Keep climate a national priority
There were a long few moments of icy fear as the early vote results trickled in from Atlantic Canada on Monday evening. Befuddled pundits began wondering aloud whether the pollsters had indeed been wrong and Maple MAGA would vastly outperform expectations. The next morning it became clear that a similar foreboding must have shuddered through Danielle Smith’s watch party.
The Trump-courting premier appeared not just relieved but almost exuberant that she could stick to her script and kick the federal Liberals around for the foreseeable future. It’s an old dynamic, but an effective one: Doug Ford’s advisers urged him to rush to the polls while Trudeau was still in office. Danielle Smith is presiding over record oil production but gets to play the outraged victim.
“Albertans are deeply frustrated that the same government that overtly attacked our provincial economy almost unabated for the past 10 years has been returned to government… As Premier, I will not permit the status quo to continue,” Smith said in a statement teasing “processes” and “options” for the path forward. “We will no longer tolerate having our industries threatened and our resources landlocked by Ottawa.”
Viewed from beyond the Prairies, the argument is breathtakingly audacious. Oil and gas production is at an all-time high. The federal Liberals bought and rammed through an oil pipeline to the West Coast to the tune of some tens of billions in opaque cost overruns, and yet it isn’t being used to capacity. Meanwhile, another new pipeline has blasted its way past Indigenous opponents and begun delivering gas to LNG Canada, billed as the largest private sector investment in Canadian history. More LNG projects are approved already.
The fossil fuel industry is insatiable. Oil prices low? Oil prices high? Trump in office? Biden in office? War in Europe? Peace on Earth? The answer is suspiciously similar: unleash us. But the industry is also yoked to the vagaries of the global market. And right now, oil prices are collapsing, the Saudis are girding for battle, and who knows what the orange menace might do next. If the oil patch sours, Danielle Smith will be especially relieved to have a time-tested scapegoat in Ottawa.
On the other side of the ideological gulf, progressives and climate advocates had dodged an outcome that seemed inevitable just weeks before: four, maybe eight, maybe 10 years of a Poilievre government, openly hostile to climate action, environmentalism and other woke globalisms.
Instead, we got Prime Minister Mark Carney. A woke globalist from central casting. A long-time climate advocate, married to even more of a climate advocate. An international envoy on the topic appointed by the UN. A double central banker famous for prodding the titans of finance on their duties to future generations. A global player who’d been arguing the vast majority of fossil fuels need to stay in the ground. And who literally wrote the book on Value(s).
I’m not nearly as sanguine as the great Bill McKibben about the prospects for Mark Carney to deliver. But considering McKibben’s long and relentless (not to mention insightful and prolific) commitment to the fight against climate change, it’s well worth hearing his take:
“In Carney we now have the world leader who knows more than any of his peers about climate change. And who knows roughly twenty times as much about climate and energy economics as anyone else in power. He may turn out to be a truly crucial figure in the fight to turn the climate tide.”
McKibben goes on to describe Carney’s past work as a “great boost” to the climate movement and concludes: “I’d say the rest of the world is going to recognize Carney as the most likely person to midwife us through this transition. I think he’s not done playing a world-historical role.”
Wow. Now, it’s possible that McKibben is envying us our new PM from the distorted perspective of a Trumpian shithole. But even if we’re clear-eyed about the domestic and global challenges facing Carney’s government, we’ve got to recognize that this has been an extraordinary reversal of political fortunes. We might even permit ourselves a moment to move beyond relief to gratitude.
We should be grateful the vote was not dominated by dudes, for example. If you’re relieved not to face a Poilievre government, Canadian women (notably in Quebec) are the voters to thank.
And another worthy object of gratitude is the group of fellow citizens willing to launch themselves into the misery of modern politics. Without climate-minded politicians, we don’t get climate policy. Some climate champions lost their seats, reports Natasha Bulowski. But we can also be grateful to welcome several newcomers.
