Canada vs. United States: How do they Compare?
Posted on 11. Jun, 2009 by Zoë Caron in Adopt a Negotiator, Canada, Uncategorized
Rumor in the halls is that Canada is waiting in the wings to see what emission reduction targets the United States puts on the table. The following table suggests that perhaps the US is not influencing Canada as rumor suggests – unfortunately. In summary, the United States is far ahead of Canada on targets and policies.
Have a look. The table speaks for itself.
Provided by Matthew Bramley of The Pembina Institute.
Subtext: According to the World Resources Institute, the Waxman-Markey Bill would produce a reduction in net US emissions (taking account of investments in international reductions) to 17-23% below the 1990 level by 2020. The biggest reason why the net effect is so much bigger than the cap-and-trade system alone is the investment in Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Degradation (REDD) – which is supposed to achieve reductions worth about 12% of 1990 emissions.
I think you are confused! Check this line:
“The ACESA’s proposed pollution caps result in reductions of total GHG emissions of 15 percent below 2005 levels by 2020. This is less than the 17 percent reduction from 2005 levels that the Waxman Markey Discussion Draft as released would have achieved. (Click the chart for a high-resolution version.)”
It is not 17% from 1990 levels! It is 17% from 2005 levels! It is really like 4-6% from 1990 levels!
Hi Luis,
I’m fairly certain that line is referring to the cap-and-trade system only, not the complementary measures, which apply internationally and to the portion of domestic emissions that fall outside the cap. The WRI analysis gives all the details.
Let me know what you think of the WRI doc if you get the chance to read it!
Thanks for your comment,
Zoë
Hi Zoe,
Yes, I had checked out the WRI doc before and think that it provides good analysis. I realize that if you include all complementary measures you could get to a 17-19 pct reduction by 1990 levels. However, this means that most of the heavy lifting is done by these complementary measures. Furthermore, as it currently stands in the Waxman-Markey bill, polluters will get 2 billion offsets (this is a huge figure!) This by itself may blow up the cap and make it meaningless!
It will be really hard to assure the additionality of the offsets because if you look at CDM projects (Waxman-Markey uses a regulatory system that is similar to CDM), you find that 75%+ of them did not provide additional reductions. And, in the worst case scenario (perhaps likely scenario), if US polluters use all of their allowable offset credits, they will continue with business as usual and emissions will not deep below 2005 levels till 2026!
I hope this does not discourage you from continuing to track the Canadian delegation and advocating for stronger commitments from your government. My point is that the US still has a lot of work to do!
Keep up the good work! I’ll continue to follow your posts!
Cheers,
Luis
Yes – I completely agree that there are major weak elements, and that the complimentary parts make up for most of that number.
The sad part is that it is still farther than the Canadian government is currently willing to go.
Thanks for reading,
Zoe
okayy, i may be an american and i may be young but at least the details will be disscussed right? its better later than never… i mean seriously i dont understand why people down our neighbors. what have they done to us……..
Hi Michelle,
I am not attempting to put any one or any country down. The point of this post is to show that the US is doing much more than Canada in terms of acting on climate change. This is important because the Canadian government continues to say that it will follow the lead of the US government, so that the policies of both countries can be harmonized. This table shows that, at this point in time, Canada still has a far way to go.
Thanks so much for reading,
Zoe