It’s perverse. Under the Canadian Constitution, energy and environment are provincial jurisdictions. Nevertheless, when Canada’s Liberal government wants to expand its reach, it just tells the provinces because it's all one atmosphere, it's taking control of their air, their water and their energy: It’s all one atmosphere right? Doesn’t stop at your border, you know. What you do affects everybody else..To repeat, that's not what the Constitution says. But, let's say we believe them. This is what’s perverse: When you take that argument internationally, the Liberals won’t hear of it..To be specific, China famously generates about 20% of all the world’s carbon emissions, because it largely relies upon ‘dirty’ coal-fired electricity generators. For comparison’s purposes, Canada generates a little over one per cent. But then being abundantly resourced with natural gas, Canada phased out most of its coal-fired power plants..So, if it's all one atmosphere and what China does affects the whole world, (and what India also does, by the way), it would make sense to help them do what we do, that is switch out of coal and into natural gas..Right?.To be specific, it would make sense if we sold them Canadian natural gas, in fact. According to the Canadian Energy Regulator, Western Canada has a lot of it: the Western Canada Sedimentary Basin has ultimately recoverable reserves of something like 1,000 trillion cubic feet, in fact..But suddenly and without obvious explanation, the one-atmosphere argument doesn't apply now. Canada's Liberal government decided Canada must meet its own commitments under the Paris Agreement, regardless of what happens in the rest of the world. .A cynic would say — I would say — that if the world is really going to fry, Canadian politicians are going to look supremely ridiculous clutching their personal-performance trophies from the Paris crowd, while the smokes of desolation swirl around Beijing. However, given the poor track record of doom merchants from Al Gore to Greta Thunberg — keep in mind in 1975 the smart people thought we were going to freeze, not fry — an early apocalypse is probably not the way to bet..Therefore to understand what drives the Liberal fanatics in Ottawa, we must look elsewhere. Tempting as some of us find it to think the worst of the Ottawa Liberal mentality, casting as an anti-Alberta obsession what is actually simple silo thinking may for once take us away from the real story here, however..Shannon Joseph is the chair of Energy for a Secure Future and she recently came into the office for a chat. You can watch the whole episode here, but she pointed out in particular the rules of the Paris Accord make individual countries responsible for meeting their own goals. So, while it might make sense for the globe if Canada helped another country reduce its emissions, there's no recognition under the accord to Canada for doing so..Or at least none that the Government of Canada wishes to utilize. In theory, the accord does provide such a mechanism: Article 6 allows a natural-gas exporting country credit when its product helps another country reduce its carbon emissions. However, as long ago as four years when Natural Resources Minister Jonathan Wilkinson was still at Environment, he commented the Liberal government's aim was to "reach Canada's emission reductions targets through domestic cuts, not by relying on credit-trading within Article 6.".As his announcements earlier this week show, and notwithstanding last month's G-7 endorsement of increased LNG deliveries as a way to meet global climate challenge, he has not changed his mind about that. Those insisting on a malicious interpretation of Ottawa's actions may find in this the evidence they seek..Meanwhile, whatever truly animates the federal Liberals, Energy for a Secure Future is making the case that increased Canadian gas exports would be good for the global climate. Further, and not incidentally, development of gas resources would represent real, practical economic reconciliation in the form of indigenous ownership in new projects. In other words, two key Liberal policy goals would be met. (It would be a cruel joke on indigenous people if, after 75 years of energy development in western Canada during which they received modest benefit only, Ottawa decided to kill the industry just as indigenous people were ready to cash in.).It's just that increased exports would also help Alberta, Saskatchewan (and B.C.) So suddenly it's not that important that it's all 'one atmosphere,' after all?.Premiers Smith and Moe will no doubt have that in mind when the Trudeau government tries to tell Alberta and Saskatchewan to phase out their own gas-fired electricity generation to meet Ottawa's impossible — and self-evidently perverse — climate goals..Contra Minister Wilkinson, there are 'lines in the sand.' And there should be.
