In April, the Mining Association of Canada (MAC) released the position paper Principles for Climate Change Policy Design. MAC’s membership includes many of Canada’s prominent mining companies and suppliers. For more information, please visit www.mining.ca.
Climate change is a global issue that requires a global solution. MAC and its members offer the following principles for consideration:
1. Establish a broad-based carbon price
Why is this principle needed? To ensure that the long-term cost of reducing greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions achieves Canada’s objectives, while keeping sustainable and competitive economic growth. Any policy design must cover the broadest possible range of carbon emission activities to maximize effectiveness.
Why is a clear price signal the best way forward? A broad-based carbon price is the most effective and efficient way to influence the investment and operating decisions that drive real emission reductions and innovation from all sectors of an economy. Regardless of which market-based mechanism (or suite of mechanisms) is chosen, a predictable long-term carbon price supports innovation and technology development, keeps economic competitiveness and provides compliance flexibility.
What would implementing this principle mean? Developing and implementing a comprehensive approach that considers: all GHG emissions; all options for sequestration; all policy mechanisms; and seeking synchronized international and regional and national government policies and regulations. An initial, critical part is to ensure national plans to lower GHG emissions are pursued in a way that does not target selected parts of an economy. Any plans should be allocated across all relevant sectors and activities. Consideration should be on the sectors and regions where the most cost-effective, low-carbon technologies or abatement options are possible.
2. Apply any climate change policy-related revenues to manage the transition toward a lower carbon future, including climate adaptation
Why is this principle needed? To emphasize that the objective of climate change policy measures should be to address climate change-related challenges (i.e., progressively reducing emissions). These measures should be revenue neutral.
What would implementing this principle mean? There are two implications of applying this principle to climate change policy-related revenues. Emission reduction policies and measures provide new revenues for governments. Such revenues should be directed toward two areas: developing lower carbon technologies and fuels, and energy and fuel efficiency, with investment in research and technology improvements in the resource sector; and helping “exposed” economic sectors and populations adapt to the costs associated with a carbon-limited future.
3. Address competitiveness and carbon leakage concerns across all sectors
Why is this principle needed? Policies and programs need to address competitiveness concerns by ensuring there are no unintended consequences for emission-intensive and trade-exposed sectors. Carbon policy should balance the competitiveness of exposed sectors and recognize that disparate international, national and regional climate change policies could create carbon leakage: where mitigation efforts achieved in one sector or jurisdiction lead to emission increases in another. The right policy balance should prevent a decline in investment, employment and tax revenues, along with potential distortion of trade flows.
What would implementing this principle mean? Governments must implement safeguards to ensure that carbon costs borne by trade-exposed sectors keep them competitive in the transition towards a lower carbon economy. Any climate change regulation should comply with international trade treaties to which Canada is a signatory, such as North American Free Trade Agreement and World Trade Organization rules and principles.
4. Be predictable, flexible and sensitive to changing conditions
Why is this principle needed? Any climate change policy should be both flexible and sensitive to changing economic conditions and geography. Clarity of policy design is essential to achieve environmental goals, minimize the impact on consumers and suppliers, and maintain economic competitiveness.
What would implementing this principle mean? Transition to a lower carbon economy would be achieved through a policy framework that provides sufficient time, consistency and clarity for consumers and industry to adapt, and makes the necessary investments to maintain competitiveness — with a rate of transition that meets objectives.
5. Be simple, complementary and effective
Why is this principle needed? In the pan-Canadian context, policies and regulations must lead to a national climate change management regime that complements provincial climate change schemes, avoids duplication and is simple to understand and administer; considers the aggregate cost burdens placed on industry; is informed by and balanced with other environmental policy areas, including land, water and air; and delivers on the environmental objective of reducing GHG emissions so that associated costs do not outweigh the benefits.
What would implementing this principle mean? Policy would be simple, complementary or, where appropriate, equivalent with new and existing climate regimes. Policy would also harmonize jurisdictions with a consistent approach to monitoring, verification, reporting and administration. Most importantly, balanced policies and regulations should provide maximum clarity to incent the behaviours needed to lower GHG emissions.
6. Support investments in developing and implementating technologies that lower emissions
Why is this principle needed? It is clear from all credible scenarios that addressing climate change will require a systematic transition to both infrastructure and technology over several decades. Capital investments to develop lower emission energy — including fuel-efficient power generation — require certainty from becoming stranded assets in the future. Policies should not limit energy technology choices, unfairly discriminate against energy choices, or establish technical barriers to trade or market entry. Policies should support the efforts of all stakeholders to emphasize energy and fuel efficiency, and advance low-cost, low-emission, stable and highly reliable forms of power generation.
What would implementing this principle mean? Governments would implement policies that create public-private investment partnerships to cultivate appropriate technologies and practices, including nuclear, natural gas cogeneration, hydrological, renewable, and other power generation sources and technologies. Governments would implement policies to encourage individual operations to transition to more energy and fuel-efficient technologies.
7. Recognize early action
Why is this principle needed? Acknowledging that some companies have proactively reduced their climate footprints, and that some provincial jurisdictions in Canada have already established climate change mitigation regimes, it must be recognized that: many early actors have undertaken investments and measures to reduce GHG emissions; and that the incremental cost of lowering carbon emissions disadvantages early actors, compared with firms just embarking on mitigation measures.
What would implementating this principle mean? Any new climate change policy should recognize that competitiveness impacts early actors more severely than on firms not subject to existing climate change schemes, and those early actors should be recognized for their early contributions.
Global Warming
We are the subject of a gigantic swindle perpetrated by politicians who believe the allegation that CO2 has a significant effect on global warming and that we can deal with it by adopting zero carbon policies. First, there is no credible evidence to support this view and substantial evidence to the contrary. Five hundred million years ago the carbon dioxide concentration was 20 times greater than today, decreasing to 4–5 times during the Jurassic period and then slowly declining with a particularly swift reduction occurring 49 million years ago. Numerous models have failed to even replicate past temperature changes. The modelers should have listened to Yogi Berra who observed “Predictions are very difficult – particularly about the future.” Second, anthropomorphic CO2 emissions constitute on the order of 5% of total CO2 emissions from the earth. Oceanic emissions are 55%, human and animal respirations 40%, and the remaining 5% from cars, trucks, planes, railroads, ships, power plants, steel mills, cement plants and the rest of the industrial revolution. We simply do not control enough of the emissions to make a difference. But we are spending vast sums subsidizing so called clean energy such as wind and solar power (they aren’t), uneconomic projects such as Solyndra and Ivanpah and overreaching agencies such as the EPA, FERC and CARB. How can we stop this insanity?
George Holbrook
ghbrc@aol.com