Geesh, Chris, thanks for reminding that I was actually running a blog with you here! My excuse for not posting definitely could not have been the lack of developments in the area of climate change. Just to continue on where you left off. Silver linings. Can we discern a silver lining in the energy policy of Canada’s southern neighbors now, with Double-You calling the Americans “addicted to oil” in the State of the Union address, and planning to reduce dependence on Middle East oil by 75% by 2025? I think one has to be even more optimistic than Chris in his previous post to believe that. But if you look real carefully, you may see it. But before you can see the silver lining, there are some thick clouds to look through:
- First of all, Mr. President only referred to foreign oil, which happens to form only 20% of the US oil consumption. Domestic oil companies are not targeted at all, even though a company like ExxonMobil made the world’s largest profitthis year through promoting the use of fossil fuels.
- Secondly, his speechwriters ensured that any mentioning of climate change did not appear in the address, even though the rationale behind cutting down emissions has to be somehow related to climate change.
- Thirdly, Bush’ aides were veeeery quick to downplay the statement made in the speech.
- Fourth, even if the government wants to reduce dependence on fossil fuels, the substitutes are not always the clean energy that is needed, but rather ‘clean’ coal, nuclear, etc. With the speech, Bush launched the Advanced Energy Initiative, a research program focusing on the development of clean energy technologies. On a more positive note, Bush has emphasized the potential of ethanol as alternative fuel.
- Fifth, even if the dependence on fossil fuels is reduced, there is no incentive for the average American to become more energy-efficient.
So, yes, it is possible to give a positive spin to Bush’ words (if you take into account all the caveats mentioned above): the fact that this is mentioned by in a public speech by one of the persons leading the country that consumes most oil in the world. Energy reform is needed. And although no-one believes that Bush will all of a sudden turn into a concerned environmentalist, he has opened space for debate on energy reform here. Now is the time for proposals that go far beyond what the Bush administration wants to catch the public’s eye.

Whoa whoa whoa! Back up the train! Hey, world did you see what happened last year in Montreal? Did it look like Canada was planning on strangling the life out of the Kyoto Protocol at the UN's Conference on Climate Change?

Okay, granted that Canadians elected a conservative minority last week. A conservative minority that may or may not support Kyoto. And they may or may not accept the view that human emissions of CO2 are contributing to global warming. I agree: that's the bad news.

But there are positive things about the Canadian federal election that might benefit Canada's response to climate change.

Here are the positives:

1. The conservative minority will have to work with the other major Canadian parties, all of whom support honouring our Kyoto commitment.
   
   
2. The fact that Canada currently holds the presidency of the UNFCCC will force the conseratives to weigh in on climate issues early, and with international attention focused on their actions.
   
   At the very least, we'll quickly learn where they stand. However, I'm hoping that this pressure will force the conservatives take a progressive approach on climate change and push for viable cuts to our steadily rising emissions.
   
   
3. Finally, in the end we, the Canadian public, have a chance to make ourselves heard. Particularly, as the conservatives step up into office, we can send a clear message that a majority of the public supports Kyoto and wants to see Canada honour its international commitment!

So that's my optimistic take on the conservatives and Kyoto. Don't count us out yet! The situation is much more nuanced and flexible than the media might protray it.

And don't forget, the United States (under a decidedly anti-Kyoto administration) has done more to cut its greenhouse gas emissions than Canada ever did under the Protocol. Either way you cut it, liberals or conservatives, the simple message is: it's time to get our act together.