EINAR CHRISTENSEN
At the UN, on Sept. 23, 2019 (more than a year ago), the world received a timely and inspirational wake-up call about the undeniable dangers of climate change from someone wise beyond her years — someone who has grasped the urgency of the global climate crisis much better than many of our (so-called) world leaders and corporation heads.
Instead of the younger generation pleading with us to secure our common future, we should be the ones ensuring that the next two generations (including our children and grandchildren) inherit a world that will be livable.
I am, of course, referring to Greta Thunberg, the Swedish teenager who understands better than most members of the generation that currently wields power, that we cannot go on destroying our planet as we have been since the start of the Industrial Revolution — especially during the last 50 years.
In 1987, Gro Harlem Brundtland (the former prime minister of Norway) delivered what became commonly known as the Brundtland Report — Our Common Future, for the World Commission on Environment and Development — as requested by the United Nations General Assembly.
The team, of which she was the chair, included members from at least 22 countries. It is interesting to note that these two Scandinavian countries have produced two such forward-thinking people — albeit two generations apart.
In the early 1960s, one brilliant mind stated: “A rising tide lifts all boats” (erroneously attributed to JFK). By the same token, rising greenhouse gas (GHG) levels harm all people, animals and plants in the world. What can we, as individuals and a nation, do to mitigate this global climate crisis?
Following, in very broad strokes, is a plan of how Canada can graduate from a fossil fuel economy to a renewable and sustainable one.
Some people (especially those in the fossil fuel industry) would say that — because of the COVID-19 crisis — now is not the time to be introducing such new measures into our economy. On the contrary, because of the slowdown in the Canadian and world economies and the reduced demand for fossil fuel products, now is the perfect time to change our basic energy generation model.
We all know that the fossil fuel industry is highly subsidized by us — the taxpayers — through our federal and provincial governments. But nobody seems to know the magnitude of these subsidies (or at least, they won't tell us). They appear to amount to billions of dollars! What would happen if these subsidies were redirected into “green” and renewable energy projects? The ultimate outcome would probably be the creation of many more highly skilled jobs than would be lost by the redirection of funds away from the fossil fuel sector. It would also result in a much cleaner biosphere.
As I see it, there are three (or four) major obstacles to converting our economy from the FF to the renewable sector:
1. As the fossil fuel sector has been subsidized for many years, it has momentum driving it forward at a great rate;
2. No government (so far) has had the political will to start the conversation — let alone the conversion — from fossil fuel jobs to the new, green economy. This is true mainly because this initiative would not bear fruit until long after its initiators have left politics;
3. The fossil fuel industry has so much economic and political power that it will take a huge grassroots effort to deflect its path onto a new course;
4.The worldwide COVID crisis. There is obviously going to be major pushback from the fossil fuel industry and those governments and individuals who espouse this fossil fuel-driven industrial philosophy. However, once started, we must stick to our guns and see it through to its final conclusion.
Granted, if Canada were the only country to go this route, we would not be competitive in the short term, but I feel that as soon as one country shows leadership in this field, others will inevitably follow. Admittedly, this isn’t the only GHG reduction initiative we should undertake, but it is one that can start this paradigm shift relatively quickly.
The generally agreed-upon critical date for stabilizing (and reducing) the generation of GHGs is 2030 — less than 10 years from now. There are probably many ways of carrying out this conversion. But, so we don't destabilize our economy any more than COVID-19 has, I’d advocate the following strategy:
Reduce the fossil fuel industry subsidies by 20 per cent per year for five years. Direct 100 per cent of these funds to sustainable energy projects immediately. An additional advantage of this strategy is that each time funds are directed to innovative, sustainable technologies, it will attract other funds (both nationally and internationally), thereby doubling or tripling the funds available.
To negate the necessity of creating a new bureaucracy to administer this plan, convert existing staff from the fossil fuel and energy sectors to its implementation and administration.
The fact that many government staff have already switched to work on administering the COVID-19 program proves that we can redirect government staff to other projects.
Admittedly, this conversion will be a thankless task — in the short term, any government that implements this plan will become the “most reviled” government to the Fossil Fools, provinces, and parties who deny climate change. But in 20 or 30 years, it will be described as the “most revered” and enlightened government ever — by your children and grandchildren.
How will we persuade the Canadian federal and provincial governments to legislate this redirection of subsidies from fossil fuel industry to renewable projects? It will take an all-party agreement to implement this plan; everyone must be on board.
We must take a “Manhattan Project” approach, as employed during the Second World War. We could call it the Canada Climate Battle Plan (or CCBP). Whereas the Manhattan Project (to build the atomic bomb) was the most secret project in the world during the Second World War (of necessity), the CCBP must be the most open and transparent enterprise in Canadian history — as everyone in Canada will have a stake in its outcome.
We need a plan that will put us on the road to converting our economy away from fossil fuel consumption, and towards a sustainable, green economy. We will have to set milestone targets and report on our progress towards them at least twice a year.
Now obviously, this cannot happen overnight, so it will have to be phased in over the next five years, as noted earlier. It will take upwards of a year just to set up a task force to organize and implement the plan and to retrain workers.
Setting up this task force is only the beginning; hundreds, if not thousands, of details will have to be worked out. It should be led by a forward-thinking group (say, three individuals) who’d have no personal conflicts of interest in its implementation. I can think of several Canadian visionaries who’d fit this bill: John Ralston Saul, Naomi Klein, Margaret MacMillan and Frank McKenna; I’m sure you can add many more potential names to this list.
One way to get buy-in to this enterprise from all Canadian citizens would be to emulate a European initiative. In Denmark (and several other European countries), cities, towns and villages are co-owners of the local energy systems. These include electricity (wind turbines, photovoltaic arrays, biomass enterprises) and heating (district heating), so everyone has a stake in producing the “greenest” energy possible — at the lowest price.
All stakeholders will pay the lowest price for energy and, if there are any dividends, they will share equally in their proceeds.
The question now facing us is, “How can we implement this climate crisis task force?” With a relatively newly-elected minority government, we have a chance to start the process.
We can’t use the excuse that Canada produces such a small fraction (less than two per cent) of the world’s GHGs, and that reducing our emissions won’t make any difference to the global picture. If everyone uses this excuse (and many countries and individuals have), nothing will ever get done.
One country has to be the first to enact this type of legislation — and there is no reason why Canada cannot be that country! If we set the example — to prove that it can be done — then other like-minded countries will follow suit. It's up to us to convince our government members at the federal and provincial levels to get us started on the right track to tackle this genuine climate crisis.
Einar Christensen lives in Halifax.
