This ugly (big) secret that very progressive Canada is trying to make people forget

This is an English Google translation of the original French article published on Atlantico – republished here with permission of the author.

Atlantico— Prime Minister Justin Trudeau portrays Canada as a global climate leader, with the pursuit of ever more ambitious climate goals and policies under his leadership. But Canada’s greenhouse gas emissions actually tell a whole different story. A slew of climate policies championed by Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau have yet to translate into deep reductions in carbon emissions and pollution in the country. How can these differences be explained? What is the reality of the data we have on Canada that would be far from Justin Trudeau’s promises?

Samuel Furfari – In 1992, the year the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change was adopted, Canada emitted 442 million tonnes of CO₂ (Mt CO₂). Last year it emitted 527 Mt CO₂. This is an increase of almost 20%. It should also be noted that before the Covid pandemic, Canada’s CO₂ emissions were 571 Mt CO₂, so the increase was 30%. This underlines that the Covid crisis has hit here as elsewhere. But it also shows that if a country wants to create jobs, provide growth that supports the quality of life, we should not expect a reduction in these emissions.

It’s not just during Justin Trudeau’s tenure that there’s been an increase. His predecessor, Stephen Harper, did the same. It has been constant since world leaders said we were going to reduce these emissions.

Despite the big statements at 26 COPs, global CO₂ emissions have increased by 59% since the adoption of this convention when its objective was to limit global CO₂ emissions. Without the Covid pandemic, they would probably have increased by 65%. In the real world, when the results are so bad and so inconsistent with the goal, drastic measures are taken without hesitation, either to abandon the unrealistic goal or to change the failing team. In the context of climate change, the opposite is true. The more global CO₂ emissions increase, the more, with the complicity of the media and environmental NGOs, the same litanies are repeated, in Canada and elsewhere.

CO₂ emissions from non-OECD countries increased by 134%; China’s emissions soared by 311%, with the growth record being held by Vietnam which produced 1300% more CO₂. Africa has only increased its CO₂ emissions “by 93%” because it is unfortunately lagging behind in the development race.

So the Canadian government is a good student compared to the others. For CO₂ emissions it’s like the rich and the poor, there is always someone who is richer or poorer. So Justin Trudeau will continue to talk without getting results. In a few weeks, he will undoubtedly repeat his litany in Sharm-el-Sheik during COP-27, which we already know will be a more resounding failure than the previous ones.

Atlantico — What have been Canada’s main failures in terms of energy and environmental policy in the context of reducing carbon emissions?

Samuel Furfari – Justin Trudeau doesn’t have a magic wand to lower CO₂ emissions. No one has it and so the plans he put in place couldn’t work. This is evident everywhere, as the figures just quoted show.

Governments like — and Canada too — artificially raise the price of energy by taxing CO₂ emissions, in the hope of decreasing demand. It only works at the margin. We see it at home [in the EU] right now, don’t we? The price at the pump is unbearable and yet people are fussing about filling their car’s tank. Energy demand is inelastic, as we say in economics; even if its price increases, we cannot do without it, at least for industrial and essential uses of life such as heating.

But there is more. Canada is a major producer of energy for the world market. According to BP’s Statistical Review of World Energy 2022, under Mr. Trudeau’s leadership, Canada’s oil production increased by about 25% and gas by 7%.

In any case, it is also necessary to underline the positive aspects in terms of environmental protection. It’s easy to scare people about environmental issues and the “protection of Mother Nature”. These issues are complex and it is easy to hide the progress that is tangible throughout the OECD and therefore also in Canada. Air quality in Canada is almost the cleanest in the world. For example, ambient concentrations of ground-level ozone have been on a declining trend since 2000, and in 2015 were 27% below 1979 levels. Fine particles have always remained below the new air quality standards. As for the precursors of acid rain, they are in free fall. In 2015, sulfur dioxide levels in Canada were 92.3% lower than in 1974 and those of nitrogen oxides decreased by 74.4% over the same period.

Why these successes on the environment and the failure on CO₂ emissions? Because there are technologies to reduce air pollutants and there are hardly any to combat CO₂ emissions.

Atlantico — What is behind this “ double discourse ” between the promises and commitments made and the reality of the facts, which is much less effective? Does this reflect a lack of political courage from progressive countries like Canada and from certain progressive leaders like Justin Trudeau on these environmental issues despite their promises?

