radiofree.asia

Category: Press Release

  • New Report: Canada’s Oil and Gas Companies Can Cover Cleanup Costs but Prioritize Corporate Profits Instead

    Ottawa | Traditional, unceded territory of the Algonquin Anishinaabeg People – A new report released today by Environmental Defence, Past Due: Tallying the Costs of Oil and Gas Cleanup in Canada, finds that oil and gas companies could use their profits to cover the costs of environmental cleanup – which are currently estimated at $123 billion but could increase up to $220 billion – but must be forced by governments to do so.

    “Oil and gas companies have profited for decades from the destruction of the land,” said Julia Levin, Associate Director of National Climate at Environmental Defence. “Despite promising to clean up after themselves, they’ve used their massive profits to line the pockets of their executives and shareholders – hoping that no one will hold them accountable for the environmental damage they have created.”

    To get a sense of the scale of Canada’s fossil fuel industry’s current and future liabilities, and what governments should do about them while companies are still producing oil and gas, Environmental Defence Canada commissioned the Parkland Institute to explore three questions:

    1. How much Canadian oil and gas production is remaining within climate-safe temperature limits?
    2. What are the current and future costs of cleaning up the damages left behind by fossil fuel companies?
    3. How much profit will oil and gas companies generate?

    “In light of Canada’s climate commitments, we wanted to find out the balance between how much Canada’s oil and gas industry has left to profit compared to the growing cost to clean up its mess,” said report author, Megan Egler, Parkland Institute. “There is a real lack of transparency around environmental liabilities in the industry, but all three scenarios we modelled tell us that companies need to be putting a lot more money toward cleanup.”

    The report examines three different scenarios for remaining levels of oil and gas production. (Realistically, production will need to be phased out rather than coming to a full halt at the end of the given time periods. However, these three scenarios serve as discussion points.) For each scenario, the report authors estimate both future liabilities and future profits.

    • A “Fair Share” scenario, with Canada’s oil and gas production ending almost immediately, by the end of 2023. This scenario is not politically realistic, but is the only scenario which aligns with global equity, considering Canada’s historical emissions and ability to transition.
    • An “Economically Efficient” scenario, with current production levels continuing for six years. This considers the allowable cumulative greenhouse gas emissions from 2022 to 2050 while staying within the 1.5°C goal. Canada’s capacity to reduce emissions is taken into account, but it does not consider Canada’s historical emissions.
    • A “Business As Usual” scenario, with current production levels maintained until 2040. This scenario ignores global equity.

    Key Findings

    • Current oil and gas industry environmental liabilities: at least $123 billion, which include the costs of cleaning up oil and gas wells, oil sands mines and tailings ponds. (Due to a lack of available data, pipelines and facilities such as refineries are not included in this report’s estimates.)
    • Under the “Economically Efficient” scenario, at least 37 per cent of industry profits must go to paying for the cleanup of the oil and gas sector’s environmental liabilities. Even with longer phaseout timelines in the “Business As Usual” scenario, nearly 20 per cent of profits must go to environmental cleanup.
    • Oil and gas corporate profits can cover cleanup costs. Public funding for the cleanup of environmental liabilities is unnecessary and would be an inefficient subsidy to oil and gas corporations.

    “Oil and gas companies have a few years of profitable production left before they will need to phase out,” said Alienor Rougeot, Climate and Energy Program Manager, Environmental Defence. “There is no time to waste. Governments must take immediate action to ensure oil and gas company profits go towards cleaning up the industry’s massive environmental liabilities – instead of enriching shareholders.”

    The full report is available here.

    ABOUT ENVIRONMENTAL DEFENCE (environmentaldefence.ca): Environmental Defence is a leading Canadian environmental advocacy organization that works with government, industry and individuals to defend clean water, a safe climate and healthy communities.

    – 30 –

    For more information or to request an interview, please contact:

    Allen Braude, Environmental Defence, media@environmentaldefence.ca

    The post New Report: Canada’s Oil and Gas Companies Can Cover Cleanup Costs but Prioritize Corporate Profits Instead appeared first on Environmental Defence.

    This post was originally published on Environmental Defence.

  • Statement on NOAA’s 2023 Harmful Algae Bloom Forecast

    Statement from Michelle Woodhouse, Water Program Manager, Environmental Defence

    NOAA forecasts small algae bloom for Lake Erie which is still cause for concern and intensive July rainfalls could potentially increase bloom severity 

    Toronto | Traditional territories of the Mississaugas of the Credit, the Anishinaabeg, the Haudenosaunee, and the Huron-Wendat – Despite NOAA’s forecast of a small algae bloom this summer, a bloom of any size is unacceptable and poses a threat to human and animal health. In fact, smaller blooms can be more toxic than larger blooms due to higher concentrations of microcystin (a potent liver toxin and possible human carcinogen).