Shannon Miedema
After 15 years fighting (inside) city hall, Miedema will represent Halifax for the Liberals. She shepherded Halifax’s climate action plan from conception through implementation. “For those who don’t know me, my name is Shannon Miedema,” she announced when seeking the Liberal nomination. “I’m a lifelong climate advocate and public servant.” She’s a former president of the Young Naturalists Club of Canada and now has to give up the job as her city’s director of environment and climate change because she rocked her riding with 63 per cent of the vote.
Gregor Robertson
The former Mayor of Vancouver, founder of Happy Planet and farmer once restored a wooden sailboat and sailed across the Pacific with no electronic gizmos. I should admit to some bias here — Robertson is a friend and sometimes soccer teammate (“elbows up” is no mere metaphor for him, as my own ribs can attest).
Before his election as mayor, he was a provincial NDP MLA, so with his victory in Vancouver Fraserview-South Burnaby, he’s completed the trifecta and now been elected to all three levels of government under three different party flags.
Robertson was a driving force behind Vancouver’s Greenest City Action Plan and personally scouted all the new bike lanes. He went on to work for global coalitions of mayors for climate action and then joined Carney’s campaign to revive Canadian environmentalism. He and Miedema are being mooted by those in the know as likely cabinet members.
Eric St-Pierre
Caption: Eric St-Pierre completes an 80 km ultra-marathon in Utah, Jan. 2025. Photo from Eric St-Pierre on LinkedIn
A fellow lover of electric school buses, St-Pierre was executive director of the Trottier Family Foundation for the last nine years. The foundation has supported loads of worthy climate projects across the country (as well as this newsletter). But St-Pierre also leveraged his role to co-create a number of other initiatives, including the Climate Champions Initiative, mobilizing $450 million in new climate philanthropy. He also co-founded Low Carbon Cities Canada and will be the new député for honoré-mercier on the Island of Montreal.
Patrick Bonin
The Carney Liberals are likely to feel the heat from Patrick Bonin, a Greenpeace climate and energy campaigner. Bonin left Greenpeace and ran for the Bloc Québécois. He was elected to represent the riding of Repentigny. “Patrick led Quebec’s climate and energy campaign and has over a decade of environmental campaigning experience,” enthused Caroline Brouilette, executive director of Climate Action Network Canada (CAN-Rac), noting that the Bloc endorsed CAN-Rac’s policy proposals in full.
It’s only a partial list but we can’t move on without mentioning some returning MPs.
Elizabeth May
Elizabeth the Unbeatable delivered the Greens’ only seat in the next Parliament.
Defying the bookies, May was reelected in her riding of Saanich-Gulf Islands by more than seven points over the Liberal candidate and 14 points over the Conservative. May started as an environmental lawyer in 1983 and got her first government gig in 1986 — policy advisor to the environment minister in the Mulroney government.
It was a different flavour of Conservative party in those days, and May was central to the team that landed the 1987 Montreal Protocol to protect the ozone layer. Still irrepressible at 70 years old, she may be a lone Green voice, but she won’t be a quiet one.
Leah Gazan
Leah Gazan. Photo from Parliament of Canada/House of Commons
Gazan calls herself “ProudLakota” online and she’ll be back representing Winnipeg Centre for the NDP. Gazan introduced the Climate Emergency Action Act, and it was her motion that forced Parliament to recognize the atrocities of the Indian Residential Schools as genocide. She’s been a tireless advocate for Missing Indigenous Women and Girls and a key advocate for the Red Dress Alert system. She won’t have many NDP colleagues in Ottawa but Alexandre Boulerice, a reliable climate advocate will return representing Rosemont-La Petite-Patrie.
...and several others
Olympic gold medallist Adam van Koeverden is back for the Liberals after winning the new Ontario riding of Burlington North-Milton West. Van Koeverden has been a persistent pest advocating for a Youth Climate Corps and by the end of the campaign, all parties except the Conservatives had promised to stand up a Climate Corps program.
