Net-zero Emissions Future
Inquiry--Debate Continued
March 28, 2023
Honourable colleagues, I rise to speak to Senator Coyle’s inquiry to find solutions to ensure the transition of society, the economy and the use of Canada’s resources in the pursuit of a just, prosperous, sustainable and peaceful net-zero future for our country and our planet.
In 2022, Canada’s Overshoot Day, in other words the day when our country used its share of all the resources that the Earth can regenerate in a single year, was March 13. Despite its imperfections, this indicator is easy to understand and reflects the unsustainable nature of our socio-economic system. Canada uses the resources for one year in just two and a half months. However, we used to waste much less. In the early 1970s, Canada’s Overshoot Day was around the end of December, where it should be.
It is in our own interest to become a sustainable nation. We need to be more efficient and careful when we use natural resources.
Our way of life and our behaviours have pushed the current system to its limits. Overall, there is a positive correlation between waste generation and income level. Hence, it’s our responsibility as a developed, rich nation to redress and set an example.
The global demand for material resources is expected to double by 2060. It will cause environmental damage, including rises in greenhouse gas emissions, waste and associated pollution if we don’t find rapid, smart, sustainable solutions and if we don’t change the paradigm of considering citizens uniquely as consumers in a linear economic system that takes, makes and wastes.
The strain on the global climate system has been observed by scientists for decades, and the cause of planet warming is unequivocally the result of human-induced greenhouse gas emissions. Current global average temperatures are close to 1.2 degrees above the pre-industrial levels, while Canada has experienced twice this warming and the Arctic three times as much. These changes are leading to the destruction of basic infrastructure by extreme weather events that all Canadians have experienced. Climate change is a systemic risk because it affects everyone, everywhere. Intense heat waves, melting of permafrost, sea-level rise, shore erosion, forest fires, tornadoes and hurricanes, atmospheric rivers, loss of biodiversity and species extinction are happening here and now. Last year — 2022 — will be known as the year when extreme weather events became the norm and costs of reparations amounted to billions per event.
I recently viewed the film The Issue with Tissue — a boreal love story by Michael Zelniker. I encourage you to watch it. You will see the direct relationship between our consumption habits, the destruction of natural capital and our blunt inaction. Understand this: More than 5,000 wild species are at some risk of extinction in Canada. For example, despite its status as a protected species, the three families of Canadian caribou are at risk of extinction, including the once-mighty George River and Leaf River herds of Labrador and Quebec. Senator Audette can tell you lots more about the disappearance of this species and its importance to Indigenous peoples.
But I’m here to speak about solutions and to say that Canadians are looking and waiting for this chamber to play its role of sober second thought and come up with constructive debate and propose effective solutions to the connected multiple crises that we are all experiencing without leaving anybody behind.
A first solution at hand is that markets address pollution and its impacts. As responsible corporations, they must address the negative externalities exactly as a responsible citizen. They created these negative externalities by providing efficient means to manage them. It is urgent to implement alternative models of production and consumption while addressing the letdowns of our linear system. We must transform to a circular economy where subproducts such as waste and other non-valued materials are reintegrated into the system.
The main principles are actually very simple: use fewer resources; design more durably; ban planned obsolescence; provide service loops, such as repair, that extend within product lifetimes; slow rates of extraction; use less toxic or polluting substances; and improve the collection and management of waste and reprocessing of materials to get the most out of the material by creating value in each stage of reuse. In sum, if a product can’t be reduced, reused, repaired, rebuilt, refinished, resold, recycled or degraded, then it should be restricted, redesigned or removed from production.
A second solution that is dramatically needed if Canada chooses to remain competitive during the ongoing third industrial revolution and knowledge economy is the shift to renewable energy for electricity production.
I was today locked in for the budget. I put out a press release. There is money for electricity — I’m very happy — but we can do better.
The Canadian renewable sector, although thriving in provinces such as Alberta, is, in general, lagging behind the rest of the world. We simply aren’t displacing fossil fuels with renewable energy quickly enough. Most G7 countries have succeeded in decoupling growth from greenhouse gas emissions because they developed and implemented clean energy. Contrary to fossil fuels, electricity from renewables follows learning curves where production costs keep falling dramatically. At present, renewable energy is the safest, cleanest and cheapest, and Canada has the resources to be a world leader. The East Coast alone has enough potential wave power to double our current installed generating capacity.
Dear colleagues, why — despite having the longest coastline, the highest tides and among the highest waves in the world — don’t we use wave or tidal renewable energy?
My office has published a white paper on the best policies for a clean recovery post COVID-19 and a second white paper on sustainable finances aiming at net-zero greenhouse gas emissions before 2050. By implementing similar or adapted approaches to those that have worked around the world, we can not only accelerate the transformation but we can render our economy more sustainable in line with our pressing reality and needs.
Among these approaches, we found several things.
Proposed bills can be viewed through both a climate lens that will consider impacts to future generations and a social justice lens that can ensure benefits and costs of the transition are distributed equitably.
