This Call to Action was produced by the Climate Emergency Unit
This year’s wildfire season is already Canada’s second-worst on record, destroying more than 7.3 million hectares of forest and land, along with the wildlife and communities living there – displacing families from Vancouver Island to Newfoundland. Our “Signed, Seared, Delivered” postcard campaign is direct and compelling, using images of places Canadians hold close to their hearts with a twist that brings the wildfire crisis to the attention of our elected leaders in a way that can’t be ignored. It’s a call to hold fossil fuel companies accountable for their emissions, protect the places we love, and recognize the climate emergency we’re in. There’s still time for you to participate! Learn more, send a scorching message to our leaders, or print off a postcard to mail to your MP, all from the button below.
This article was written by Ritika Dubey and was published in the Toronto Star on October 15, 2024.
When Julie Riddell and her husband, Gerry, bought their Fort Myers, Fla., vacation property in 2009, it didn’t cross their mind that they might be buying in a hurricane-prone area.
“But for at least eight years, we’ve been seeing a lot more action and more frequency (of storms),” the Toronto resident said.
Riddell’s Florida property, situated inland, has been a winter getaway and spot for family vacations for years.
While she loves heading down south, Riddell said the cost of insurance premiums have drastically gone up over the years, almost quadrupling since they first bought the property as severe storms threaten communities in coastal regions.
Cleanup efforts are continuing on Florida’s west coast after two hurricanes made landfall in recent weeks.
However, it appears Canadian snowbirds are divided on whether they want to stay or rethink their decision to own property in the state as worsening weather and surging property costs become a bigger fact of life.
For Riddell, these issues haven’t yet persuaded her to sell.
She said her Florida neighbours are like her “second family.”
“I see more people when I’m in Florida in the winter than I do here (in Toronto),” Riddell said.
She added, “In Toronto, it’s like, I see my neighbour when he puts out the garbage and then that’s it.”
The Riddells have however had to make investments to secure their property against severe weather, such as by maintaining hurricane shutters.
“I’ll have to spend more money making sure … we have the defences in place for another catastrophic (event),” Julie said.
“I’m going to dig in like a lot of Floridians do,” she added. “We’re not leaving.” Hurricane seasons are getting more intense as oceans get warmer. When Helene plowed through
I’m going to dig in like a lot of Floridians do. We’re not leaving.
JULIE RIDDELL SNOWBIRD
Florida roughly two weeks ago, it was the seventh Category 4 or stronger storm to make landfall in the continental U.S. in eight years. That’s more than triple the average annual rate of such monster landfalls in the U.S. since 1950, according to a data analysis by the Associated Press.
Two years ago, Hurricane Ian caused about $60 billion in insured damages in Florida,where many communities and local businesses are still recovering from the destruction.
Martin Kinal, a Mississauga resident, sold his Venice, Fla., vacation home this year. Though his property is more inland and less susceptible to floods, he had a close encounter with Hurricane Ian.
“Ian was the last one and while our home and city sustained very little wind damage … we did have water reach our front doorstep,” Kinal said in an email.
“One more step and it would have been inside our home.”
Kinal said one of his Florida neighbours decided to move to Arizona the following year because they realized “sooner or later, one will hit our area.”
“We decided to sell in May this year due to costs associated with keeping a vacation home in Florida,” he said. “Since the pandemic hit, cost of everything seems to double.”
As the frequency of storms hitting the coast of Florida increases, some insurance companies have significantly hiked premiums, limited their policy offerings or pulled out of the region all together.
Nine insurers have been declared insolvent or merged into other companies in Florida since 2021. Average annual property insurance premiums jumped 42 per cent last year to $6,000 in Florida, compared with a national average in the U.S. of $1,700, an AP analysis said.
Kris Rossignoli, a cross-border financial planner at Cardinal Point, said owning a second home in Florida requires thinking about more than whether you can afford to buy and pay the mortgage.
“It’s now, ‘Can I afford the price of the home plus all of the additional insurance that comes with the home, and especially flood insurance,” he said.
Upkeep of vacation homes is also getting more expensive because of the rising price of building materials and property caretakers, as well as more frequent maintenance, Rossignoli said.
“A lot of Canadians couldn’t go down … to prepare their (Florida) homes for this storm,” he said. “You either have to have really good neighbours or you hire third-party services to do that.”
While that’s stretching the financial equation of owning a second home, Rossignoli said it still seems viable when compared with the cost of long-term rentals in Florida.
Ontario resident Ray Ferris, who owns a property in Treasure Island, Fla., says he’s concerned about what he will find when he heads south this winter. But he adds that he’s eager to get down there and help the city rebuild.
Ferris and his wife spend two to three months a year at their vacation condo, which they bought in 2021, to escape the gloomy northern winters. For the rest of the year, they rent it out, but the latest storms could impact that.
