this post was submitted on 10 Dec 2024
9 points (76.5% liked)

Canada

7307 readers
611 users here now

What's going on Canada?



Related Communities


🍁 Meta


🗺️ Provinces / Territories


🏙️ Cities / Local Communities

Sorted alphabetically by city name.


🏒 SportsHockey

Football (NFL): incomplete

Football (CFL): incomplete

Baseball

Basketball

Soccer


💻 Schools / Universities

Sorted by province, then by total full-time enrolment.


💵 Finance, Shopping, Sales


🗣️ Politics


🍁 Social / Culture


Rules

  1. Keep the original title when submitting an article. You can put your own commentary in the body of the post or in the comment section.

Reminder that the rules for lemmy.ca also apply here. See the sidebar on the homepage: lemmy.ca


founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Laurie Adkin, a professor emerita of political science at the University of Alberta, told The Maple that she regards Trudeau’s performance on climate as a “crushing disappointment.” “The idea is just to keep the economy running as it normally does, without there being any substantial cost to capitalists,” said Adkin. “I think it’s pretty clear that this is unsustainable, both socially and environmentally.”

In his November 2024 report, Environment Commissioner Jerry DeMarco revealed that Canada has only reduced CO2 emissions by seven per cent since 2005, meaning the government has “only six years left to do essentially 20 or 30 years worth of reductions.”

Mere months before introducing the carbon tax legislation, Trudeau purchased the Trans Mountain Pipeline expansion project (TMX) from Kinder Morgan for $4.5 billion after the company threatened to back away from the project. By the time the expansion opened in May 2024, nearly tripling the amount of tar sands bitumen shipped to the B.C. Lower Mainland for export, its price tag had increased to $34 billion.

Trudeau’s support for ongoing fossil fuel expansion, Mertins-Kirkwood added, reflects a “knot that the government’s trying to tie itself into,” in which it attempts to cut CO2 emissions for domestic consumption while expanding fossil fuel production, displacing the emissions generated from increased production onto other countries. While Canada’s domestic emissions have decreased in recent years, Canada’s National Observer recently reported that emissions from the oil, gas and coal that Canada exports, which aren’t covered by Canada’s emissions reduction commitments, have increased by 58 per cent since 2012. “We are actually fuelling climate change on a global scale through our exports,” said Adkin. “The first thing we should actually be cutting back in terms of a phase out is exports, but that’s not on the agenda.”

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] kbal@fedia.io 5 points 1 month ago

I can't agree that cutting back on exports should've been the first priority. It would've done less good at a higher cost than eliminating domestic fossil fuel consumption, which is how Canada could've had a real impact on on global scale by showing everyone how it's done. I write in the past tense because with the Liberal government having failed to get it done, the political chance to accomplish anything useful in time to prevent the disaster seems to be rapidly approaching zero.