Samuel Furfari – The whole issue is skewed by the simple fact that no one is intentionally producing CO₂. It is a by-product of fossil fuel consumption, which is itself a by-product of labor demand. We too easily forget the laws of physics. Energy is exactly the same physical quantity as work, that is, the displacement of a force (a weight) over a distance. All effort, all movement is work and consumes energy. We don’t spend our time producing greenhouse gases for fun or carelessness. It is the consequence of life, various personal activities, services or industries. Justin Trudeau and other leaders can promise whatever they want, I’ve long since given them no credit.

If we want growth to provide jobs and a quality of life for a growing population, we will have to work more and therefore consume more. We are finally realizing it. Only fossil fuels make this possible. Over the past ten years, 61% of the world’s primary energy growth has been provided by fossil fuels. In non-OECD countries, this share is 80%. This means that if the consumption of renewable energies increases, the consumption of fossil fuels increases much more.

We are not looking for solutions just to fight climate change. For 49 years — since the first oil shock — the world has struggled to find alternative energy solutions. After research efforts at first, then subsidies of all kinds and finally production obligations for renewable energies, these have only supported part of the growth in demand. Moreover, if we consider the tolerated renewable energies (that is to say excluding wood and hydraulics), they now only represent 3% of the energy balance. What is your level of optimism? Are we going to double? Triple? Let’s even imagine a quadrupling – which I don’t see happening at all – this will only represent 12% of the balance sheet of a consumption in strong growth.

Flip the problem any way you want, global CO₂ emissions will rise. Canada is also a land of emigration and jobs, and Trudeau’s plans, like those of his predecessors, will do nothing about it.

Atlantico — The G7 countries have succeeded in ensuring their economic growth while reducing their emissions. But Canada’s environmental commissioner says the country is struggling to meet those targets and flatten the curve. Among the G20 countries, Canada is second only to Saudi Arabia in terms of emissions per capita. Does Canada have the means to change this situation? What solutions should Justin Trudeau apply to follow a more virtuous path and to keep his commitments?

Samuel Furfari -Taking a single parameter to compare the energy performance of a country is a mistake for novice energy specialists. Canada has failed to reduce these emissions partly because since 1990 the population has increased by 37%. Canada currently accepts 400,000 immigrants each year. More people who have to live and work causes more demand for energy. The climate objectives proclaimed by Justin Trudeau can therefore never be achieved, despite the extreme and destructive measures for the industry currently imposed.

Then Canada is the second coldest country in the world; and we do not heat the houses with wind turbines and photovoltaic solar panels. It is therefore necessary to use fossil fuels to survive the cold. Its extremely low population density (4 inhabitants per km²) obviously penalizes it. Because of the meteorology and population density, the comparison should be made against Russia and there Canada would be much better ranked.

The United States has reduced its emissions since 2008/2009 thanks to very cheap shale gas which has replaced much of the coal in power plants. President Obama made a commitment in 2015 in Paris to reduce his country’s emissions when it had already been done. There remains the EU, which has reduced its emissions by 23% compared to 1990, but at what cost! It has a weak economy, it is deindustrializing and spending a lot of money to obtain expensive electricity, which pushes its industries to relocate. Just look at the state of our industry.

There are no miracles in the field of energy. Economic growth is forcing energy consumption and it is now obvious that renewable energies will remain limited due to their high cost (if it were not, there would be no need to force their production by three consecutive European directives since 2009), their footprint which limits their massive use, their intermittency which can only be compensated by fossil fuels.

There are therefore two solutions to reduce CO₂ emissions, and Canada is working on them: pushing nuclear power and energy efficiency, renamed sobriety. Canada has a card to play in nuclear energy thanks to its Candu-type reactors, which run on natural uranium. As for energy efficiency, do we need convoluted plans to know that wasting energy is stupid?

I will conclude by saying that we must be wary of politicians’ promises and also of risky comparisons between such different countries. The only valid parameter is that of global CO2 emissions, and there it is clear, the emissions have increased and will increase. The less money we waste on this useless quest, money which have less and less of due to these policies, the better, especially since everyone will be better off if they are more prosperous. Canada too…

Samuel Furfari is professor of geopolitics of energy at the ESCP-London and emeritus from the Free University of Brussels, doctor of applied sciences (ULB), polytechnic engineer (ULB) and President of the European Society of Engineers and Industrialists. For thirty-six years he was a senior civil servant in the Directorate General for Energy of the European Commission.