The following is a re-print of the July 2024 edition of Shift Storm, the CCPA's monthly newsletter which focuses on the intersection of work and climate change. Click here to subscribe to Shift Storm and get the latest updates straight to your inbox as soon as they come out.
Against the backdrop of the hottest June in recorded history, two of Europe’s biggest economies (and largest polluters) went to the polls and avoided major backslides on climate action.
France narrowly avoided capture by a far-right coalition that campaigned against what it calls “punitive ecology,” a phrase that includes any policy it perceives to inconvenience households or businesses. In practice, that would have meant scrapping energy efficiency regulations, investments in wind power and efforts to phase out internal combustion engines.
In the UK, the winning Labour Party campaigned on a modest green industrial policy that included a ban on new offshore oil and gas licenses, in contrast to the outgoing Conservatives’ recent history of backtracking on climate commitments and enabling new fossil fuel development. Labour must now deliver on those promises, especially as the growing reality of job losses in the fossil fuel industry attracts ire from workers in vulnerable regions. As a recent report from the Scottish Just Transition Commission highlights, the plans in place for winding down fossil fuel infrastructure, such as refineries, are inadequate.
Despite the differences between parties, however, in neither country was climate a top electoral issue. That speaks to the vulnerability of climate policy more broadly. In the absence of a strong political consensus, long-term climate policies are threatened at every turn by shifting political winds.
As we look ahead to this fall’s U.S. election and next year’s Canadian election, climate action in both countries is already being buffeted by those winds.
What can be done to future-proof climate policies against changes in government? Some will argue that passing legislation is key, as it’s harder to undo than specific regulations or spending plans. Legislation is part of the answer, certainly, but I think the more important solution is simply to build things. A public transit system or a wind farm, for example, are not only impractical to remove, but they also create political constituencies that will fight to defend them. Making the climate transition tangible is always going to be more resilient than doing it on paper.
This is a theme I’ll return to as we gear up for these elections, but for now let’s get into this month’s research and developments.
Storm surge: this month’s key reads
Canada passes anti-greenwashing law
With the passage of Bill C-59, Canada has quietly reformed the Competition Act to prohibit misleading representations of “a product’s benefits for protecting or restoring the environment or mitigating the environmental, social and ecological causes or effects of climate change.” This is a big deal for ending the ceaseless claims by oil companies that they are somehow climate leaders. In response to the legislation, the oil sands lobby group Pathways Alliance immediately scrubbed their website and social media accounts.
InfluenceMap, a UK-based think tank, recently published a report, The Canadian Oil Sands Playbook, that thoroughly dissects the Pathways Alliance strategy. In short, the industry has adopted a publicly pro-climate position, which it uses as cover for weakening and delaying efforts to slow or stop fossil fuel production. It’s proven to be an effective strategy so far for downplaying criticisms from environmentalists without making any true concessions.
I’m sure Bill C-59 won’t be the end of greenwashing in Canada. The legislation could have been stronger and there are other ways the industry can and will attempt to cover up its continued role in driving climate change. But for now we should celebrate the win.
Keystone XL NAFTA suit thrown out, but similar claims continue
Since 2015, Canada’s TC Energy Corporation has been trying to sue the U.S. government for blocking the Keystone XL pipeline expansion. The $15 billion claim was made through the controversial investor-state dispute settlement (ISDS) provision in the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA)—preserved in part by the new Canada-U.S.-Mexico Agreement (CUSMA)—which allows investors to claim compensation for lost future profits due to state action.
Investors can and often do win huge sums through this process, even where governments acted in the public interest or on legitimate environmental grounds. Fortunately, the TC Energy claim was recently dismissed by an ISDS arbitration panel. My colleagues Stuart Trew and Scott Sinclair have a complete breakdown over on the CCPA blog. The key takeaway is that, while this was a welcome ruling, the decision is unlikely to prevent similar ISDS claims in the future.
The threat of ISDS looms large over global climate action, as multinational energy corporations exploit a web of international investment agreements enforced by powerful international institutions, such as the World Bank and World Trade Organization, to contest state climate action. If we cannot unwind the ISDS system, it poses a major risk to climate policy, especially in developing countries that do not have the capacity to fight back against these claims.
Research radar: the latest developments in work and climate
A concise and comprehensive blueprint for a just transition. In case you missed part one or part two, the Pembina Institute and Canadian Labour Congress have released a summary report for their Sustainable Jobs Blueprint project. It’s a helpful synthesis of their important work and a great place to start for anyone catching up on Canada’s just transition debate in the wake of Bill C-50.
