(Ottawa) Environment Minister Steven Guilbeault says Canada will not agree to include language calling for a phase-out of all fossil fuels in the final deal at the U.S. climate talks. United Nations this year in Egypt.
Last year, the United Nations conference agreement in Scotland called on countries to move faster to get rid of coal-fired power stations that are not equipped with the technology to capture emissions. It was the first time a COP pact included a reference to reducing any type of fossil fuel use.
India spent the last two weeks of the COP27 negotiations pushing to add oil and gas to this paragraph in this year’s final pact.
The European Union supports the idea as long as it does not weaken the coal language and the United States agrees as long as it applies only to “untreated” oil and gas.
But there was no sign of such language in the draft text of the COP27 pact released on Thursday. The final draft was still being negotiated as the two-week climate talks neared their final day on Friday.
Canada supported coal language last year, but Guilbeault said he was not open to accepting the addition of oil and gas.
In a one-on-one chat in Egypt on Thursday with Caroline Brouillette, national policy manager for Climate Action Network Canada, Guilbeault said Canada is focusing on regulations and policies that reduce carbon emissions. greenhouse gases, such as regulations on how much methane oil and gas producers can emit.
It also focuses on reducing demand for fossil fuels with policies that promote energy conservation alternatives, such as electric vehicles, clean energy, and more efficient buildings.
Likely challenge in court
Minister Guilbeault says that if Canada supports adding an oil and gas phase-out clause, it will provoke a reaction from the provinces, including in court.
Everything we do is challenged in court. (Carbon) pricing has been challenged, our plastic pollution regulations have been challenged, our environmental impact assessment is challenged — either by the provinces, or by companies, or by both. And if we are not on very solid legal ground, we will lose in court and that does not help anyone.
Steven Guilbeault, Federal Minister of the Environment
According to Mr. Guilbeault, Canada has not been challenged for its coal phase-out plans, but it is for almost everything it does in the oil and gas field.
“We have to be very careful about what we do […] so that what we do stands up in court. Otherwise, we are wasting time, and precious time, fighting climate change,” argued Mr. Guilbeault.
Julia Levin, head of the national climate program for the Canadian organization Environmental Defence, called it a disappointing excuse.
“I would say it is clear that the Government of Canada is beholden to fossil fuel lobbyists and puts their interests ahead of the public welfare,” criticized Ms.me Wine.
She added that Canada’s position is odd, given that the agreement would likely have included the same reduction provision as coal. Although M.me Levin does not support carbon capture and storage as a serious solution to reducing emissions, she said even that would be “a clear signal that, according to the United States and others, the age of oil and gas is over.
High demand for decades
The Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers (CAPP), meanwhile, said getting low-emissions oil and natural gas to international markets is critical for its members.
“Given that global demand for natural gas and oil will remain strong for decades, Canada has a role to play in providing secure, low-emissions resources to the global energy supply,” said Lisa Baiton, President and Executive Director of CAPP, in a written statement.
The hope in Egypt is that countries will reach a consensus on action to reduce greenhouse gas emissions enough to make it still realistic to meet the goal of limiting global warming to 1.5. °C.
There is also pressure for an agreement on loss and damage so that the richer countries, which are most responsible for climate change, help the poorer countries which bear the brunt of extreme weather and assume fewer responsibilities.
A fund for loss and damage is also not included in the draft text of the pact. Mr. Guilbealt said earlier this week in an interview with The Canadian Press that Canada supports the idea, but this COP was only the first step towards such a policy.
“We won’t solve it here,” he said. And in fact, the agenda item specifies that we are giving ourselves two years to have this conversation. »
UN Secretary General António Guterres said on Thursday that progress was not enough. “The time for discussing loss and damage financing is over. We need action,” he argued.
He did not directly ask for the inclusion of a fossil fuel phase-out in the final text, but alluded to it.
“The 1.5 goal isn’t just about keeping a goal alive-it’s about keeping people alive,” Guterres said. I see the will to stick to the 1.5 target, but we need to ensure that this commitment is evident in the outcome of COP27. The expansion of fossil fuels is destroying humanity. »