The Canadian government has announced a new target to reduce planet-heating emissions 45-50% from 2005 levels by 2035, despite its official advisors on the Net Zero Advisory Board (NZAB) recommending a 50-55% goal and climate campaigners calling for an 80% cut.
The new target is in addition to an existing goal to cut emissions 40-45% by 2030. Canadian Environment Minister Steven Guilbeault said the 2035 target “keeps us on track to keep the promise to our kids and grandkids that the world we leave behind for them will be safe, sustainable, affordable and prosperous”.
But the NZAB, which the government consulted on the new target, said in a statement on Thursday that “the lower range of the government’s target risks Canada’s ability to stay on track for net-zero emissions”. “Our modelling and analysis showed that targets below 50% will put Canada behind on its legislated objective of net-zero emissions by mid-century,” it added.
The NZAB is made up of nine Canadians, including campaigners, a financier, an electrical engineer, an Indigenous community leader and a climate scientist.
The board warned that “postponing action means requiring even deeper decarbonisation efforts in the future, which could bring higher risks and costs”. “We need a national effort to reach, and ideally surpass, a 50% reduction by 2035 while ensuring climate policies are affordable for Canadians,” it said.
All countries that signed up to the 2015 Paris Agreement are supposed to submit a more ambitious national climate plan – known as a Nationally Determined Contribution (NDC) – to the United Nations by late next year. The Canadian government confirmed that its new 2035 target will be part of its NDC, but the full document will not be published until 2025. A concrete implementation plan to meet the target will be drawn up by December 2029, it added.
International comparisons
The NZAB compared Canada’s 2035 target unfavourably with other similarly wealthy nations like the UK, which recently set a target to cut emissions by 81% between 1990 and 2035 “following the recommendation of its climate advisory group, the Climate Change Committee”. The board added that the EU is expected to choose a 2035 target in a similar range and Japan has recently proposed a 60% reduction target, in order to stay on a pathway to net-zero.
EU should push for global deal to curb solar geoengineering, advisors say
NZAB member Catherine Abreu, who is director of the International Climate Politics Hub, noted that Canada’s target envisions at most a 1% a year decrease in emissions between 2030 and 2035, a pace of reduction she called “frankly pathetic” when the US, UK and EU cut their emissions 3%, 5% and 8% respectively in 2023.
She added that the “incredibly disappointing” target will damage Canada’s global credibility as it “sticks out like a sore thumb amidst the targets that other G7 nations are putting forward”. “It’s painful to see a government that has spent most of the last decade working hard to revolutionise Canadian climate policy put out a target that projects those policies will fail to do what they’re designed to,” she said in a statement.
Oil an obstacle
The Canadian government has been led by Justin Trudeau’s centrist Liberal Party since 2015. In 2019, it implemented a national tax on carbon emissions and is now trying to implement a cap on emissions from the country’s large oil and gas production industry. The carbon price started out at C20 (US$16) a tonne and, under the current government’s plans, will ramp up steadily to C$170 ($134) in 2030.
Despite these measures, emissions have yet to consistently decline in Canada as they have in Europe and the US. This is partly because Canada still produces a lot of oil, a sector mostly under the control of provincial governments, and the production of this fossil fuel creates a lot of emissions. In addition, Canada’s transport emissions have continued to rise, as Canadians opt for bigger, more polluting cars like Sports Utility Vehicles (SUVs).
Why rich countries are “reluctant” on additional JETP coal-to-clean deals
In a statement on the new target, the government claimed it had “successfully bent the emissions curve” through efforts like energy efficiency improvements, decarbonising electricity and the carbon tax. When it came to power in 2015, emissions were on course to increase 9% by 2030, it said, but instead they have fallen slightly already. There were over 314,000 jobs in the environmental and clean technology products sector in 2021, up 6.5% from 2020, it added.