    The root causes of these harmful algae blooms, namely agricultural runoff and rising lake temperatures, must be addressed. NOAA scientists made it clear today that despite a mild 2023 forecast, there is still an urgent need for action to address all sources of phosphorus losses and runoff on both sides of the border. A changing climate is already leading to heavier-than-normal rainfall in the Great Lakes basin during the spring and summer months.

    Climate models predict this will only increase. A wetter spring and summer will result in more phosphorus runoff from the land and into Lake Erie, causing more severe algae blooms. Severe blooms suffocate the lake, creating a “dead zone” due to a lack of oxygen in the water, which can decimate fisheries. The presence of microcystin can also threaten drinking water and be fatal to animals.

    Canada and Ontario have committed to reducing the amount of phosphorus entering the lake by 40 per cent by 2025. However, to date, neither have provided an update on the progress towards that goal. We need greater accountability for how the agricultural food sector is being adequately supported, but also held to account in reducing its role in the problem. Recent government funding commitments for the Great Lakes should be used to help support the greater implementation of agricultural best management practices. This is sorely needed for the sector and greatly needed for larger-scale and heavily industrialized operations.

    The provincial and federal governments must work together to tackle current agricultural practices that often lead to overapplication rates on crops, in addition to very poor manure management systems for animals being raised for food. As a society, certain unsustainable agricultural production practices must be addressed.

    Furthermore, they must also work together to implement policies, such as Canada’s anticipated Sustainable Agriculture Strategy, to encourage efficient and restrained use of fertilizers. Overapplication of manure from animal agriculture is also a notable problem, and one that is costly for farmers and the environment, and should be addressed through more stringent storage and application practices.

    Background information:

    • The U.S. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) has announced its 2023 Lake Erie algae bloom forecast. This year’s bloom is expected to be small at a severity of 3 on a scale of 10.
    • July rainfall plays an important role in how the bloom can develop while the temperatures are also increasing in the lake. Intensive heavy rainfalls that could end up persisting over the month of July this summer may cause the bloom to grow to a moderate severity of 4.5.
    • Ontario and Canada signed the Canada-Ontario Lake Erie Action Plan in 2018 as part of the binational efforts to address Lake Erie’s algae blooms and keep them from spiralling out of control.
    • In 2014 nearly 500,000 residents in Toledo, Ohio and Pelee, Ontario were left without access to safe drinking water for days due to a severe bloom.
    • Every year, there are incidents of dogs that die from swimming in water near algae blooms due to the presence of microcystin.

    ABOUT ENVIRONMENTAL DEFENCE (environmentaldefence.ca): Environmental Defence is a leading Canadian environmental advocacy organization that works with government, industry and individuals to defend clean water, a safe climate and healthy communities.

    – 30 –

    For more information or to request an interview, please contact:

    Paula Gray, Environmental Defence, pgray@environmentaldefence.ca, 705-435-8611

    The post Statement on NOAA’s 2023 Harmful Algae Bloom Forecast appeared first on Environmental Defence.

    This post was originally published on Environmental Defence.

  • Ontario’s Step Towards Deposit Return for All Beverage Containers Is a Welcome Development for the Environment

    Statement from Senior Program Manager for Plastics, Karen Wirsig

    Toronto | Traditional territories of the Mississaugas of the Credit, the Anishinaabeg, the Haudenosaunee, and the Huron-Wendat – We are pleased to hear that the provincial government is taking an active role in designing a deposit-return program for non-alcoholic drink containers as the beverage industry takes over responsibility for its packaging waste in Ontario.

    Under provincial regulations, beverage companies in Ontario are required to collect and recycle or refill 75 per cent of their non-alcoholic empties by 2026 and 80 per cent by 2030. But the industry’s “Recycle Everywhere” program (slated to begin on July 1) will not be up to the task of meeting these targets, mainly because it doesn’t include any significant changes to the existing recycling bin program. 

    Right now, less than 50 per cent of non-alcoholic beverage containers are collected in recycling bins. This compares to nearly 80 per cent of Beer Store packaging in Ontario and 84 per cent of all beverage containers in Alberta, which are both covered by successful deposit-return programs. 

    A deposit-return program for all beverage containers is the best way to prevent litter and keep empties out of landfill and incinerators. It is also more cost-effective than the recycling bin system proposed by the industry. We applaud this move towards deposit return from the provincial government and urge the beverage industry to get on board.  In order to rein in plastic pollution, we must transition to deposit return for all beverage containers in Ontario as soon as possible.

