Promises to Keep

Prime Minister Justin Trudeau took part in a Q&A with Akshat Rathi, Senior Reporter for Climate at Bloomberg News last Tuesday at the 2030 in Focus: Getting the Next Decade Right on Net-Zero conference hosted by The Net-Zero Advisory Body and the Canadian Climate Institute. The Q&A touched on various topics related to the net-zero economy, including carbon pollution pricing, Canada’s energy transition, Canadian versus American progress, and compensation to developing countries for losses caused by climate change. During the Q&A, Trudeau made several headline-worthy comments, but what stood out most was his assurance that Canada will meet its emissions targets.

The Promise and the Plan

At the end of the interview, Rathi noted that Canada’s emissions are currently 20 percent higher than in 1990, despite the implementation of Canada’s first climate plan over 30 years ago and the introduction of eight climate plans since. When pressed on whether he could guarantee that this time would be different, Trudeau asserted yes and explained the difference now is that “every other plan was based on targets. Any politician put forward a target. Can you actually build a plan to do it, make the trade-offs and fight for a price on carbon pollution, and make those shifts like we’re seeing?”

The “plan to do it” that Trudeau was referring to is the 2030 Emissions Reduction Plan (ERP). The ERP outlines an ambitious sector-by-sector plan for major sectors in the economy such as oil and gas, transportation, electricity, heavy industry, and others, to cut emissions by 40 percent by 2030 and stay on track to achieve net-zero emissions by 2050. The Plan was released earlier this year, following the passing of the Canadian Net-Zero Emissions Accountability Act in June 2021, which enshrined the 2050 net-zero goal into law and mandated the setting of intermediary targets at five-year intervals.

Other Perspectives

Although Trudeau is confident that the ERP will overcome the shortcomings of previous climate plans and achieve net-zero by 2050, others are not so sure. Critics from the industry and environmental organizations have raised concerns about the feasibility and timeline of the ERP, while environmental stakeholders have also expressed sentiments that it is inadequate.

Concerns about the aggressive timelines of the ERP include the Canadian Climate Institute’s assessment, which found the plan as “credible and can deliver deep emissions reductions—if the policies are executed in a timely fashion” and noted, “the success of the Plan hinges on enacting a large and complex policy package in a short timeframe while achieving a level of technology and financing deployment that is a significant shift from current levels.” While the Canadian Climate Institute’s review of the ERP is overarchingly positive despite the plan’s short timeframes, other groups have shared greater worries regarding these timelines. An analyst from the Institute for Energy Economics and Financial Analysis stated that the ERP seems “frantic,” as eight years is not far off and companies may not adapt so swiftly. Similarly, a press release from the Canadian Chamber of Commerce outlined the Chamber’s “concerns with the feasibility and limited supporting detail of several components of the ERP.” The press release also noted the risk of hindered progress if the Government failed to announce detailed plans and investments and provided a list of topics requiring more clarity.

Regarding the overall sufficiency of the ERP, the Climate Action Network acknowledged that, while the plan is promising, it “falls short of the level of transparency and ambition required.” They also feel that it allows certain sectors, such as oil and gas, to not contribute their fair share at a time when an all-hands-on-deck approach is needed. Similarly, the David Suzuki Foundation recognized the ERP’s relatively greater chance of success when compared to previous plans and its ingrained accountability measures. However, they also criticized the plan’s shortcomings such as an overemphasis on carbon capture and storage, as well as ambiguity surrounding carbon offsets and the limitation of their use. Public Interest Alberta’s news release compared the government’s goal of net-zero by 2050 with that of Exxon-Mobil’s, proclaiming that this indicates the climate target is “not even close to ambitious enough.”

Certainly Uncertain

Beyond the shortcomings of the ERP identified above, Trudeau’s certainty of achieving net-zero by 2050 is questionable, as he failed to answer Mathi at both the beginning and end of their conversation on whether he could provide the year for when emissions would start declining.

If net-zero by 2050 hinges on the ERP, and Trudeau wants to make good on his promise to achieve this, more work must be done to ensure the goals set out in the plan can be met. This includes providing the necessary support and funding to achieve the required technological shifts and addressing the deficiencies related to transparency and clarity stated above. Otherwise, sectors will be left scrambling, and Canada will fail to reach its climate target again.