Federal buildings strategy lacks teeth. The new Canada Green Buildings Strategy gets the broad strokes right in terms of prioritizing energy efficiency retrofits for existing buildings and introducing stricter standards for new buildings. But as Efficiency Canada points out in their response, the federal government isn’t committing enough money or implementing serious enough regulations to make those aspirations a reality.
Alberta’s coal transition programs are working, but they could be doing so much more. Prairies Economic Development Canada announced $39 million for 10 economic diversification projects in Alberta coal communities, including investments in public infrastructure, employment centres and industrial parks. Federal transition funding delivered through a Crown corporation is one of the best industrial policy tools we have for delivering a just transition in fossil fuel communities. The main problem with this announcement is the amount of funding on offer. PrairiesCan needs at least 10 times the budget to accelerate real industrial alternatives in fossil fuel communities.
Saskatchewan to offer oil and gas courses to high schoolers. I initially thought it was satire, but the province is indeed developing online classes where “students will learn about the importance of the oil and gas industry.” The curriculum is being developed in part by Teine Energy, a private oil and gas corporation. One of the many ironies here is that we can and should be leveraging the education system to better prepare young people for the economy of the future—just one that does not include fossil fuels.
BC oil and gas industry scores a carbon pricing loophole. Over on Policy Note, my CCPA-BC colleague Marc Lee details how the province’s new output-based pricing system (OBPS) for large emitters allows oil and gas companies to pay only a fraction of the full carbon price. Oil and gas lobbyists played an important role in the policy change, which will result in the province giving up half a billion dollars in annual carbon pricing revenues.
Provinces are pulling in different directions on climate. This latest concession to the fossil industry notwithstanding, BC comes out on top in a new report published by the Pembina Institute and Simon Fraser University, All Together Now, which compares Canadian governments on their climate policies. The federal government and the province of Quebec round out the top three “strong leaders” while Ontario, Alberta and Saskatchewan bring up the rear. The report makes a series of sensical policy recommendations, but it does not grapple with the underlying political differences between these jurisdictions, which are the real problem.
Wastewater processing driving green skills demand in Canada. The most in-demand green skill sets in Canada right now are wastewater processing, renewable energy and solar power, according to a new report from the Future Skills Centre, Hiring Green. The study is based on job postings, so it’s just the tip of the iceberg when it comes to future demand, but I always appreciate research that turns the amorphous concept of “green jobs” into something more tangible.
EU nations need to get on the same industrial policy page. A briefing from the European Council on Foreign Relations, A green industrial policy for the next European Commission, offers an interesting breakdown of the competing views within the EU when it comes to subsidizing green manufacturing. The main takeaway is that working at cross purposes will disadvantage Europe relative to the U.S. or China. The EU would be better served by adopting a common strategic approach.
EU auto transition is exacerbating regional inequities. On a related note, a paper published in Energy Research & Social Science, “Driving towards a just transition?” finds that the shift from internal combustion engines to ZEVs is deepening a “core-periphery” divide within Europe’s manufacturing sector. The troubling conclusion that “just” transition policies can actually make inequality worse is something I wrote about back in 2019.
What role for Chinese ZEVs in Canada? The Canadian government will likely follow the U.S. lead in implementing punitive tariffs on Chinese ZEV imports. There are good reasons for privileging domestic ZEV manufacturers from both an industrial policy and labour perspective, but I’m not sure that keeping Chinese manufacturers out entirely is the right move from a consumer or climate perspective. We’ll see where Canada lands.
Low-income households are being left out of the ZEV shift. On a related note, new research from UCLA’s Luskin Center for Innovation reiterates that government incentives for purchasing zero-emission vehicles disproportionately benefit higher-income households. That’s true even in places like California, which offer incentives specifically for lower-income car buyers. The bottom line is that equitably decarbonizing the transportation sector requires a more holistic approach than helping rich people get into Teslas.
Canadian wildfires are causing more climate change. We often focus on wildfires as a consequence of climate change, but the unfortunate reality, as an article in the journal Global Change Biology points out, is that wildfires are also causing climate change in a brutal feedback loop. Canada’s 2023 wildfires produced 3 billion tons of CO2, far more than Canada’s reported emissions for the year. As we mourn the losses in Jasper, we cannot lose sight of the symbiotic connection between climate change and fires.
