Last year, ReClimate’s research center at Carleton University released a report on Canadian responses to climate change and clean energy, showing that 70% of Canadians say governments should do more about climate change. Over 90% support growth in renewable power and clean energy, while almost 60% say oil and gas remain important to our future economy. The report also states that many Canadians continue to hold conflicting attitudes on energy transition, having a widespread sense that we can have clean energy and go on burning fossil fuels, too.
Political pressure appears to create the biggest divide. Federally, the Conservatives, while in power (2006-2015), initially canceled billions of federal spending for climate change and energy efficiency and eventually withdrew from the Kyoto Protocol. Currently, as the opposition, they state their climate policy will be revealed during their 2025 election platform. In the interim, they are campaigning to end Canada’s carbon tax. Provincially, Alberta’s controversial six-month ban on renewable projects, which ended February 29, involved a review of renewable impacts on agricultural lands, the environment, municipalities, and viewscapes. Since then, few renewable projects have moved forward as the province begins developing a new electricity market. The legislative timeline suggests more months of uncertainty are ahead.
Municipal or Indigenous concerns may turn down renewable projects requiring significant amounts of land impacting local ecosystems and requests for zoning bylaw amendments. Also, there may be sometimes NIMBY perceptions.
The National Institute of Health states that believing climate change is naturally occurring instead of caused by humans is known as attribution skepticism or soft denial. Reports show fossil fuel companies and power providers may reject renewables or climate change and oppose fossil fuel phase-outs. Resistance is augmented by lobbyists who promote misinformation on climate solutions and messaging to make low-carbon technologies appear to be less competitive. Environmental sociologist Riley Dunlap identified a counter-movement to climate activism that includes fossil fuel corporations, opposition scientists, conservative think tanks, and front groups. Self-designated experts and those with strong ideological motivations may come on board to support misinformation or act as policy delayers. Many opponents point out geographic limitations, storage challenges, lack of consumer education on sustainable energy, infrastructure, and installation costs, and concerns that electricity generation doesn’t match peak demand hours, creating more challenges for the sector. This may also polarize public discussions and/or create a wait-and-see position, as fossil fuels are still readily available and affordable.
Further setbacks are the number of lobbyists now allowed at UNFCCC COP meetings. Denier resistances may be positioned as “It’s too late, or it’s not important enough just now.” These tactics only delay government progress to move clean energy forward.
Organizations like the Suzuki Foundation have delivered petitions to urge governments to take more ambitious climate action. Environmental groups often promote conservation measures to homeowners, support Indigenous climate-led action, encourage capital investment in renewables, advocate eating for a climate-stable planet, and mobilize climate political action events toward fossil fuel phase-out and increased emission targets. Overall, environmental groups have fewer resources than industry, and counter groups seemingly pop up alongside environmental successes.
A recent Ontario court appeal case from seven youths favored their climate lawsuit, challenging Ontario’s weak emissions target as risking citizen well-being and violating the Charter of Rights and Freedoms.
Scorecard would like to specifically mention Pembina Institute, a national non-partisan think tank, and their strong efforts on renewables and climate change. Pembina’s July report, All Together Now, https://www.pembina.org/pub/all-together-now, states that nearly half our emissions come from Saskatchewan and Alberta. The report declares glaring gaps in climate policy and emphasizes the importance of policy-makers prioritizing actions with the greatest potential for achieving rapid, deep emissions reductions. Our climate denier research found an academic study identifying lower beliefs in climate change primarily in rural Alberta and Saskatchewan, oil and gas industry regions.
We ask that readers monitor Pembina’s efforts to strengthen this work.
Contact
Lejla Latifovic, Senior Communications Lead, Communities & Decarbonization, Pembina Institute. Email: lejlal@pembina.org Phone: 819-639-4185
This Post was submitted by Climate Scorecard Canada Country Manager Diane Szoller.