Right-wing backlash
Canada’s carbon tax has been highly contentious and opposed by oil-reliant provinces like Alberta, as well as by the right-wing opposition Conservative Party. With federal elections scheduled for October next year, the Conservatives are leading in the polls and are campaigning by putting the slogan “axe the tax” on billboards and T-shirts.
Reacting to the new 2035 emissions target, Caroline Brouillette, executive director of Climate Action Network Canada, said Trudeau had “chosen to cave” to “belligerent climate deniers”.
She pointed to “oil and gas backed-disinformation campaigns and efforts to roll back progress”. “It has been alarming to see, with some rare exceptions, our politicians engage in a race to the bottom – at a moment when we most need leadership to confront the billionaires profiting from burning our world down,” she added.
(Reporting by Joe Lo; editing by Megan Rowling)
The post Canada ignores official advice in setting much-criticised 2035 emissions target appeared first on Climate Home News.
Canada ignores official advice in setting much-criticised 2035 emissions target
Climate Change
Trump Administration Abandons Fight Against Wind Energy as Clean Energy Output Surges
The clean energy sector is showing resilience despite challenges thrown at it by a hostile White House, a recent report found. A string of legal victories has further dampened the Trump administration’s efforts to halt wind and solar power.
The Trump administration has abandoned its effort to halt wind energy projects across the United States and dropped its challenge to the court ruling that tossed President Donald Trump’s order freezing federal permitting and leasing for wind projects. States that challenged the order hailed the development as one of the most significant legal victories against the Trump White House’s campaign against the energy transition.
Trump Administration Abandons Fight Against Wind Energy as Clean Energy Output Surges
Amid reports that the government could weaken the UK’s electric vehicle (EV) targets, Carbon Brief analysis reveals the nation’s EV drivers are saving more than £1,100 a year in fuel costs, compared with running a petrol car.
Battery EVs (BEVs) are roughly four times more efficient than combustion-engine cars, making them far cheaper to run – particularly since the Iran crisis caused a spike in fossil-fuel prices.
The savings from driving BEVs are also more than three times higher than for “plug-in” hybrids (PHEVs), which evidence shows are mostly driven with their combustion engines.
In total, the more than 2m BEVs, 1m PHEVs and 100,000 electric vans on UK roads are saving drivers around £3bn a year, Carbon Brief’s analysis shows, as illustrated in the figure below.
In addition, these EVs are avoiding the need for nearly 2.5bn litres of fuel and cutting carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions by nearly 7m tonnes each year.
Despite recent news that EVs are now cheaper to buy than petrol cars, as well as having far lower running costs, BBC News says the government is “set to water down” its EV sales targets.
The broadcaster explains that the current goal, under the UK’s “zero-emissions vehicle” (ZEV) mandate, is for 80% of new car sales to be BEVs by 2030.
It says that the government is set to consult on weakening this to between 50% and 70%, following “lobbying” by carmakers and trade unions.
According to the Sunday Times, prime minister Keir Starmer “is understood to have overruled the energy secretary [Ed Miliband] after sustained pressure from industry, the Unite union and Peter Kyle, the business secretary”.
The car industry has consistently claimed there is insufficient demand for BEVs to meet the targets under the ZEV mandate, yet the government says manufacturers have “over-complied” to date. Independent analysts say the industry is on track to continue beating the ZEV mandate goals.
The industry has been able to beat its targets by using a wide range of “flexibilities”, which were introduced after a previous round of lobbying. These allow carmarkers to meet part of their EV targets by selling more efficient combustion cars, such as hybrids and plug-in hybrids.
The ZEV mandate is the single-largest part of the government’s plans to meet its legally binding climate goals over the next decade.
The advisory Climate Change Committee (CCC) previously warned that the extra flexibilities would result in a larger number of hybrids being sold, at the expense of battery EVs.
When it consulted on the ZEV mandate in 2023, the then-Conservative government noted that PHEVs do not deliver the cost and CO2 savings they are advertised with.
It pointed to “dramatic” differences between the performance of PHEVs in test cycles and what they deliver under real-world conditions.
