Canada and climate change: The two-faced monster
Peter Kent, the Federal Minister of Energy
attended a meeting of the United Nations climate
change conference in Durban, South
Africa in early December. There, he delivered
the news that Canada would not be participating
in what is being considered round
two of the Kyoto Protocol. The goal of the
original Kyoto Protocol was to give countries
goals for reducing emissions or
resources to be used in reducing emissions,
and the new agreement would be similar in
terms of setting reduction targets. Kent's
reasoning for not signing on to the new
agreement was, according to him, because it
fails to target major emitters.
The whole ordeal seems baffling to me. Before the conference, Kent promised to have it out with countries who were shirking their commitments, yet Canada is in the exact same boat. It was the spring of 2008 and Canada had just become the first country to be sued for failing to comply with the standards set out by Kyoto Protocol. The Harper government admitted to the U.N. that there was simply no way to meet our obligations. Fast forward to now: Kent is speaking out against countries making excuses for their shortcomings while simultaneously ducking out of an agreement we haven't honoured in years, anyway. The Conservative government seems to want it both ways, championing a tough approach while simultaneously withdrawing from any international accountability.
In a study by a branch of the U.N. concerned with measuring greenhouse gas emissions, Canada received a D grade with a comment that "significant progress is needed." This is a statistic released by the United Nations, internationally available and, coupled with our failure to commit to a second effort at reducing greenhouse emissions, it seems like Canada is being poorly represented in the international community. The same study ranked Canada fourth-worst of 17 countries with an emission ratio of 22 tonnes of carbon dioxide per capita.
It's obvious that in a recession, cutting any kind of production is dangerous to the economy. This is all the more true when the emissions are broken down per province. The worst offender, Alberta, contributes heavily to the country's combustion sources, which make up 45 per cent of our greenhouse gas production. Other countries that are struggling to meet their reductions criticize developed countries like Canada and the U.S. for polluting heavily on their rise to first-world status, yet condemning current third-world countries trying to do the same.
The reality is that many countries who sign on to this new agreement will fail to meet their reduction quotas. The point that seems to be lost in all of this is that the purpose of the Kyoto Protocol was to create an international embodiment of the U.N.'s commitment to fight pollution. The goal is to unite around a common purpose and mutually agree to make it a priority, and Canada's repeated failure to do so will hurt us in the short term politically and in the long term environmentally.
Editorial opinions or comments expressed in this online edition of Interrobang newspaper reflect the views of the writer and are not those of the Interrobang or the Fanshawe Student Union. The Interrobang is published weekly by the Fanshawe Student Union at 1001 Fanshawe College Blvd., P.O. Box 7005, London, Ontario, N5Y 5R6 and distributed through the Fanshawe College community. Letters to the editor are welcome. All letters are subject to editing and should be emailed. All letters must be accompanied by contact information. Letters can also be submitted online by clicking here.
The whole ordeal seems baffling to me. Before the conference, Kent promised to have it out with countries who were shirking their commitments, yet Canada is in the exact same boat. It was the spring of 2008 and Canada had just become the first country to be sued for failing to comply with the standards set out by Kyoto Protocol. The Harper government admitted to the U.N. that there was simply no way to meet our obligations. Fast forward to now: Kent is speaking out against countries making excuses for their shortcomings while simultaneously ducking out of an agreement we haven't honoured in years, anyway. The Conservative government seems to want it both ways, championing a tough approach while simultaneously withdrawing from any international accountability.
In a study by a branch of the U.N. concerned with measuring greenhouse gas emissions, Canada received a D grade with a comment that "significant progress is needed." This is a statistic released by the United Nations, internationally available and, coupled with our failure to commit to a second effort at reducing greenhouse emissions, it seems like Canada is being poorly represented in the international community. The same study ranked Canada fourth-worst of 17 countries with an emission ratio of 22 tonnes of carbon dioxide per capita.
It's obvious that in a recession, cutting any kind of production is dangerous to the economy. This is all the more true when the emissions are broken down per province. The worst offender, Alberta, contributes heavily to the country's combustion sources, which make up 45 per cent of our greenhouse gas production. Other countries that are struggling to meet their reductions criticize developed countries like Canada and the U.S. for polluting heavily on their rise to first-world status, yet condemning current third-world countries trying to do the same.
The reality is that many countries who sign on to this new agreement will fail to meet their reduction quotas. The point that seems to be lost in all of this is that the purpose of the Kyoto Protocol was to create an international embodiment of the U.N.'s commitment to fight pollution. The goal is to unite around a common purpose and mutually agree to make it a priority, and Canada's repeated failure to do so will hurt us in the short term politically and in the long term environmentally.
Editorial opinions or comments expressed in this online edition of Interrobang newspaper reflect the views of the writer and are not those of the Interrobang or the Fanshawe Student Union. The Interrobang is published weekly by the Fanshawe Student Union at 1001 Fanshawe College Blvd., P.O. Box 7005, London, Ontario, N5Y 5R6 and distributed through the Fanshawe College community. Letters to the editor are welcome. All letters are subject to editing and should be emailed. All letters must be accompanied by contact information. Letters can also be submitted online by clicking here.
