Posted yesterday at 11:00 a.m.
This question comes up in our inboxes almost every time we write about climate change.
It is true that Quebec’s emissions, in absolute terms, are very low. Quebec emits barely 11% of Canada’s emissions, which itself only emits 1.6% of global emissions. Quebecers, collectively, therefore emit less than 0.17% of global emissions.
Should we conclude that we must wash our hands of the climate emergency? No way.
What should concern us are emissions per capita rather than total emissions. Faced with climate change, there is no moral reason for a Quebecer to allow themselves to emit more GHGs and make less effort than a Chinese or an American simply because they live in a less populated country.
Premier François Legault likes to say that Quebec has the best record of the 60 provinces and American states in terms of GHGs per person. It’s…almost true. States such as Massachusetts, New York, Vermont, Maryland and California have comparable, if not lower, per capita emissions than Quebec.
But this two-country comparison offers a very limited picture.
At approximately 9.9 tons of CO equivalent2 per capita, Quebecers emit more GHGs than the inhabitants of highly populated countries such as China (9 tonnes per capita), India (2.5) or Indonesia (3.7).
At 7.6 tonnes per capita, the Europeans are also doing better than us. And they have reduced their emissions by 40% since 1990, compared to barely 3% in Quebec.
The idea here is not to “blame” Quebecers, as we often hear. It is simply a matter of having a fair portrait. It will be said that Quebec is characterized by long distances and a cold climate. It’s true, and it influences our energy consumption and therefore our GHG production.
Another downside to be made comes from trade. The airplanes, aluminum, newsprint or pigs that we export produce GHGs here, but are consumed elsewhere. Conversely, Quebecers consume a number of objects made in China, for example, as well as oil produced elsewhere. In total, it is estimated that if emissions were counted on the basis of consumption rather than production, emissions from Quebec households would be slightly lower than what the official inventory shows.
We can conclude that the balance sheet of Quebecers is, in reality, a little better than what is displayed. But the fact that we export GHGs also means that by modifying our processes, we could reduce the emissions of other countries and therefore play a greater role in the world.
Anyway, regardless of how you calculate, each Quebecer emits much more GHGs than the average Earthling. Keep in mind that if every inhabitant of the Earth polluted as much as we do, the global situation would simply be catastrophic.
The other factor to consider is diplomatic. The major annual UN conferences such as COP27, which will take place in November in Egypt, are vast exercises in negotiation.
To convince the planet’s major emitters to reduce their emissions, we have to show that we are doing the work at home. Otherwise, everyone will stare at each other waiting for the other to move. It is hard to see François Legault challenge Narendra Modi, Prime Minister of India, and ask him to lower his emissions if each Quebecer emits four times more GHGs than an Indian and the province does not improve its balance sheet.
Finally, note that the Kyoto Protocol includes the principle of “common but differentiated responsibilities” with regard to the climate. Developed countries, which have been emitting GHGs into the atmosphere for longer than less advanced economies, have contributed more to the problem. They also have greater ways to tackle it.
Under this principle, the group Climate Action Network Canada calculated last year that to do its “fair share”, Quebec would have to make a reduction of 137 to 168 megatonnes of CO2 by 2030. However, we currently emit around 84 megatons.
This therefore means that we have released so much CO2 into the atmosphere over the decades that our debt to the climate exceeds our annual production.
How to get out? Climate Action Network proposes that we reduce our emissions by 60% by 2030 compared to 1990 levels and make the rest of the effort by helping less developed countries to reduce theirs.
It is a huge contract, probably unattainable given the fact that we have only reduced our emissions by 3% since 1990.
The analysis shows, however, that Quebec is far from doing too much for the climate. And that shifting our responsibilities onto other states is a morally indefensible reflex, which would only encourage inaction by major emitters.