QUESTION PERIOD — Environment and Climate Change
Greenhouse Gas Emissions
December 11, 2023
Senator Gold, the government just announced a cap on greenhouse gas emissions by 2030. However, our oil and gas production is expected to increase during that period.
How do you explain this inconsistency? It is the illusion of carbon capture, which is being touted as a miracle solution, so that the industry can continue with the status quo.
The International Energy Agency recently wrote that oil and gas companies need to start “letting go of the illusion” that carbon capture is a realistic solution. Those doubts were best summed up by John Moffet, an assistant deputy minister at the Department of the Environment.
I think the bigger issue that we hear about is that it’s a very costly way to continue to produce oil and gas . . . at some point the world needs to stop using oil and gas. . . . It’s not really a technical question; it’s sort of a moral hazard question: “Should we do this and, thereby, enable continued use of oil and gas?”
Senator Gold, why spend billions of dollars in public funds to continue producing fossil fuels when we should be phasing them out as quickly as possible?
I thank the honourable senator for her question.
I feel a bit like Goldilocks. Things are either way too hot or way too cold. In short, the government is committed to continuing to take a science-based, cautious approach to climate action and to ensuring a more sustainable future.
The global economy uses and will continue to use oil and gas, which is why the government is moving ahead with its commitment to introduce a cap on pollution, with an ambitious and achievable plan for emissions from the oil and gas sector.
This is the first time that an oil-producing country has put such a program in place. The pollution cap will ensure that Canada’s oil and gas sector does its part to reduce emissions and strengthen its competitiveness in this rapidly decarbonizing sector of the global economy.
When experts look at carbon capture technology, it is only in a very specific context, namely, to capture emissions from industries for which there is currently no other alternative, such as the steel and cement industries. No one thinks that carbon capture is a realistic option for greenhouse gas emissions from the oil and gas industry.
Why is Canada insisting on investing billions of public dollars in a technology that is leading us to a dead-end from a climate change and economic perspective?
Thank you, but with all due respect, I do not agree with the premise of your question.
Every sector of the Canadian economy is being asked to help in the fight against climate change and in building a prosperous future. In order to meet that important goal, we need to invest in technology and innovation. With its provincial and territorial partners in the industry, Canada will do its part to find ways to reduce emissions and save the planet.
