Last month, the Chair of Energy Sector Management at HEC Montréal published its annual report on theState of energy in Quebec, in which we painted a demoralizing portrait of the energy habits of Quebecers. We live in a state of “energy intoxication”, it was concluded, and the trend of rising energy consumption sabotages the hope of achieving our climate objectives.
The consumption of petroleum products is on the rise, cities are spreading out and homes are ever more energy-intensive. Quebecers are buying ever bigger and more fuel-efficient cars. Houses, which are getting bigger and bigger, are scattered around the outskirts of urban centres, and more and more road infrastructure is therefore needed to accommodate this way of life. These are things that we know, that we see, but the results are no less striking. We are doing the exact opposite of what should be done. The irony is that despite everything, we find a way to lull ourselves into illusions.
When the report was released theenergy state, Pierre-Olivier Pineau, holder of the Chair in Energy Sector Management, stressed the urgency of implementing measures that will really encourage Quebecers to reduce their energy consumption, which is downright irresponsible. However, if a 180 degree turn is necessary in our consumption habits, the solutions are much simpler and more user-friendly than our reluctance to apply them would suggest.
At least, this is the proposition supported by the researcher in energy balance, a concise and clear essay published a few weeks ago. The book dissects the contradictions and received ideas that fuel the energy status quo in Quebec, and argues that not only are the solutions for a successful energy transition accessible, but that they would also translate more into improving our quality of life than in painful sacrifices.
The discourse we hold about ourselves in terms of energy transition is based on the fantasy that we are not really big polluters. This mirage, it seems to me, is fueled by a strange combination of hydroelectric pride (our energy is cleaner than elsewhere, they tell ourselves) and a willingness to designate the emerging economies of the global South as the real threat, with their ambition to imitate the western lifestyle. Gold energy balance completely dispels this illusion. For example, the author points out that, even if Quebec stands out for the share of renewable energies it produces, our total energy consumption shows that the dunce’s cap is ours.
The essay also highlights the obvious: it is urgent to tame the notion of limit. Regardless of the technological crutches available to us, we must learn to consume much less energy overall. The proliferation of energy-efficient technologies, explains Pierre-Olivier Pineau very well, has a pernicious “rebound effect”. These have the effect of customs clearance; we mobilize more efficient technologies, but, on the balance sheet, we remain stuck with the same energy inflation. The focus should rather be on research, yes, on energy efficiency, but with a view to considerably reducing our total consumption.
The good news is that, to get there, most of the solutions are already there, very simple and within our reach. The problem is that they are discredited by putting them in the category of unattainable or unrealistic lifestyles.
Just take the issue of transportation. Cycling, says Pierre-Olivier Pineau, is 18 times more energy efficient than transport by private car. However, the promotion of active transportation is constantly bogged down in a discourse claiming that it is out of reach for the majority of people — because they live on the outskirts of the centers, because the urban infrastructures are not adapted.
As it stands, that’s not true. Except that it’s the snake biting its tail: it’s the choices we continue to make in terms of land use planning that produce dependence on the automobile and that disqualify active transportation. We forget to mention that it is up to us to offer citizens the opportunity to make choices that are both more sober and more energy efficient. This is true in terms of transport, but it is just as true in terms of housing, food, leisure…
To learn to desire something other than the destructive way of life that is ours, we must collectively create the conditions favorable to a profound transformation of our ways of living. It is not a question of promoting individual asceticism while leaving the citizens alone to face this responsibility. Contrary to what Minister Pierre Fitzgibbon recently suggested, energy sobriety is not just about encouraging Quebecers to start their dishwashers at midnight.
It is rather a question of making a collective commitment to build cities on a human scale, to promote a less energy-intensive diet, to live in more affordable and more energy-efficient housing. However, Pierre-Olivier Pineau’s book demonstrates it in a brilliant way: everyone would gain from the change and our lives would be generally more pleasant.
Columnist specializing in environmental justice issues, Aurélie Lanctôt is a doctoral candidate in law at McGill University.