Ferris said renting out the condo helps keep up with condo fees, ongoing maintenance and insurance but he’s now worried he won’t be able to find renters.
“We’re now concerned that nobody is going to vacation on Treasure Island,” he said.
Ferris said he has “second guessed” his decision to buy a condo on the beach on the Gulf of Mexico when tracking storms but isn’t convinced that it’s time to sell.
“It’s almost a fact of life you have to accept if you’re going to live on the water,” he said.
If you’d like to receive notifications whenever new articles are posted, click on the website name at the top, My Climate Change Website. A small window will pop up in the lower right hand corner that says Subscribe. Click on the small window. Another window will pop up where you can enter your email address. Enter your email address and press Enter. A message will pop up saying that you have successfully subscribed.
This is not a news article but a program that I have just completed. Please watch the introductory 2 minute video. If it’s something that appeals to you, sign up, and try it out, with family, with friends. It could make a difference.
Note: Subtitles are available in different languages.
This opinion was written by Chris Bataille and was published in the Globe & Mail on October 10, 2023.
Adjunct research fellow at the Columbia University Center on Global Energy Policy and the Canadian IPCC lead author of the WGIII Industry Chapter and Summary for Policymakers
As the leaves turn to mark the changing of the seasons, we also mark the oneyear anniversary of the U.S. Inflation Reduction Act. This gargantuan bill, which could see between US$380-billion and US$1.7trillion put toward clean power and industry in the United States while reshoring manufacturing, contrasts sharply with the absence of similar incentives across the world, including in Canada.
The IRA’s huge investment tax credits and production subsidies for wind, solar, batteries, cleantech, hydrogen, and carbon capture and storage follow on the heels of two bipartisan laws – the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, and the CHIPS and Science Act – designed to invest in American solutions and keep jobs and businesses in the U.S. The European Union has moved vigorously to counter the U.S. subsidies with their Green Deal, in order to not lose investment. But what is Canada doing? Although Canada can claim to have allocated a lot of financial and political capital to net-zero decarbonization of business and industry, its efforts simply have not been as effective as the programs and policies south of the border, or overseas.
We have a kaleidoscope of programs and funds: the $8-billion Net Zero Accelerator fund, the $15-billion Canada Growth Fund – a host of proposed investment tax credits for everything from clean electricity to carbon-capture utilization and storage. Add to this the rumblings from 2022’s Fall Economic Statement around carbon contracts for difference – options contracts that pay out under certain conditions, such as when the carbon price is reduced or eliminated.
Looking at this range of programs, one could conclude that Canada is in the game when it comes to attracting net-zero investment.
But the truth is, we are failing the net-zero investment certainty test. The investment tax credits, while designed to match the IRA and substantial on paper, are still in development and have yet to be finalized, signed into law, and made operational. Industrial firms are caught in a quagmire of onerous, complicated, and unclear processes when trying to access our various transformative investment funds, with the disbursement of resources not keeping up with the pace of investment decisions.
Meanwhile, Ottawa said last week that because of mismanagement allegations, it has frozen the funding powers of Sustainable Development Technology Canada, the main federal body for financing early-stage cleantech. Industry executives have warned that this could have a disastrous effect on the timelines for various projects.
In times of increasing debt levels and rising interest rates, Canada must be prudent in spending taxpayer dollars. But we must also move ambitiously to secure a prosperous future in a global lowcarbon economy for our children and, increasingly, ourselves.
We need to prioritize our efforts on reducing emissions from high-impact materials with assured long-term demand – such as metals, cement, and chemicals such as fertilizer and jet fuel – by aiming for near-zero emissions intensity in their production. It takes years to plan, permit and finance clean steel, cement, or chemicals plants, which then last 20-plus years before their first refurbishments.
Decisions are being made in rapid succession now about where to build the clean industrial facilities of the future, which will still be in demand when we are all driving electric cars and living in largely electrified homes. We need to be permitting, financing and building the plants that will be producing for us in 2050 now in order to keep us anywhere near the Paris Agreement goals.
Achieving this goal comes with increased production costs, but it’s surprisingly little compared with the outcomes. Producing low-emissions metals may cost 10 to 40 per cent more, while making clinker for cement and keystone chemicals may double, but these increases would add less than 1 per cent to the overall price tag of vehicles, buildings, and infrastructure. If Canada is going to provide a welcome place for investment, and high-paying jobs for its citizens, then we need to help these industries to close the cost gap.
Fortunately, there are several concrete things the federal government can do. By the end of 2023, it must ensure its proposed tax credits have become law. It needs to align its industrial-carbon-pricing benchmarks with its goals by announcing an ambitious schedule to apply carbon pricing to all emissions.
