to avoid an “overbuilt, underutilized gas system.” But the Progressive Conservative Doug Ford government immediately fought back – claiming the issue was about housing costs – and effectively overruled the decision this spring. It passed legislation, Bill 165, to limit regulatory oversight and make it easier for Enbridge, the gas supplier, to expand.

That was a mistake. Enbridge benefits as its pipeline network grows and the price is borne by all customers. They subsidize the Enbridge expansion, rather than the company paying the cost itself. And it locks in more fossil fuel infrastructure, worsening the risk of stranded assets in the future, as the Ontario Energy Board warned.

Ontario’s moving in the wrong direction. “Provincial governments need to start directing a shift from gas to electric heating infrastructure,” the Climate Institute argued. It called on governments to help bodies such as regulators and electricity system operators make decisions that abide by net zero goals and, especially, stop expanding fossil fuel systems.

The wrong decisions today will reverberate for decades. It’s easy to point at the oil sands or cars and trucks but the challenge of emissions exists across the economy and buildings merit more attention. Big changes are necessary – and moving in the wrong direction puts Canada further behind.

This editorial was written and published by the Globe & Mail on June 15, 2024.

‘How do you sleep at night?” It was a rhetorical question, framed as a real one, from a politician to one of Canada’s top oil executives at a House of Commons committee earlier this month. NDP MP Laurel Collins said she was simply asking what people want to know, in the face of delayed climate action from Canada’s oil sector.

Suncor chief executive Rich Kruger said the question was designed “to create headlines, point fingers” and “villainize the industry.”

The question might have been rhetorical, and designed to create social-media content, but it did serve a useful purpose. The question illustrates a long-standing tension in this country, that some Canadians believe oil executives are a special type of bad actor.

It’s a deeply inconsistent position. Would an MP ask about the slumber of CEOs in sectors that are the voracious consumers of fossil fuel, or extracted critical minerals? Those who lead Canada’s aircraft or vehicle manufacturing companies, those who produce their wares using power from coal plants overseas, or artificial intelligence executives, whose companies’ computers could suck up more electrical power a few years from now than a rich developed country consumes?

Probably not.

But oil executives should get a higher level of scrutiny because of the global industry history of not acknowledging, or hiding, the truth of climate change. And Canadian oil sands producers have not fully explained how they’re going to live up to their net zero by 2050 promises, and have not yet invested the required billions of dollars.

Here’s where the frustration of progressive MPs becomes concrete. Everyone needs to be more fully committed if there’s going to be sustainable progress in Canada on climate.

Canada is one of the world’s largest oil producers, and a transition in a world hungry for energy is not going to happen overnight. The world devours copious amounts of crude every day. Canada’s oil industry, riding high commodity prices, is also a bright spot in a national economy where per person GDP is flailing.

The oil and natural gas sector remains Canada’s largest source of greenhouse gas emissions, making up 31 per cent of the total in 2022, the latest official numbers. That’s because of the sheer scale of the export-focused industry. From 1990 to 2022, Canadian crude production nearly tripled.

The oil sands in Northern Alberta also use far more energy and produce more emissions than other types of oil, hitting a record level of emissions in 2022. Oil output is at record highs and set to rise significantly. It makes it more challenging to further reduce emissions, even as industry has cut the volume of emissions per barrel. That’s a good trend but it’s not enough.

The debate is happening as a key climate policy is on the ropes. The consumer carbon tax – which could be a solid, serious thing – has been under constant attack by the Conservatives and debased by the Liberals’ political manoeuvring in Atlantic Canada.

The proposed emissions cap on oil and gas, which no other country has instituted, will be forever fought by any provincial government in Alberta.

One bright spot is industrial carbon pricing. It’s effective, generally uncontroversial, and should survive into the years ahead – no matter which political party forms government. But it needs to be strengthened and bolstered, alongside potential federal contracts for difference that aim to encourage industry investments. The combination would help all heavy emitters reduce or capture emissions, no matter what sector or region of the country they are in.

There will be the carrot of taxpayer subsidies alongside the stick of emissions rules, as well. Finance Minister Chrystia Freeland said this week a carbon capture tax credit, worth more than $10-billion, will soon be law and she wants to see “shovels in the ground.” The oil sands companies had previously said they want taxpayers to fund the majority of their carbon capture project and wouldn’t forge ahead until public money is locked in.

How does a Canada oil executive sleep at night? Probably at least as well as leaders in other industries that consume the world’s resources. But the alarm clock is ringing – for everyone.

The natural gas system must stop expanding for Canada to meet emissions goals and avoid cost spirals, Canadian Climate Institute report says.

This article was written by Marco Chown Oved and was published in the Toronto Star on June 13, 2024. It was updated on June 17, 2024.

The natural gas system must stop expanding in order for Canada to meet its climate goals and to avoid saddling customers with rising costs as people switch to electric heat, according to a new report by the Canadian Climate Institute.

“Expanding gas infrastructure to heat buildings today would be like investing heavily in a chain of video rental stores 15 years ago,” said Jason Dion, senior research director at the institute and one of the authors of the report. “Energy systems need to plan for the reality that is arriving on our doorstep. The smart approach to protect consumers and ensure affordable, reliable energy in the future is to grow the electricity system — not lock in more dependence on gas.” 

