Canada has committed to emission reductions at home of 2.7% below 1990 levels by the year 2020. (Or 20% below 2006 levels by 2020 as the government phrases it). Remember that we committed years ago to 6% below 1990 level target by the year 2012 via the Kyoto Protocol.

I am confident that the government recognizes the scientific advice of achieving 25 to 40% emission reductions globally below 1990 levels by 2020. Yet our target doesn’t seem to match up.

To put this in perspective, Japans statement of a much higher level, -15% by 2020, received a response from Yvo de Boer (general secretary of the UN Convention on Climate Change) of, “For the first time in 2.5 years in this job, I don’t know what to say.”

He continued to say that the emission reduction plans to date leave developed countries “a long, long way from the ambitious reduction scenarios” that scientists say are needed.

In addition, almost all other developed countries are submitting targets more ambitious than Canada. For example: European Union: 20-30%, Australia: 5-25%, United States: 17-24%. Studies show that it is economically feasible for Canada to achieve the 25 to 40% by 2020: this target is ambitious, though certainly possible.

What is it going to take for Canada to gain leadership? Quite possibly the voice of the people. I’ve written my letter to our Minister of Environment. Have you?

Tagged with:
  • Number Crunch: Where Canada’s Emission Targets Stand « It’s Getting Hot In Here

    [...] Continue reading “Number Crunch: Where Canada’s Emission Targets Stand” here&#8230… [...]

  • Julie Erickson

    Hi Zoe -

    Any word on where Canada stands on Annex II obligations? Has their negotiator made any statements about funds for adaptation/tech transfer/REDD?

  • Zoe

    Hi Julie,

    Apologies for a delayed reply.

    Canada did submit new text related to adaptation, technology and mitigation, but those have not been made public.

    Canada committed to provide its “fair share” of financial support for climate action in developing countries.

    New analysis from the Pembina Institute shows that Canada’s contribution would be about 3–4% of the total. Using conservative estimates, Canada’s “fair share” works out to approximately $2–6 billion per year.

    I hope that helps,

  • Franny


    Thank you for all of this excellent tracking. So useful.

    I have a request. Given this statement:

    Studies show that it is economically feasible for Canada to achieve the 25 to 40% by 2020: this target is ambitious, though certainly possible.

    Could you tell us which studies and who conducted them?

    Thank you! Much appreciated!

    Take care,

  • Zoe

    Hi Franny,

    Looks like the links in the post got lost once we transferred to a new website. Sorry about that. The study is from The Pembina Institute. I’ll find the link and post it here when I have it.


  • Slit-leggings at American Apparel and Current Climate Policy in Canada « For Serious?

    [...] The deal was that Canada would reduce its emissions 6% below what they were in 1990, by the time the year 2012 rolled around. It became a commitment known to the world, staring us in the face every day. Regardless, our emissions went up about 25%. This means we’ve committed ourselves to a 30% reduction, while the year 2012 is quickly approaching. So what did we do? We changed our targets. We cut it in half (to 2.7%) and extended the deadline (to the year 2020). See this blog post for details. [...]

More in Canada (161 of 172 articles)