At the same time this move must come with accompanying policies to protect investments in emissions reduction, similar to the EU border-carbon adjustment which started its first phase Oct. 1. It also needs to state that it will prefer and pay for cleaner materials for its own consumption, which is considerable.
Finally, it needs to provide certainty on the future of carbon pricing and its commitment to net zero by signing contracts for difference – or a policy with similar effect – with at least a couple of project proponents who have transformative, concrete net-zero projects that will help shift global standards.
Transformative, near-zero emissions projects need to happen in Canada – we need the investment, we need the emissions reductions. And once we have mastered this and shown it can be done, Canada will become a source of service exports to help the world to do the same.
This article was written by Emma Graney and was published in the Globe & Mail on September 18, 2023.
Delegates walks past an image of oil workers at the World Petroleum Congress in Calgary on Sept. 18. Oil sands companies that are part of the Pathways Alliance are aiming to spend more than $24-billion on emission-reduction projects by 2030.JEFF MCINTOSH/THE CANADIAN PRESS
Delegates walks past an image of oil workers at the World Petroleum Congress in Calgary on Sept. 18. Oil sands companies that are part of the Pathways Alliance are aiming to spend more than $24-billion on emission-reduction projects by 2030.JEFF MCINTOSH/THE CANADIAN PRESS
Oil and gas companies must do more to reduce their emissions as the world prepares to drastically reduce its consumption of fossil fuels, Canada’s Natural Resources Minister says.
Jonathan Wilkinson made the remarks as part of a broader “call to action” to Canada’s fossil fuel industry on the eve of the 24th World Petroleum Congress in Calgary Sunday night. He told The Globe and Mail afterward that the majority of oil sands producers have made a commitment to net zero, but “substantive action” is crucial to meeting 2050 climate goals.
“We need to see purchase orders for equipment that’s actually going to be put in the ground,” he said Sunday night.
With demand for oil and gas forecast to peak for use in vehicles and combustion in the next decade, Mr. Wilkinson said, “countries that focus on producing ultralow-carbon” fossil fuels “are likely to be the last producers standing.”
Indeed, the International Energy Agency’s June oil forecast says that peak oil demand is in sight, with the fuel’s use for transport likely to drop after 2026. However, the IEA noted, overall consumption will be supported by strong petrochemicals demand.
But Mr. Wilkinson’s remarks about the future of fossil fuels kicked off something of a political bun fight with Alberta Premier Danielle Smith, who at the gala event Sunday shot back that the province owns its oil and gas reserves and will increase flows while lowering emissions as producers move toward carbon neutrality by 2050.
Asked by media on Monday about her shot across the bow at Mr. Wilkinson during her speech, Ms. Smith called the federal minister’s comments “tone deaf” and a “slap in the face” to attendees at one of the world’s largest fossil fuel gatherings.
“This is not an industry that’s winding down. It’s an industry that’s transitioning away from emissions,” she said.
“I don’t like to fight with our federal counterparts, but I’m not going to allow them to take swipes at our industry.”
Ms. Smith pointed to comments made by Saudi Aramco chief executive Amin Nasser, who on Monday morning told the congress that the “premature” phasing out of fossil fuels puts global energy security at risk.
The head of the world’s largest oil producer said there are many shortcomings in the approach the world is taking in the energy transition, including targets that are removed from the needs of energy markets and the realities of the supply-demand balance.
Mr. Nasser also took aim at the recent IEA forecast, saying it is mostly being driven by “policy rather than markets.”
Lowering emissions, however, will rely on huge investments from oil companies.
And a report released last week by the Pembina Institute, an environmental think tank, found that those companies are making no such new investments, despite being on track for their second highest profits in a decade.
Oil sands companies that are part of the Pathways Alliance, which has pledged to reach net zero by 2050, are aiming to spend more than $24-billion on emission-reduction projects by 2030.
Pathways president Kendall Dilling doesn’t disagree that large-scale investments are wanting, but he told The Globe on Monday that the group is doing “everything we humanly can to keep this project on track for 2030.”
“We’re as anxious as anybody to turn dirt and get steel in the ground and demonstrate that, yes, these projects are going to happen,” he said. “But you can’t wave a magic wand and accelerate that by three years. You’ve got to go through that front-end process and we’re doing it as quickly as we can.”
Mr. Wilkinson acknowledged that emissions reduction will also rely on the federal and provincial governments establishing all of the rules and regulations needed to hasten activity – particularly in carbon capture and sequestration.
Ottawa and Alberta agree that Canadian fossil fuel production should be net zero by 2050. They also agree that technologies such as carbon capture will be key to getting there, and that the two levels of government need to work together.