Nathaniel Erskine-Smith was reelected in the Toronto riding of Beaches-East York. “Nate” was one of the few to openly defend the carbon tax beyond its bitter end. “The lies won,” he wrote in February. “We failed to defend it successfully… We should all be embarrassed that we've let shameless politics kill a system that cost-effectively reduces pollution and ensures the poorest are overwhelmingly made better off.”
And to round out our partial list, let’s offer some gratitude to one of the most vilified people in the country. It’s hard to imagine living Steven Guilbeault’s life with the relentless smears and threats. And yet he’ll be back, reelected overwhelmingly by voters in the Montreal riding of Laurier-Sainte-Marie. Guilbeault beat his nearest opponent by over 33 percentage points. He’ll be reunited with his former cabinet colleague, Johathan Wilkinson — such a stubborn advocate for cleantech that he’s still driving a hydrogen fuel cell car around North Vancouver.
How he withstands the fossil-fuelled onslaught and the cesspit of social media is truly beyond me. It’s hard to imagine being an elected representative these days. And that’s the point of offering some gratitude this week. We’ll get back to regular programming and crapping on the politicians soon enough. But for now, in this moment of relief, thank you to all you who stood up.
Comments
I'm glad you're more skeptical than McKibben (a climate hero). I'm afraid Carney may try to incentivise the transition while not pushing for fossil fuel export phase-out. The public will still get the message that "it's not an emergency" and "we've got this under control." (As they have from scrapping the carbon tax.) That will leave us open to disinformation about any plan to tackle carbon emissions.
One thing is certain; we're so late in the game that we need to create a huge push for the fastest possible transition (and degrowth).
Does Chris Hatch believe that Carney is a liar?
Liberal partisans like Hatch hail Carney as the second coming of the Climate Messiah. The first being Justin Trudeau — and we all know how that went.
To maintain this belief, Hatch must ignore mountains of contrary evidence. All the things Carney and the Liberal Party have actually said in support of fossil-fuel expansion. All the hundreds of millions of tax dollars the federal government has granted to the O&G industry.
"Mark Carney's Liberals to make Canada the world's leading energy superpower
"'Canada has a tremendous opportunity to be the world's leading energy superpower, in both clean and conventional energy,' said Mark Carney, Leader of the Liberal Party of Canada."
Liberal Party news release (April 9, 2025)
"Liberal Leader Mark Carney pitched Alberta as the heart of a new superpower in both clean and conventional energy Tuesday night as part of his first campaign stop in the province.
"'The world needs that leadership,' he said, adding that his plan is to build an 'energy superpower in both clean and conventional. (CBC, Apr 09, 2025)
"Throughout the federal campaign, Carney spoke of an all-of-the-above energy strategy to make Canada a superpower in both renewables and fossil fuels. As previously reported by Canada's National Observer, pursuing both isn't a credible strategy from a climate point of view."
"Will Carney learn from Trudeau's mistakes?" (National Observer, 02-May-25)
Carney's first act as PM was to cancel the carbon "tax". Carney conceded the Conservatives' dishonest argument that consumer carbon pricing represented a burden on households. In fact, most households came out ahead after rebate.
Carney has given no indication that his government might cancel fossil fuel subsidies for white elephants such as carbon capture in the oilsands, SMRs, and blue hydrogen. Nothing about cancelling subsidies for LNG projects. That's tens and hundreds of billions of dollars on the table. To say nothing of an east-west pipeline.
Don't believe me. Believe The Observer:
"Mixed messages: Carney Liberals pledge money for LNG while bridling against industry demands" (National Observer, March 28, 2025)
"Feds to contribute up to $200M for Haisla-led project to ship liquefied natural gas to Asia" (CBC, March 21, 2025)
Thank Carney's Liberals.
"Canada will no longer cover travel costs of experts it nominates to UN's climate science body" (CBC, Apr 12, 2025)
"In a sudden and unexplained change from previous decades, the federal government has stopped covering the travel costs of Canadian experts volunteering for the next major global climate science assessment."
The Liberals can find untold billions for the O&G industry, but can't afford $680,000 to send Canadian scientists and experts to IPCC meetings.
