There are two ways to read the latest report from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). The first point of view, optimistic, is that it is still possible to limit global warming to 1.5°C – the most demanding objective of the Paris Agreement – and that humanity has the means and knowledge to achieve it. The other way of looking at it is that the shift will be so big that most countries and their citizens are unlikely to agree to submit to the drastic measures that are needed.
If we want to achieve the objective of limiting the rise in temperatures to 1.5°C since the pre-industrial era, global greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, which are increasing despite the commitments of the countries that have signed the the Paris Agreement, must peak within three years, and then decrease by 43% by 2030 compared to the level of 2019, warns the IPCC.
Relentless, the scientific data compiled by the IPCC show that the States’ commitments lead, not to a reduction, but to a 14% increase in emissions by the end of the decade. If maintained, the current trajectory leads to a rise in average temperatures of 2.7°C by the end of the century, a mark that would simply be catastrophic.
In its latest report, the IPCC goes beyond findings and projections to describe the various means that must be taken to avoid the worst. These means imply a profound change in lifestyles within developed countries. It is not simply a question of swapping your gas-powered car for an electric vehicle, a change on which the main part of the Legault government’s Plan for a Green Economy is currently based.
Scientists advocate for behavioral changes aimed at decreasing energy and resource consumption. They call for a change in diet to reduce the consumption of foods of animal origin. We must reduce individual trips by car and promote public transport, as well as active transport on foot or by bike. This means rethinking our towns and villages, reviewing our land use planning practices and countering urban sprawl, which in Quebec—as we know—is still on the rise.
While China and India intend to build new coal-fired power plants, the IPCC estimates that this sector must be abandoned by 2050. Similarly, oil consumption must fall by 60% and that of gas by 70% . Fossil fuels will have to be replaced by renewable sources such as solar, wind and possibly hydrogen. Significant energy savings will have to be achieved. Energy efficiency, advanced design of new buildings and renovation of old buildings are on the menu.
When the report was published, the Minister of the Environment and the Fight Against Climate Change, Benoit Charette, informed us that Quebec did not intend to review its target of a 37.5% reduction by 2030. Either. Quebecers emit twice as many GHGs per capita as the rest of North America. But the policy of the foot on the brake is not appropriate. The CAQ government should be more enterprising in terms of the climate: the measures it has adopted to date only account for half of the objective it has set itself. That Quebec is responsible for less than 0.2% of GHG emissions in the world is not a reason for doing nothing. Thanks to its hydroelectric resources, our State is in an enviable situation, but it also has a duty to set an example. Anyway, the future is in the development of a green economy: the Legault government must not camp in a retrograde posture.
On the side of the federal government, it’s the big gap. At the time of publication of the report, the Minister of Environment and Climate Change, Steven Guilbeault, mentioned the possibility of increasing Canadian production of hydrocarbons, natural resources being under provincial jurisdiction, he claims. As if Ottawa, which continues to subsidize the industry, was totally powerless.
This oil will be extracted by emitting fewer GHGs than in the past, says Mr. Guilbeault. However, this “cleaner” oil will produce as much of it as before when it is consumed.
In fact, Steven Guilbeault is a worthy minister in a government of an oil state which, ignoring the warnings of the IPCC, intends to continue producing hydrocarbons again and again. This typical behavior does not bode well for achieving the goal of the Paris Agreement.