Yet there remains a gaping chasm between the two when it comes to global fossil fuel demand in the future, and what that means for Canadian production.
Mr. Wilkinson told The Globe he’s not opposed to any source of energy, as long as the emissions issues are addressed. That includes natural gas, he said, which can have a role going forward “as long as you can capture the carbon and you can sequester it.”
Ms. Smith is adamant about the continuing role for combustion vehicles, but Mr. Wilkinson countered that “from a scientific and environmental perspective, that just can’t be true or we’re going to be in a position where the environment is going downhill very, very quickly.”
“If Premier Smith is right, the environmental consequences are really, really bad.”
Oil and gas companies must do more to reduce their emissions as the world prepares to drastically reduce its consumption of fossil fuels, Canada’s Natural Resources Minister says.
Jonathan Wilkinson made the remarks as part of a broader “call to action” to Canada’s fossil fuel industry on the eve of the 24th World Petroleum Congress in Calgary Sunday night. He told The Globe and Mail afterward that the majority of oil sands producers have made a commitment to net zero, but “substantive action” is crucial to meeting 2050 climate goals.
“We need to see purchase orders for equipment that’s actually going to be put in the ground,” he said Sunday night.
With demand for oil and gas forecast to peak for use in vehicles and combustion in the next decade, Mr. Wilkinson said, “countries that focus on producing ultralow-carbon” fossil fuels “are likely to be the last producers standing.”
Indeed, the International Energy Agency’s June oil forecast says that peak oil demand is in sight, with the fuel’s use for transport likely to drop after 2026. However, the IEA noted, overall consumption will be supported by strong petrochemicals demand.
But Mr. Wilkinson’s remarks about the future of fossil fuels kicked off something of a political bun fight with Alberta Premier Danielle Smith, who at the gala event Sunday shot back that the province owns its oil and gas reserves and will increase flows while lowering emissions as producers move toward carbon neutrality by 2050.
Asked by media on Monday about her shot across the bow at Mr. Wilkinson during her speech, Ms. Smith called the federal minister’s comments “tone deaf” and a “slap in the face” to attendees at one of the world’s largest fossil fuel gatherings.
“This is not an industry that’s winding down. It’s an industry that’s transitioning away from emissions,” she said.
“I don’t like to fight with our federal counterparts, but I’m not going to allow them to take swipes at our industry.”
Ms. Smith pointed to comments made by Saudi Aramco chief executive Amin Nasser, who on Monday morning told the congress that the “premature” phasing out of fossil fuels puts global energy security at risk.
The head of the world’s largest oil producer said there are many shortcomings in the approach the world is taking in the energy transition, including targets that are removed from the needs of energy markets and the realities of the supply-demand balance.
Mr. Nasser also took aim at the recent IEA forecast, saying it is mostly being driven by “policy rather than markets.”
Lowering emissions, however, will rely on huge investments from oil companies.
And a report released last week by the Pembina Institute, an environmental think tank, found that those companies are making no such new investments, despite being on track for their second highest profits in a decade.
Oil sands companies that are part of the Pathways Alliance, which has pledged to reach net zero by 2050, are aiming to spend more than $24-billion on emission-reduction projects by 2030.
Pathways president Kendall Dilling doesn’t disagree that large-scale investments are wanting, but he told The Globe on Monday that the group is doing “everything we humanly can to keep this project on track for 2030.”
“We’re as anxious as anybody to turn dirt and get steel in the ground and demonstrate that, yes, these projects are going to happen,” he said. “But you can’t wave a magic wand and accelerate that by three years. You’ve got to go through that front-end process and we’re doing it as quickly as we can.”
Mr. Wilkinson acknowledged that emissions reduction will also rely on the federal and provincial governments establishing all of the rules and regulations needed to hasten activity – particularly in carbon capture and sequestration.
Ottawa and Alberta agree that Canadian fossil fuel production should be net zero by 2050. They also agree that technologies such as carbon capture will be key to getting there, and that the two levels of government need to work together.
Yet there remains a gaping chasm between the two when it comes to global fossil fuel demand in the future, and what that means for Canadian production.
Mr. Wilkinson told The Globe he’s not opposed to any source of energy, as long as the emissions issues are addressed. That includes natural gas, he said, which can have a role going forward “as long as you can capture the carbon and you can sequester it.”
Ms. Smith is adamant about the continuing role for combustion vehicles, but Mr. Wilkinson countered that “from a scientific and environmental perspective, that just can’t be true or we’re going to be in a position where the environment is going downhill very, very quickly.”
“If Premier Smith is right, the environmental consequences are really, really bad.”
:format(jpeg)/cloudfront-us-east-1.images.arcpublishing.com/tgam/7CVD4BLWNRLHJMD2ZG7DENYVR4.JPG)
My Climate Change Website 