Thank Carney's Liberals.
Carney is on side with an east-west pipeline:
"Quebec should use oil from Alberta, not the U.S., Carney says" (Montreal Gazette, April 07, 2025)
"Mark Carney says he wants Quebecers to use oil from Alberta rather than the United States — but a new pipeline would require Quebec's blessing.
"There is a big advantage to Canada to push that out, use our own oil, use the resources from that for other things, including protecting our environments (and) our social programs."
"The Liberal leader, a former United Nations Special Envoy on Climate Action and Finance, said there is no contradiction between his positions on reducing greenhouse gas emissions and building pipelines."
"On Sunday, Carney also argued that Canada also had to invest further in carbon capture technology to reduce carbon emissions of its energy sector to be competitive internationally, particularly for the European Union." (EJ, Apr 14, 2025)
Carney's support for CCS is unconscionable. Clearly, he has not done his homework.
We know what Carney has said and done.
Was he lying, Mr. Hatch? Why don't you believe him?
Hatch: "It's time to shift from relief to gratitude as Carney helps steer the climate transition"
Premature, to say the least.
No transition is possible as long as fossil fuel production and consumption are growing.
Mr. Hatch is selling Observer readers a bill of goods. Just as the Liberal Party and other petro-progressive parties sell your grandchildren down the river.
This is not journalism.
Carney has never been in politics before, ever, and has been at the helm for not even 60 days so far, but already he's being pinned with a personality transplant from the ghost of Trudeau.
Sure, he was asked for advice on occasion as a private independent consultant, but in his own words they didn't heed much of that advice.
Quebec, Carney's largest base of support, stated a couple of days ago it will not allow a pipeline from Alberta (a statement from the BQ which holds the balance of power in the House).
You can issue all the E-W pro-pipeline rhetoric in the world (Poilievre) or give a sop to Alberta (Carney while campaigning) and none of it will come to fruition if Quebec is not on board.
Political acceptance, economics and Indigenous consultation will decide the fate of new O&G infrastructure. Listing the actions of prior Trudeau-Freeland-Morneau governments does not automatucally translate into copycat action by Carney. Nor does campaign statements made without a plan.
I will wait and judge Carney on his work over the full term of his first government, and on the success of his stated plans, such as his huge housing policy and national electricity grid expansion.
AB wrote: "already he's being pinned with a personality transplant from the ghost of Trudeau"
I would not say that Carney and Trudeau share the same personality. But the Liberal Party does not change its spots.
AB wrote: "Political acceptance, economics and Indigenous consultation will decide the fate of new O&G infrastructure."
Just as political acceptance, economics, and Indigenous consultation decided the fate of TMX and Coastal Gaslink?
Economics — is that with or without billions of dollars in government subsidies? Would TMX have been completed if the Trudeau Liberals had not bought it? Would any of B.C.'s LNG projects go ahead without billions of dollars in provincial and federal subsidies.
It was Carney's Liberals, not Trudeau, who shelled out $200 M for Cedar LNG.
Carney supports CCS in the oilsands. Tens of billions of dollars down the drain.
An east-west pipeline all the way to New Brunswick makes little sense, Carney's false rationale notwithstanding. Certainly not to displace imports. Retooling Eastern Canada refineries for Alberta's heavy oil will cost billions. Who will pay?
For now, the Liberals may settle for a pipeline to Ontario, so that mercurial U.S. presidents cannot hold us hostage. A more likely prospect is an expanded TMX or even a northern arm to Kitimat (which would require lifting the tanker ban).
"Second Trans Mountain pipeline expansion a 'no-brainer' way to diversify energy exports"(Financial Post, Feb 12, 2025)
"Northern Leg' to Trans Mountain pipeline attracts interest amid brewing trade war" (Financial Post, Feb 24, 2025)
Carney: "Canada has a tremendous opportunity to be the world's leading energy superpower, in both clean and conventional energy."
