The world is racing toward an unprecedented climate emergency. Recent groundbreaking reports leave no doubt that climate change is now the most critical challenge of our times. The latest science is worrisome:
- the IPCC 1.5°C report,
- Canada’s Changing Climate report,
- the U.S. Fourth National Climate Assessment,
- the latest Mauna Loa CO2 (415 ppm) reading,
- the UN report on nature’s accelerating decline.
Canadians agree: we need to do more to combat climate change. And we need a strong and credible plan to do so. Economists agree: carbon pricing should be part of that plan. It’s is a practical, meaningful and fair way to reduce the pollution that is destabilizing our climate and threatening our health. But there are a lot of myths about carbon pricing.
Debunking Myths about Carbon Pricing
Putting a price on pollution should be a no-brainer
We can see and feel the effects of climate change—from forest fires to floods that threaten our homes, to pollution that threatens our kids’ health. Canadians want a serious plan to take action on climate change. We need ambitious actions and policies that match the scope and magnitude of the threats we face. And we will need a suite of tools to do so. By far, the most efficient and effective tool in the climate toolbox is carbon pricing. A climate plan without a carbon pricing is not climate action.
I live in a country which is regarded as a world leader on carbon pricing. Canada’s Greenhouse Gas Pollution Pricing Act sets the national price on greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions for all provinces and territories that do not have their own compliant carbon pricing regime. In spite of this achievement, a more ambitious carbon pricing policy is required to reduce worldwide greenhouse gas emissions by 45% below 2005 levels by 2030, as per the IPCC 1.5 °C report.
Dispelling The Myths About Carbon Pricing
Ten Compelling Reasons Why Carbon Pricing Works
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License. 
Our example matters?
Canada is a good example of a lot of things, like having a free press and having democracy, but that in itself does little to get other countries to adopt these things.
Change has winners and losers and many people worry they will be a loser in carbon pricing and other efforts to deal with the problem, telling people that it will only be for us to set a good example is not going to get people to accept change,
We need a binding solution on all countries that is better than the inadequate, voluntary Paris Accord that lets Chin and India and other countries increase emissions while we make efforts to reduce ours.
And here is a key point – Canadians do emits 3 times per capita what others emits – so why are we increasing our population through high immigration?Our per capita rate of immigration is about 2.5 times that of the US. So instead of each person reducing emisions by 30% we have to find per capita savings of at least 46% to meet the current inadequate target.
We are supposed to cut emissions by 30% from 2005 to 2030 – but at the same time, our population is to grow by at least 25% if not more, because the Trudeau government has increased immigration from 260,000 to 350,000.
Brian – welcome to Below2C.
As you point out, climate change and carbon emissions are a complicated problem. Rising greenhouse gases is a global problem. It starts with overpopulation. Nothing is easier to solve by having more people inhabit the planet. Whether immigrants end up in Canada or elsewhere, does little to address the overall challenge we face.
Thank you for your feedback – much appreciated.