Offsetters
Investor Relations|Careers|Contact Us
Offsetters About Us Advisory Services Project Services Education
Our Team Our Partners Frequently Asked Questions Current News
  • Contact us
    Archive
    2020
    June
    2019
    DecemberNovemberSeptember
    2018
    DecemberOctoberJulyJune
    2017
    NovemberJulyJuneMarch
    2016
    SeptemberAugustFebruary
    2015
    DecemberNovemberOctoberSeptemberJulyAprilMarchFebruaryJanuary
    2014
    OctoberSeptemberAprilMarchFebruaryJanuary
    2013
    DecemberNovemberOctoberSeptemberAugustJulyJuneMayAprilMarchFebruaryJanuary
    2012
    DecemberNovemberOctoberSeptemberAugustJulyJuneMayAprilMarchFebruaryJanuary
    2011
    DecemberNovemberOctoberSeptemberAugustJulyJuneMayAprilMarchFebruaryJanuary
    2010
    DecemberNovemberOctoberSeptemberAugustJulyJuneAprilMarchFebruaryJanuary
    2009
    DecemberNovemberOctoberSeptemberAugustJulyJuneMayAprilMarchFebruary
    2008
    DecemberNovemberSeptemberAugustJulyJuneApril
    Home» About Us» Current News» 2011

    Flawed figures, Squandered Leadership

    By James Tansey

    The climate conference in Durban could have had a very different outcome, but instead, the Federal Government’s withdrawal from the Kyoto protocol not only damaged Canada’s reputation internationally, it also squandered an opportunity to give climate policy new momentum at a time when no other country has the same capacity to lead.

    Kyoto is flawed; it is cumbersome, has limited oversight and even if it had been implemented by the signatories, the targets are lower than scientists believe is necessary to reduce climate change. But it was the only serious attempt to negotiate a binding agreement among the world’s largest emitters. Canada’s capacity to lead on climate policy is a function of the fact that we have weathered the financial crisis better than any other country and that high fuel prices make the extraction of our natural resources, including natural gas and the oil sands, financially viable. But most importantly, the Federal government’s estimates of the financial cost of compliance with Kyoto are wrong.

    Countries that won’t meet their obligations under Kyoto through emissions reductions alone have the option of buying reductions from developing countries through the Clean Development Mechanism, in the form of offsets. Minister Peter Kent suggested that, in this scenario, the cost of complying with Kyoto would have been $13.6bn in total, or $1600 per family in Canada (or $400 per person), although it’s hard to understand where these figures come from. Canada must purchase 700 million tonnes of CO2, with the average price, according to Kent, at $19 per tonne. However, at current prices in the global carbon markets (roughly $6 per tonne), Kyoto compliance could cost less than $4.2bn a year nationally or about $120 per Canadian citizen.

    If you treat these figures as an investment in renewable energy and energy efficiency projects, or in the conservation of forests, then it is hard to believe that many people would object. In a recent Environics poll, 74% of Canadians agreed that CO2 emissions should be regulated even if that results in higher energy prices, and support for other climate policies, such as a carbon tax is at an all time high with almost 6 in 10 people in favour.

    We’ve benefited enormously from the steady economic growth over the last two decades that has also led to an increase in our emissions. Rather than reducing greenhouse gases by 5.2% from 1990 levels, as outlined in Kyoto, Canada’s emissions have grown by 30%, roughly 162 million tonnes. In 1990, the starting year for Kyoto, our GDP was $583bn and in 1997, when Canada adopted Kyoto, GDP was $614bn. Today, Canada’s GDP is currently $1.785 trillion; expansion of the energy sector has been a major driver of the Canadian economy over that period. If the Federal government’s exaggerated $1600 per household cost of Kyoto is a one time expense against a tripling in the size of the economy, it starts to look quite reasonable.

    If Canada had approached the international negotiations with an attitude of leadership and responsibility, it would have made a dramatic difference in Durban. On the other side of the table, even China indicated a willingness to participate in negotiations about targets, and has already made progress in the development of pilot cap and trade programs in select provinces and cities.

    If Canada had taken a different approach in Durban, it might not have saved the Kyoto Accord but it would have re-established Canada as a global leader that is willing to step up and demonstrate a responsible and affordable commitment to tackling climate change. Outside of action by Provinces like Quebec, Ontario and British Columbia, Canada’s position on climate policy is an international embarrassment.

  • Complete Offsetters Media Kit

    Download PDF

    Offsetters Investor Presentation

    Download PDF

    OffsettersOffsetters

    • Offsetters is hiring a Junior Analyst for our Advisory Services Department. Details here: https://t.co/VRVWOjfVCh… https://t.co/HPts22qoQj
    • Happy Holidays from Offsetters https://t.co/GvSpYxUQ2K
    • Burger King Dips Its Toe Into the Circular Economy: https://t.co/xBWbsZ6oc3 https://t.co/xJnLGaOoH8
    • Looking for the perfect holiday gift for clients or employees? @HemlockPrinters Wild World Gift Wrap is printed 100… https://t.co/Etjy5TyyKA
    • We're hiring a Client Engagement Administrator. Check out our site for more information: https://t.co/VRVWOjfVCh… https://t.co/Qjdaf3YBTw

Get the latest updates from Offsetters.

Sitemap|Privacy|Terms
RSS Twitter Facebook Youtube Vancouver 2010 Official Supplier