Carney: "My government will work closely with our oil and gas industry to reduce their emissions over time, so that Canadian conventional energy will supply the world for decades to come."
Are you calling our new PM a liar? Why don't you believe him?
There's a lot of supposition and projection there. Carney's not even had enough time to change the linens in Rideau Cottage and already his action on the ground is predicted to follow mainly an oily path despite his past experience analyzing energy and the costs of climate impacts.
WRT the Liberal Party, the leader, who now occupies the PMO for a few years, has a lot of power. To predict the LPC will walk in Trudeau's footsteps for three years with Carney at the helm is just not supported by any evidence so far barely 60 days since the leadership contest, and only 8 days since the election. Again, I will wait to judge Carney's first full term in government.
Economics: OPEC just opened its spigots wide and promised to keep them open for months or longer to create a world glut in oil, and drop the world price into the basement and put some of its competition out of business. The last time they did that was in 2014, and it sent Alberta into a recession. No one will propose a pipeline or expanded fossil extraction in those circumstances. This would be a great time to build an E-W-N electricity grid and expand renewables, as Carney has promised.
Economics: Carney directed $200 million to one LNG project. Not long after he announced a $250,000,000 million affordable energy efficient housing program (with private sector participation) and $10,000,000 million in direct public funding (100% subsidy) for social and supportive housing, again with energy efficient precepts. Given the evidence so far of actual funding commitments -- not just campaign rhetoric -- Carney's priorities seem to be focused far away from O&G with actual funding.
Politics: Quebec. Quebec. Quebec. There rests the central challenge to Energy East and any other pipeline that is proposed to cross its territory. Quebec has rejected it. TMX and Gateway are in BC and the political hurdles are not nearly as life and death to the Liberal party as in Quebec. Indigenous people in BC do not have many treaties with the feds, and there is a divide between the hereditary chiefs (who are opposed) and elected band councils (many of whom have an equity stake in fossil infrastructure). To my knowledge, the hereditary chiefs have not taken LNG proponents to court on consultation, though lots of injunctions have been launched against their blockades which have succeeded in causing major delays, but have not stopped the project.
Meanwhile, the BC government launched a clean energy call last year and eight Indigenous communities immediately responded with majority First Nations owned large scale wind farm proposals. Yesterday, the premier announced another clean energy call and First Nations reps made presentations at the event. There is a lot of anticipation that First Nations renewable projects will eventually become as vital to the province as its legacy hydroelectricity. That is a model for Canada, despite BC's prior support for LNG, which given world energy trends, it will in all likelyhood regret within 10 years.
BC Indigenous involvement in energy is willfully dominated by renewables, which are in turn approved quickly. Their involvement in fossil fuels is mixed and divided and does not have the same level of internal support.
TMX survived direct senior court challenges based primarily on federal jurisdiction, but it was forced to go back and consult more with land-based First Nations along the route, some of whom acquiesced. Note that all but one coastal First Nation were adamantly opposed to TMX. This indicates that the land pipeline received far more attention than the marine tanker route. There has never been adequate consultation with communities on the coast, nor has there been a professional independent risk assessment on marine ecoststems and economies.
Economics: China, SE Asia and the global south are incrementally electrifying more with renewables, not fossil fuels. Bitumen and LNG industries now have a shelf life, and in the meantime face recessions in producing jurisdictions due to artificially sinking prices.
AB wrote: "There's a lot of supposition and projection there."
No, I merely take Carney at his word.
You choose not to believe him, for some reason.
AB wrote: "already his action on the ground is predicted to follow mainly an oily path despite his past experience analyzing energy and the costs of climate impacts "
Not predictions. Statements by Carney and the Liberal Party. Why should I doubt what PM Carney says?
$200 million already doled out to Cedar LNG. [Tens of billions on the table for CCS, which Carney vigorously supports. Where are the tens of billions for renewables?
If Carney has not already discovered that governing is not the same as writing a book, he will soon.
