An email received (20190621) from The Climate Mobilization, an organization I support, has this description of the Canadian response to climate disruption: “Canada fails on Climate Emergency.“ This portrayal is consistent with my own experience of Canadian and international politics.
The grassroots Climate Emergency Movement in Canada has been a global leader, with 404 governments adopting climate emergency resolutions at the local level. However, shortly after its House of Commons took up and passed a weak national climate emergency declaration, they failed to make it count.
The non-binding resolution was tied to an old, gradualist timeline rather than moving at emergency speed. It recommitted Canada to their commitments under the Paris climate accord without even on additional goal or legally binding commitment. Then, two days later, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s government approved the expansion of the Trans Mountain Pipeline project, which is intended to vastly accelerate the extraction of Alberta tar sands oil, nearly tripling the capacity of the existing pipeline and locking in billions of dollars in investment in fossil fuel infrastructure and untold megatons of carbon emissions from the extracted oil.
The hypocrisy of these two parliamentary decisions demonstrates the gap between the will of the people and the power of the fossil fuel industry in the industrialized world. Declarations of Climate Emergency are a start — these declarations can unify the shared commitment of the movement, clarify the truth of the situation, and put lawmakers on record. But they are not enough — only a sustained global movement focused on winning power, launching a mobilization, and bringing the fossil fuel industry to heel, will give us a chance at survival.
The Trans Mountain Pipeline will negatively impact the entire globe, but it most seriously threatens the land rights of numerous Indigenous communities in its path. After the pipeline announcement, the Union of British Columbia Indian Chiefs (UBCIC) reaffirmed the commitment of leaders from across British Columbia, stating that they “remain staunchly opposed” to pipeline expansion, and “have vowed that it will never get built.” You can support the UBCIC’s efforts here.
Also, the following links speak to these issues.
A reasonable article listing the many factors within the predictions. My personal experience is consistent with this: every major report I have seen has indicated the previous report was such that global warming is worse than previously reported.
Consistent with “Sooner Than . . .” I would never have expected this in my lifetime, in spite of the fact that I had briefly lived and practiced in the Arctic when I was a general practitioner. Given that the northern coast of Canada is the Arctic Ocean, high temperatures here likely have a major influence on the climate in North America (in more ways than geographic).
Although in a sense limited to British Columbia, this is a well-thought-out exposition of the complexity of organizing in response to climate disruption. Unfortunately, as the article delineates, the overall political discussion is one of dissention rather than cooperation; this is one of the main reasons I have joined the Suzuki Elders and put my effort into a Salon entitled “Climate Change Conversations: Unpacking The Problem Of Conflict.”
What Would 3 Degrees Mean? (20100901)
An old link but one that is still pertinent. We are easily on a path to 3°C warming, and the outcome will not be pretty. My guess is that we are almost certain to reach 2°C even with massive effort.
Is Humanity Dying? (20190617)
The question is at some level meaningless — we either will or will not survive the coming apocalypse. Yet the sooner we start to take effective action, the less catastrophic will be the consequences. In any event, the world of my grand-children will be very different from the current one.