In practice, less than a third of miles driven in PHEVs are fuelled by electricity, with petrol making up the rest. As a result, cost and CO2 savings from BEVs are three times larger than for PHEVs.
The post Analysis: UK’s EV drivers are now saving £1,100 each a year – and £3bn in total appeared first on Carbon Brief.
Analysis: UK’s EV drivers are now saving £1,100 each a year – and £3bn in total
Civil society groups have called for an investigation into the first carbon credits approved under a new UN mechanism, alleging the project is linked to Myanmar’s military junta – which the UN says is guilty of human rights abuses – and has “massively” overstated its climate impact.
The programme, which aims to cut emissions by distributing efficient cookstoves across Myanmar, received approval to issue around 650,000 carbon credits from the Article 6.4 Supervisory Body in February, in a landmark moment for the Paris Agreement’s carbon market. Only two projects have been given the green light by the mechanism’s regulator so far.
But two reports published last week, led by the Global Forest Coalition and Brussels-based NGO Carbon Market Watch, raised serious concerns about the project’s implementation in conflict zones where civilians have faced airstrikes and mass displacement as well as its emission-reduction calculations.
Project continued after military coup
Myanmar has been ravaged by a brutal civil war since the country’s military overthrew the democratically elected government in a coup d’état in February 2021. The military regime has attacked civilian populations, persecuted ethnic minorities and committed widespread sexual violence, among other serious human rights violations, the UN Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in Myanmar said in April.
The cookstove programme started in 2018 under the previous UN-run carbon offsetting scheme – the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) – as a partnership between Myanmar’s Ministry of Natural Resources and Environmental Conservation (MONREC) and the Climate Change Center (CCC), a South Korean NGO, with investment from private South Korean firms.
-
European, island states seek clear future for global roadmap to cut fossil fuels
Some European, small island and other nations argue the forthcoming roadmap should be part of UN climate talks, while Russia has resisted this idea
The project continued operating after the coup. For most of the period between 2021 and 2022 in which the issued credits were generated, MONREC was led by Colonel Khin Maung Yi, who was sanctioned by the European Union in 2021 for supporting the military regime, the Global Forest Coalition report said.
CCC acknowledged engaging with government authorities after the coup but said this “should not be interpreted as political endorsement” of the junta. The South Korean NGO added that abandoning the programme when political circumstances changed “would not necessarily have been the most responsible outcome for the households involved”.
Conflict prevents on the ground verification
The Global Forest Coalition report raised particular concerns about the project’s implementation in Myanmar’s central Dry Zone, including Sagaing Region, an anti-junta resistance stronghold that has been most heavily affected by the conflict and routinely targeted by airstrikes and violent attacks. The region accounts for more than a third of Myanmar’s 3.8 million internally displaced people.
The NGOs said that, in addition to ethical concerns about carbon credits being produced by the military government in an area actively affected by its attacks, this raises questions over the ability to effectively verify the climate integrity of the projects.
Before carbon credits are issued, external auditors need to validate the claims made by project developers and confirm that the emission reductions claimed are correct. This process usually includes site visits to a representative sample of households to check how the improved cookstoves are being used.
But, because of the “volatile political situation” in Myanmar, the auditing team was not able to leave the capital Yangon and could only speak to project participants remotely via Zoom, project documents show.
“Due to ongoing armed conflict on the ground, the data currently used to justify carbon credit issuance in Sagaing by the Burmese military junta is unverifiable and highly likely fraudulent,” said Zaw Tuseng, founder and president of the Myanmar Policy Institute, which contributed to the report, in a written statement. “This demands an immediate suspension of credit transfers until a neutral, conflict-sensitive audit can be conducted.”
“Exceptional circumstances”
CCC told Climate Home News that, although it recognises that on-site verification is “generally preferable, particularly in complex operating environments”, the decision to opt for remote controls was not taken “as a discretionary shortcut, but as an approved alternative under exceptional circumstances”.