AB wrote: "To predict the LPC will walk in Trudeau's footsteps for three years with Carney at the helm is just not supported by any evidence so far barely 60 days since the leadership contest"
Exhibits A thru Z listed above.
When Carney promises to make Canada "the world's leading energy superpower, in both clean and conventional energy", I believe he is committing his government to both sectors, tilting towards fossil fuels. The Liberals' classic "both ... and" energy policy does not solve our emissions problem.
AB wrote: "No one will propose a pipeline or expanded fossil extraction in those circumstances."
OPEC's oil price games last months or years at most. Pipelines and LNG projects run for decades. Decisions to invest are not based on current prices, but on long-term demand outlooks.
With Ottawa and provincial governments largely picking up the tab for CCS, SMRs, blue hydrogen, well clean-up, oilsands reclamation, and new pipelines, plus billions of dollars in LNG subsidies, the O&G industry is free to privatize the profits and socialize the costs.
Many U.S. refineries are specifically fitted out to process Alberta dilbit — a heavy grade they cannot obtain cheaper elsewhere. (Switching to domestic light crudes will cost a fortune.) The relationship between Alberta's oilsands and U.S. mid-West refineries is forged by a network of pipelines — unlikely to change for decades.
Oilsands production is difficult to turn on and off. Aside from slight occasional hiccups (e.g., -5% during the first year of COVID), Alberta and Canadian oil production have risen year over year since 1985. Right through the global oil price crash starting in 2014.
If I read the Liberal housing plan document correctly, allocated monies are spread over a decade. A ten-year plan. $25 billion in debt financing + $1 billion in equity financing to "innovative Canadian prefabricated home builders" + $10 billion in low-cost financing and capital to "affordable home builders". About the cost of a new pipeline. The Liberals' commitment to Pathways Alliance's nearly useless CCS project far exceeds that price tag.
"Mark Carney’s Liberals unveil Canada’s most ambitious housing plan since the Second World War"
Needless to say, spending on housing does not negate spending on fossil-fuel infrastructure. Grossly underreported emissions from Canada's largest and fastest-growing emissions source keep growing.
*
B.C. is set to miss its 2030 climate targets by miles, largely due to new LNG projects, with more in the queue.
*
Important details get lost in global energy statistics.
Adding renewable capacity does not solve our emissions problem if fossil fuel production and consumption continue to grow or even remain constant.
Clean energy investment is extremely uneven. Most renewable capacity growth is in China. China's clean tech investments exceed investments by the USA and EU combined, with developing nations lagging far behind.
The IEA projects that developing nations with two-thirds of the global population will continue to lag badly in "clean" energy investment. So what will they use instead?
Fossil fuels. For the majority of the world's population -- in the regions where energy demand is set to rise the most.
Here's an interesting take on this topic by Energi Media in a discussion wioth an economist:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SLRV7m9h4RU
EM's take on Danielle Smith's TV address yesterday. Markham Hislop was a little worked up:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qYz0Qxe-3QI
After reading this article, I wonder if it might be possible to found a cross party Climate Advisory Committee of MPs. There are very qualified people in at least parties.
Carney has advocated that "the market" is the vehicle through which to effect change and that technology will deliver us from the emissions-caused hell confronting humanity. Relying on "the market", the very force that arrived us where we are is naive and way too slow. Carney's favored technology is CCS despite UN climate scientists relentlessly advising that this is a costly solution for only about 2% of GHG emissions....2%! The reality is that global average temp already exceeds the 1.5C Paris goal....yes, we await the 20-year rolling average to confirm, but do we really need to wait to call it? Major financial entities are already advocating for planning to meet a 3C temperature rise! Scientists continue to tell us of the disasters that await at 2C and 3C, but governments continue to play in the margins of climate change, pretending to do something meaningful. Here's the thing: the first rule when one finds oneself in a hole is to stop digging! We continue to dig furiously despite this truism. As they say in Newfoundland, this strategy is "stunned as me arse". The only possible solution is to reduce emissions quickly by changing our consumer habits in all areas from diets to toys to recreational vehicles to travel.