Two weeks ago, I was writing about the Alberta election campaign unfolding against the backdrop of wildfires. I remarked, in summary, that it was surreal that we could focus the political debate on something other than climate change when the smoke was affecting the quality of the air as far away as Edmonton and Calgary. It was explained, of course, but it was not justified.
But the phenomenon of political denial in the face of environmental disasters is far from exotic or uniquely Albertan. Arriving in Ottawa early Tuesday morning was, to be honest, quite a shock. With wildfires in the area, smoke engulfed the city. If Environment Canada usually measures air quality on a scale of 1 to 10, experts in the capital captured the equivalent of a 14 during the morning. The messages to the population, they spoke of a vague “11 +”. In other words, even our science communication tools should be updated so that we can properly understand the magnitude of the situation.
Each person reacts differently to such a concentration of smoke in the air. While some are little affected, colleagues have spoken of headaches and more difficult breathing. After an hour in town, my throat was sore. Coming back to Montreal in the evening, I felt like I had spent the day in the smoking section of a restaurant from yesteryear. It is not normal. This is absolutely not normal. For people with respiratory diseases, this is especially dangerous. And yet, each continued on his way. business as usualon orange sky background.
Canada has been burning for over a month now, region by region. Alberta, Ontario, Quebec, the Atlantic. Since the beginning, these fires have been the subject of significant international media coverage. I will say it: more important than in Canada itself.
Except for a few days. The situation now takes on more importance, politically speaking. The lack of firefighters is starting to be embarrassing, our elected officials must now count on the help of the French and the Americans. The Red Cross is actively collecting donations for the evacuees. Not only did the smoke engulf Ottawa, but the effect of the pollution was also felt in the major cities of the center of the country such as Montreal, Kingston and Toronto. It smelled burnt all the way to New York on Wednesday. And when the big central cities are affected by a problem, this problem ceases, doesn’t it, to be “regional”.
Suddenly, we begin to pronounce, with lip service, the words “climate adaptation”. This expression, which is still most often absent from our political debates, reminds us that, even if we must accelerate efforts to slow down climate change, their effects are already affecting us. We absolutely must stop being surprised by their consequences, with each ice storm, each flood, each crisis of forest fires (and I am only talking about this spring), and start investing seriously in the resilience of our communities.
This week, the opposition parties, in the National Assembly, announced that they wanted to look into the question. It is high time to get there. Because more frequent extreme weather events are necessarily costly, environmentally, economically, humanly. But they are even more expensive when faced with ill-prepared.
The municipalities, “creatures of the provinces” in our political system, need assistance to build sewer systems capable of accommodating torrential rains, protecting the banks against possible flooding, multiplying green spaces to reduce the effects of heat waves. We need air conditioning in schools, hospitals, seniors’ residences. Municipal by-laws that limit urban sprawl in wetlands. And many more.
With the El Niño phenomenon beginning, summer promises to be hot. We know that periods of extreme heat kill, particularly the oldest, the most vulnerable and the poorest. So what do we do ? Are we surprised, again, by the next wave of deadly heat? Are we getting ready to groan (“Ah yeah, climate change, again, oh la la”)? Or are we preparing?
Little news, in closing. A study published on Tuesday found that the Arctic Ocean could be ice-free in summer as early as 2030, a decade earlier than previously predicted by the IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change). And once the Arctic melts, the chain of climate effects will be irreversible — unless drastic actions are taken to reduce our global emissions. Draconian actions that do not seem “realistic” in the eyes of the techno-optimists who currently govern us.
Except that the political definition of “realistic” and “achievable”, in the end, depends on all of us. It can become unthinkable for a leader not to act seriously to counter climate change and adapt to their reality – when public opinion makes him feel it.
From the Côte-Nord to Abitibi via Saguenay, Haute-Mauricie and Outaouais, from Chibougamau to Ottawa via Montreal, you only need to have breathed outside this week to have the environment in mind. Could it be that behind the smell of burnt wood one can also smell something like awareness in the air?
Anthropologist, Emilie Nicolas is a columnist for Le Devoir and Liberation. She hosts the Détours podcast for Canadaland.