The South Korean NGO added that it reviewed the feasibility of the project at community level “on an ongoing basis” and it “did not identify conflict-related incidents that directly affected project implementation activities in participating communities during the monitoring period”.
A spokesperson for the UN climate change body told Climate Home News that, when site access is not possible, the UN carbon credit mechanism allows for “alternative verification approaches while still maintaining conservative assumptions and environmental integrity safeguards”. “These provisions ensure that crediting can only proceed where evidence is reliable,” they added.
Contested methodology
Carbon markets are seen as an important channel to raise money to help low-income communities in developing countries switch to less polluting cooking methods, both reducing CO2 emissions and improving air quality. But several cookstove offsetting projects have faced criticism from researchers and campaigners who argue that climate benefits are often exaggerated and weak monitoring can undermine claims of real emission reductions.
The project in Myanmar uses a contested methodology developed under the earlier Kyoto Protocol that was rejected last year by The Integrity Council for the Voluntary Carbon Market (ICVCM), a watchdog that issues quality labels to carbon credit types, because it found it “insufficiently rigorous”.
EU carbon credits could supercharge world’s clean cooking push, France says
After transitioning from the CDM to the new mechanism, the project was required to apply “more conservative” assumptions to calculate emission reductions, which resulted in 40% fewer credits being issued, according to the UN climate change body.
“The result is consistent with environmental integrity requirements and ensures that each credited tonne genuinely represents a tonne reduced and contributes to the goals of the Paris Agreement,” Mkhuthazi Steleki, the South African chair of the Article 6.4 Supervisory Body, which oversees the mechanism, said in February.
Too many credits issued
But Carbon Market Watch claimed in a second report last week that, despite the adjustment, the project is still likely to issue seven times more credits than its real climate impact justifies, comparing its calculations with values from peer-reviewed scientific literature.
The biggest driver of the credit inflation, the group said, is the failure to account for “stacking” – the widespread practice of households using multiple stoves at the same time, including more polluting ones the project does not monitor.
Peer-reviewed science considers a stacking rate of 68% a conservative assumption, but the methodology used by the Myanmar programme makes no allowance for it at all, the report said.
CCC disputed those findings. In a written response to Climate Home News, it said the project was developed under methodologies approved within the UN climate framework and that external recalculations by researchers are not “determinative of the level of crediting achieved”.
The credits are expected to be used primarily by major South Korean polluters to meet obligations under the country’s emissions trading system – a move that will also enable the government to count those units toward emissions reduction targets in its nationally determined contribution (NDC), the UN climate body told Climate Home News.
Myanmar will use the remaining credits to achieve in part the goals of its own national climate plan under the Paris Agreement.
“Over-crediting, at any magnitude, cannot be compatible with the climate ambition of a world striving to limit global warming to 1.5ºC,” said Isa Mulder, an expert at Carbon Market Watch.
The post UN’s first Paris Agreement carbon credits face human rights and climate concerns appeared first on Climate Home News.
UN’s first Paris Agreement carbon credits face human rights and climate concerns
-
Climate Change10 months ago
Guest post: Why China is still building new coal – and when it might stop
-
Greenhouse Gases10 months ago
Guest post: Why China is still building new coal – and when it might stop
-
Greenhouse Gases2 years ago嘉宾来稿：满足中国增长的用电需求 光伏加储能“比新建煤电更实惠”
-
Climate Change2 years ago嘉宾来稿：满足中国增长的用电需求 光伏加储能“比新建煤电更实惠”
-
Climate Change2 years ago
Bill Discounting Climate Change in Florida’s Energy Policy Awaits DeSantis’ Approval
-
Renewable Energy8 months agoSending Progressive Philanthropist George Soros to Prison?
-
Carbon Footprint2 years agoUS SEC’s Climate Disclosure Rules Spur Renewed Interest in Carbon Credits
-
Greenhouse Gases11 months ago
嘉宾来稿：探究火山喷发如何影响气候预测