by Ashley Lin, Breakthrough Generation Fellow

-------
Canada is beginning a three-day round of talks between the nation's premiers addressing climate change. In an op-ed piece in today's Ottawa Times, Michael Shellenberger and Ted Nordhaus also presented their stance on how Canada can, and should, deal with climate change. Their insight can hopefully shed some light on how Canada can not only solve climate change, but become a global leader.

The central message of the opinion piece frames an ideal approach to climate change as one that looks beyond simply the issue of global warming to the larger problem of a growing population's energy needs. While cap-and-trade may reduce emissions within the country, the rising energy usage of people in China and India will more than make up for that reduction. By investing in clean technology, Canada will not only reduce its own greenhouse gas emissions, it will make it possible for developing nations to emit less while continuing on the road to prosperity.

Shellenberger and Nordhaus write:

Too often nations ask how they can reduce their own emissions without taking into consideration the larger picture of energy modernization and technology innovation. Were Canada to halt all emissions tomorrow it would have zero impact on climate change.

To get a sense of the scale of the challenge, consider that, this year, the increase of China's emissions will be larger than Canada's total emissions. Given this, Canada's focus should be on making clean energy technologies cheap, so that they could be picked up by fast-developing nations such as China.

The difficulties in concentrating on a simply regulatory framework have already surfaced as the talks geared towards a climate-change plan began between the nation's 13 premiers today. Alberta and Saskatchewan dashed hopes for a unified cap-and-trade system at the outset, placing themselves firmly against British Columbia and Manitoba, which have already adopted cap-and-trade programs. Ontario and Quebec have similarly announced intentions to begin cap-and-trade by 2010.

In looking at British Columbia's cap-and-trade program, Shellenberger and Nordhaus note that the $10 per ton price on carbon will not drive any changes in behavior or innovation. The money generated from the carbon price goes towards cutting taxes in other areas, a practice that in other countries has raised emissions levels instead of curbing them.

Both Norway and Denmark established carbon taxes in the 1990s. But while Norway uses its revenues for government spending, Denmark earmarks its carbon tax revenues for clean energy, such as wind power, which has become a vibrant national industry. As a consequence, Norway's emissions climbed 43 per cent while Denmark's declined 15 per cent.

In order to reduce its emissions on a national and global scale, Canada should focus on making clean energy cheap. The first steps have already been taken by some of the very oil interests seen as hampering efforts to tackle climate change. Alberta premier Ed Stelmach and Saskatchewan premier Brad Wall see carbon capture and storage (CCS) as a better way to mitigate climate change than imposing a carbon price. Alberta, the number one emitter of GHG in the country due to its oil sand resources, has invested $2 billion into CCS. Saskatchewan's own CCS project claims to have saved 10 million tons of carbon dioxide. While these provinces are powerfully motivated by oil riches, their actions in developing technology that could be used in countries like China are more likely to have an actual impact on global carbon emissions than just a price on carbon. And if Alberta can significantly reduce its emissions with CCS, they would have more incentive to adopt a cap-and-trade system later on.

In their opinion piece, Michael Shellenberger and Ted Nordhaus outline four courses of action Canada should embark upon to become a global leader in reducing carbon emissions. But it really boils down to one long sentence: By concentrating on the larger global picture, Canada should recognize that the best way to make clean energy cheaper is with technological advances and not by raising energy prices. To do this, revenues raised by carbon taxes should be directed towards research, development, and deployment of new technology, with a panel of experts to oversee the necessary investments.