Financial supports for the transition can focus on helping people first and then corporations. When financial assistance is provided to corporations, it should be accompanied by accountability and enforceable measures — verifiable goals that contribute to human and ecosystem well-being.
We can ask if government financial support to development projects protects and regenerates natural capital and ecosystems. We can ask if Indigenous communities have been consulted and if they can be supported in their role as guardians of Indigenous lands and biodiversity.
Fisheries, forestry and agriculture are sectors that still operate under unsustainable approaches. Several fish stocks are disappearing, boreal forests are being clear-cut and agricultural soils are impoverished by overuse of heavy mechanized operations like synthetic fertilization and pesticides. These sectors need to rethink and operations need to be optimized.
We can support actions so municipalities adapt to climate change now by building future-proof critical infrastructure, by building right the first time and in the right places and using natural infrastructure as first lines of defence against flooding and erosion.
Every government investment could go in the direction of building forward better, which coincides with economically and environmentally efficient projects that allow for recouping their costs while serving to reduce inequality.
Dear colleagues, there are many solutions to the problems that we face and can no longer ignore. What we need is the will and the intent to protect our children and current and future generations.
As President Biden said last week:
A future where we understand that economic success is not in conflict with the rights and dignity of workers or meeting our responsibilities addressing the climate crisis, but rather those things depend on us doing that. . . . Factually.
Colleagues, you know the United States Inflation Reduction Act is a game changer, and we need to step up our game if we don’t want to be left behind.
To conclude, we are hearing arguments about the cost of taking action. I challenge you to justify the economic, financial, societal and moral cost of inaction. In 2011, the National Round Table on the Environment and the Economy predicted that the cost of inaction could reach $91 billion a year in Canada by 2050. The Canadian Climate Institute estimates that by 2025, or very shortly, our GDP will have decreased by $25 billion. By 2055, it will be $80 billion to $103 billion lower. Inaction or a business-as-usual approach results in the destruction of our natural capital, which is a significant part of our GDP.
I ask you to consider what you are doing to protect the livelihoods of Canadians and the Canadian economy from the impacts of the interconnected crises of climate change, biodiversity loss, and the financial crisis. I ask you to consider what you are doing to lead the way to a prosperous, net-zero economy.
Thank you, meegwetch.
Honourable senators, I rise again this evening to speak to Senator Coyle’s inquiry calling the attention of the Senate to the importance of finding solutions to transition Canada’s society, economy and resource use in pursuit of a fair, prosperous, sustainable and peaceful net-zero emissions future for our country and our planet.
I am and always will be an “agvocate.” I’ve worked in agriculture for most of my life. It’s what I know best and will remain a primary focus as long as I serve Canadians in the Red Chamber.
Thus, my focus this evening will be agriculture’s role in the fight against climate change and the mitigation of greenhouse gas emissions in support of Canada’s efforts to achieve net-zero emissions.
According to the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, in 2016, agriculture contributed about 17% of greenhouse gas emissions globally, and that figure does not include an additional 7% to 14% caused by changes to land use. According to Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada, 10% of Canada’s greenhouse gas emissions are from crop and livestock production, excluding emissions from the use of fossil fuels or from fertilizer production.
These are significant numbers that we need to work to bring down. However, the onus cannot be placed solely on the farmers and the agricultural industry. They work hard to provide us with food, and most of them are good stewards of the land. And, as stewards of the land, farmers are and have been heavily invested in the fight against climate change and mitigating its impacts.
In many cases, our farmers face the brunt of climate change as Canadian agriculture suffers greatly from the effects. The frequency of extreme weather events has doubled since the 1990s. There has been an increase in floods, droughts, forest fires and storms that, unsurprisingly, interfere with harvests and disproportionately affect farms of all sizes.
While we must recognize that agriculture is part of the problem when it comes to climate change, the agricultural sector has demonstrated continuous improvement over many years while emissions from other sectors have risen over time. Agriculture truly has an amazing potential to be an important part of the climate change solution.
In fact, many farmers have already taken steps over the years to make their land a zero-till operation. This technique increases the retention of organic matter and nutrient cycling, which in turn increases carbon sequestration. Or they use perennial forage cover crops: There is more carbon in soils under perennial forage than annual crops, due in part to the former’s ability to better transfer carbon to the soil.
In fact, the Canadian Federation of Agriculture shared that farmers have kept their emissions steady for 20 years while almost doubling production, resulting in a decrease of greenhouse gas emission intensity by one half.
Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada also recognizes that agriculture helps slow climate change by storing carbon on agricultural lands. Storing — or sequestering — carbon in soil as organic matter, perennial vegetation and in trees reduces carbon dioxide amounts in the atmosphere.
We have also seen more technological advancements and innovation, including precision agriculture, the use of artificial intelligence and drones, that aim to decrease negative environmental impacts while also increasing profitability. We can also explore the possibility of scaling up technologies that we already know yield positive environmental outcomes.