The report comes on the heels of a controversial move by the government of Premier Doug Ford to overrule the Ontario Energy Board’s decision to end the subsidization of gas hookups in new buildings. 

The OEB had ruled that gas hookups were artificially cheaper than electricity hookups because of the practice of allowing the cost to be spread out over 40 years, instead of being paid upfront, and that gas consumption would likely drop significantly in that time, leaving fewer customers to pay for aging pipeline infrastructure.

The Ford government said it was unacceptable to make new houses more expensive by adding the full $4,400 gas hookup fee.

The dispute is emblematic of a problem that spreads across Canada: that utility regulators aren’t taking climate change and emissions reductions targets into account in their decision making and business as usual risks “costly dead-end pathways,” said Saachi Gibson, a research director at the climate institute.

“The sector is stuck,” she said.

For Canada to achieve net zero emissions by 2050, gas use will have to drop by 81 to 98 per cent in buildings, the report found. Electric heat (including heat pumps and baseboard heating), which now account for 34 per cent of heating systems, will need to more than double to 86 per cent over the next two and a half decades, with the remaining 14 per cent of systems (mostly in Alberta) powered by a hybrid of gas and electricity.

Yet natural gas systems continue to expand. Thousands of kilometres of new distribution pipelines have been built over the last decade and hundreds of thousands of new customers have been added, the report found. This is because gas utilities don’t make money by selling gas, which they don’t mark up. Instead, they get a guaranteed rate of return on their investments in pipelines and other infrastructure.

“They have a direct economic incentive to pursue continued growth of gas infrastructure and new customers, even if the long-term usage case is uncertain,” said Dion. 

This incentive structure needs to change, Dion said, pointing to Quebec, where electrical utilities and gas companies work together to provide hybrid heat, and Massachusetts, where regulators are required to consider other options before approving the replacement of end-of-life gas pipelines.

To better align climate goals and utility infrastructure decisions, provinces need to legislate emissions reductions targets and empower utility regulators to take them into account, the report said.

“Provincial governments should stop treating gas system expansion as the default option, and equip regulators to consider alternatives,” said Kate Harland, the research lead on the report. 

Cities and states around the world have started to ban gas hookups in new buildings, saying that electrifying heat is such a large undertaking, with millions of buildings that need to be transitioned, that the first step must be to stop adding new fossil fuel heating. 

These gas bans have passed in Vancouver, Montreal, New York state and Germany. But in Ontario, natural gas customers pay fees to cover new pipelines and network expansion. As more and more people switch to electric heating, those left on the system will have to pay more to maintain the infrastructure.

While Ontario has a plan to expand electricity generation, including new nuclear plants, gas plants, grid-scale batteries and renewables, there is no similar long-term vision for the natural gas system.

“It’s our hope that (Ontario) will halt the continued expansion of the gas network in the interests of ratepayers over the long term,” said Dion.

This opinion was written by Rob Miller and was published in Canada’s National Observer on April 26, 2024.

Perhaps some relief for climate anxiety about our planet can be found by imagining what the world would look like if we embraced these climate-friendly measures — in 2029. Markus Spiske/Pexels

Another Earth Day has come and gone. Delegates are in Ottawa this week to hammer out a global plastics treaty. These events happened against a backdrop of continued uncertainty about our commitment to fighting climate change. Carbon pricing, electric vehicles and other climate-friendly measures are taking a back seat to pocketbook issues such as affordability. This kind of short-term thinking is creating anxiety amongst young people and climate activists who desperately want to be more hopeful about the future. Perhaps some relief for climate anxiety can be found by imagining what the world would look like if we embraced these climate-friendly measures.

The secretary general of the UN said fossil fuel companies should be banned from advertising in every country, akin to the restrictions on big tobacco.

António Guterres delivered fresh scientific warnings of global heating in a major speech in New York. He called on news and tech media to stop enabling ‘planetary destruction’ by taking fossil fuel firms’ advertising money, while warning that the world faces ‘climate crunch time’ in its faltering attempts to stem the crisis.

Following is UN Secretary-General António Guterres’ special address on climate action, “A Moment of Truth”, to the American Museum of Natural History, in New York today:

This article was written and published by the United Nations on June 5, 2024.

‘Stop acting as enablers to planetary destruction,’ secretary general tells PR firms

This article was written by Benjamin Shingler and was published by CBC News on June 6, 2024.

UN chief urges countries to ban fossil fuel ads

United Nations Secretary General António Guterres is calling on nations to ban fossil fuel ads, and urging media and tech companies to ‘stop taking fossil fuel advertising.’

The European Union’s Copernicus climate change monitoring service says the global average temperature for the last 12 months was the highest on record. UN Secretary General Antonio Guterres called on world leaders and corporations to take ‘urgent action.’

‘We’re shattering global temperature records and reaping the whirlwind,’ UN secretary-general says

This article was written by Benjamin Shingler and was published by CBC News on June 5, 2024.

United Nations Secretary-General António Guterres delivers his special address on climate action from the American Museum of Natural History in New York.

“It’s climate crunch time” when it comes to tackling rising carbon emissions, the UN Secretary-General said on Wednesday, stressing that while the need for global action is unprecedented, so too are the opportunities for prosperity and sustainable development.

This article was written and published by the United Nations on June 5, 2024.