After retiring from teaching Chemistry and Environmental Science at Redeemer University College, Dr. Henry Brouwer is now the Eastern Canada Regional Climate Witness Project Coordinator of the Christian Reformed Church. In the wake of a flurry of historic climate change news in Canada, Dr. Brouwer agreed to share his expertise with Do Justice.
Already in 1861, British physicist John Tyndall first showed that certain gases, collectively called greenhouse gases (including carbon dioxide, or CO2) are capable of absorbing thermal radiation emitted by the earth. In 1896, Svante Arrhenius calculated that the earth’s temperature would increase by about 6 degrees Celsius if CO2 levels were to double.
But following the agreement at the Earth Summit in 1992 to limit carbon emissions, the fossil fuel industry began an extremely effective campaign, primarily in the US, to create doubt about the science of climate change. 'Fake news' has stalled serious international action ever since, even though individual countries, states/provinces, and cities have implemented numerous projects to reduce carbon emissions.
A carbon tax involves the addition of a tax per tonne of carbon (in the form of carbon dioxide) emitted; the increased fuel cost is expected to lower demand. But in a cap and trade system, the government auctions off carbon emission permits to major users of fossil fuels, with a decreasing number of permits auctioned each year until the carbon emission reduction target is reached. Companies requiring more permits can buy extra permits from other, more efficient companies at market value.
Cap and trade, although more complicated than a carbon tax, employs market forces to reduce overall carbon emissions, while a carbon tax simply increases the cost of fuel but may not achieve the reduction goal desired by the government. The Ontario cap and trade program was linked with those in Quebec and California, creating a much greater market for carbon permits.
A fund was established to help citizens and businesses in Ontario become more energy efficient. For example, the Save on Energy program in Ontario provided grants to develop alternate sources of energy and to lower energy demand by homeowners, businesses and institutions (e.g. grants for electric vehicles, better windows, high efficiency furnaces, geothermal heating and cooling, and lighting, to name a few). This approach not only reduced carbon emissions but also operating costs--a win-win situation!
The Conservative parties, both provincial and federal, oppose any form of carbon tax. With cancellation of the Ontario cap and trade program in July 2018, many grants for improving efficiency were canceled, including hundreds of sustainable energy projects (wind, solar, hydro). .
Even the Financial Accountability Office (FAO) of Ontario recently predicted that the budget will worsen by three billion dollars over the next three years with the cancellation of this program. Unfortunately, the current government has not yet released its plans to address climate change, other than to challenge the federal carbon tax in the courts!
Effective April 1, 2019, a carbon tax of $20/tonne, increasing to $50/tonne by 2022, will be imposed in the hopes of decreasing demand. The money collected is to be refunded to the citizens to compensate them for the increase in fuel costs.
I don't think so. Since the proceeds of the tax will be refunded to citizens, there will be no extra revenues for programs for the transition away from fossil fuels. How will the government finance much-needed public transportation systems or develop sustainable infrastructure projects, at a time when they are already heavily in debt? We cannot expect private industry alone to propose and finance the transition to sustainable energy sources.
The earth's temperature is already about 1oC higher than pre-industrial times. Many impacts of a warming earth are occurring much sooner than predicted, such as intensification of storms, severe drought and flooding, melting of the Arctic ice, and rapid melting of glaciers, to name a few. The concentration of carbon dioxide, presently 45% above pre-industrial times, will be about 60% higher by 2040 at current emission rates; this will only intensify the effects of climate change and create more severe problems for our children's generation.
NO! But the longer we fail to reduce carbon emissions, the greater the effects (and costs) of climate change and the more difficult to make the necessary changes. We need long-term planning to provide a road-map of where we have to be and how we will get there.
God’s creation has an amazing ability to restore itself, but only if humans stop releasing substances that cause the problems. Take the acid rain problem in the 1960's: once the emission of sulfur dioxide (the cause) was reduced using a cap and trade approach, the areas affected (e.g acidification of rivers and lakes) slowly improved.
The simple answer is – WE MUST REDUCE USE OF FOSSIL FUELS! Caring for God’s creation at a time when humanity's impact is beyond question is no longer optional. Here are a few ways you can become part of the solution:
We are called to be faithful in all things. How can you use your insights and gifts to make this world a better place for your children?
* Recommended viewing: Royal Dutch Shell’s 28 minute documentary “Climate of Concern” (1991)
The Reformed family is a diverse family with a diverse range of opinions. Not all perspectives expressed on the blog represent the official positions of the Christian Reformed Church. Learn more about this blog, Reformed doctrines, and our diversity policy on our About page.
In order to steward ministry shares well, commenting isn’t available on Do Justice itself because we engage with comments and dialogue in other spaces. To comment on this post, please visit the Christian Reformed Centre for Public Dialogue’s Facebook page (for Canada-specific articles) or the Office of Social Justice’s Facebook page. Alternatively, please email us. We want to hear from you!
Read more about our comment policy.