There are many other innovative methods farmers employ in order to protect the environment without sacrificing profitability. An example of this is reintegrating livestock and crops on the farm and managed grazing, which can increase livestock’s nutrient consumption as well as increase soil organic matter. Additionally, vertical farming and urban farming have gained popularity in recent years.
These innovative ways of producing quality foods allow us to grow crops in cities without taking up much space.
We’re also seeing the use of hydroponics, meaning growing crops directly in nutrient-enriched water rather than soil.
The challenge for the agriculture and agri-food sector will be to mitigate their emissions while adapting to the impacts of climate change without jeopardizing food security.
To do so, Canadian agriculture producers and food processors will need the government’s and the public’s support in transitioning their operations to be more sustainable, and they will also require their support while they seek to change decades‑long practices and procedures.
Many organizations, including the Canadian Federation of Agriculture, the Ontario Federation of Agriculture, the Canadian Cattle Association and the Canadian Pork Council, among others, have highlighted their dedication to supporting Canada’s fight against climate change over the past few years.
There are, of course, specific concerns to each sector regarding such issues as fair carbon pricing and other potential impacts to the overall sustainability of the industries, but overall, Canadian agriculture knows that they have a critical role to play as stewards of the land, which involves preserving ecosystems and resources, such as soil and water, as well as minimizing the environmental impacts of their activities through the implementation of beneficial agricultural practices.
At this time, I would like to pivot to the role of soil health and the environment and how it can and does affect climate change. I have risen on a number of occasions in this chamber and in the Agriculture and Forestry Committee to speak about the importance of soil health.
As you may know, the Standing Senate Committee on Agriculture and Forestry is undertaking a new soil health study. As one of Canada’s most precious natural resources, soil conservation is a top-of-mind matter for the agriculture and agri‑food sector. The future of this country is intrinsically linked to the health of its ecosystem, which in itself hinges on soil health. In relation to this inquiry, soils across Canada play a critical role in carbon storage and can help deliver on Canada’s net-zero targets.
Healthy soil is arguably one of the most critical resources for the health of our natural and agri-ecosystems so that they can sustain food production, as well as the provision of ecosystem services. Knowing how to manage soils and understanding how soils function is key to their productivity and long-term sustainability.
Ensuring the health and conservation of Canadian land is a shared responsibility and will require collective leadership and sustained commitment and action by those directly responsible for managing soil across the country.
However, it is concerning to think that Ontario is losing almost 319 acres of farmland every day. At this time, I would like to acknowledge the Ontario Federation of Agriculture’s Home Grown campaign. It is high time that we work together to protect local farms across this province and across Canada from being lost to urban sprawl. When we lose farmland, we lose the food that would have been cultivated there as well and the positive benefits of green space. That loss directly contributes to our ability to maintain a strong, stable food supply chain and contributes to the loss of ecosystems.
In March 2019, a report by the Canadian Agri-Food Policy Institute entitled Clean Growth in Agriculture highlighted that:
Canadian agriculture . . . has steadily reduced its GHG emissions intensity as a result of dramatic disruptive technological changes. The efforts by governments, industry and academia continue to enable the industry to reduce its emissions . . . . becoming a net sink and providing solutions for the rest of the economy.
Soil health and climate change are intrinsically linked. On the one hand, soils are the second-largest carbon sink after our oceans, storing three times more carbon than is found in the atmosphere. On the other hand, rising temperatures and changing precipitation patterns can lead to soil erosion and fertility loss and a decline in soil’s ability to carry out basic ecosystem services.
We know that soil is not a renewable resource, and we don’t have much time left to save our soil — some experts say less than 50 years. Additionally, the cost of soil degradation in Canada is estimated at over $3 billion annually. That cost will only increase if nothing is done.
Improving soil health is not a one-size-fits-all endeavour across Canada’s varied landscape, but it is clear that healthy soil has an important role to play in our economy, environment and society, including helping our country reach our net-zero targets.
Honourable colleagues, we know that climate change is one of the biggest issues facing our world. It is clear that the agricultural industry understands and supports the call to action to fight climate change. However, we are asking a lot of our farmers. Many agricultural operations rely on decades-old practices that have only recently been deemed as environmentally detrimental. I am taking this opportunity to once again call upon the Canadian government to work collaboratively with our agricultural industry so that it can help make the journey to environmental sustainability a little easier for everyone.
I am confident that the agricultural industry, which has been innovating for as long as it has existed, will continue to rise to the challenge by helping in the fight against climate change. Of course, initiatives must come from all sectors and be a joint effort from all of us. In order to achieve our goals in greenhouse gas reduction, government and industry must work together.
I know that many of us in this chamber have children and grandchildren. Without working together to challenge and change the effects of climate change, I fear they will be living in a world entirely different than the one we know today.
I appreciate the opportunity to provide an agricultural perspective in the Senate. I thank my honourable colleague for bringing this inquiry forward. Thank you, meegwetch.