    ABOUT ENVIRONMENTAL DEFENCE (environmentaldefence.ca): Environmental Defence is a leading Canadian environmental advocacy organization that works with government, industry and individuals to defend clean water, a safe climate and healthy communities.

    – 30 –

    For more information or to request an interview, please contact:

    Lauren Thomas, Environmental Defence, media@environmentaldefence.ca

     

    The post Ontario’s Step Towards Deposit Return for All Beverage Containers Is a Welcome Development for the Environment appeared first on Environmental Defence.

    This post was originally published on Environmental Defence.

  • Statement on IESO’s Continued Push for Polluting Gas Power

    Statement from Lana Goldberg, Ontario Climate Program Manager

    Toronto | Traditional territories of the Mississaugas of the Credit, the Anishinaabeg, the Haudenosaunee, and the Huron-Wendat –  As wildfires continue to burn across the country and air quality has become an urgent concern in Ontario, the province’s recent gas plant expansions and extensions are utterly irresponsible. Ontario does not need any more fossil gas, it can easily meet its growing electricity demand with clean sources like wind and solar power, which would be less expensive for residents too.

    While Ontario’s Energy Minister indicated that new gas projects would require municipal resolutions in support, that doesn’t seem to be the case. The recent capacity expansions have gone ahead without such support and likely any consultation at all. Both Toronto and Brampton City Councils seem to have been caught off guard by the announcements and are rightly concerned about the impact these new contracts will have on their ability to meet emissions reduction targets. Instead of supporting municipalities in meeting their targets, the province is steamrolling them by expanding the lifespan of polluting gas projects that they don’t want or need.

    The good news is that the Ontario government’s interest in new gas plants appears to be encountering some hurdles. The IESO was only able to drum up proposals to meet half of its intended new gas generation capacity during its expedited contract process. This may be due to the anticipated Federal government’s Clean Electricity Regulations that will likely require grids across Canada achieve net zero emissions by 2035. The province needs to face the reality that the only way forward is to focus on building clean electricity projects like wind and solar.

    Background information: 

    • Today the IESO announced capacity expansions and contract extensions for St. Clair Energy Centre in St.Clair Township and for York Energy Centre in King Township, close to Newmarket.
    • The IESO’s previous announcement included contracts for new gas plants in Windsor and St. Clair Township as well as expansion of facilities in Toronto, Brampton, Halton Hills, and Thorold. 
    • The IESO’s Expedited LT1 procurement process was seeking to offer contracts for up to 600 MW of new gas generation. It has only offered contracts for 318.5 MW of new generation to date.  
    • Additional contracts for new gas plants are planned and are scheduled to be announced in the first or second quarters of 2024. 
    • On December 23, 2022, the Minister of Energy sent a letter to the IESO requiring new gas projects receive municipal resolutions in support. 
    • The IESO projects emissions from the electricity sector will increase over 400 per cent by 2030 and by almost 800 per cent by 2040 (compared to the 2017 level).
    • In response to the IESO’s previous contract announcement in May, Toronto City Council passed a motion asking the Federal government to strengthen its forthcoming Clean Electricity Regulations to ensure Toronto’s Portlands gas plant could not be expanded.  
    • Toronto council members expressed concern to the media about the expansion at the Portlands plant on Toronto’s eastern waterfront, after it passed a motion committing to stop gas expansions in the city. 
    • Brampton City Council also passed a motion following the IESO’s May announcement asking staff to investigate what the impact of the Goreway plant’s capacity expansion and contract extension would have on the city’s climate targets.  
    • 34 municipalities have passed motions calling on the province to phase out gas-generated electricity.  
    • The Royal Bank of Canada’s recent report concluded Ontario can avoid the need for new gas plants by making smart investments. 

    Find out more about Ontario’s gas problem at NoMoreGasPlants.ca

    ABOUT ENVIRONMENTAL DEFENCE (environmentaldefence.ca): Environmental Defence is a leading Canadian environmental advocacy organization that works with government, industry and individuals to defend clean water, a safe climate and healthy communities.

    – 30 –

    For more information or to request an interview, please contact:

    Carolyn Townend, Environmental Defence, media@environmentaldefence.ca

    The post Statement on IESO’s Continued Push for Polluting Gas Power appeared first on Environmental Defence.

    This post was originally published on Environmental Defence.

  • Federal Government Signals Its Willingness to Get Serious on Pesticides

    ENVIRONMENTAL DEFENCE, DAVID SUZUKI FOUNDATION, ECOJUSTICE, FRIENDS OF THE EARTH CANADA, PREVENT CANCER NOW

    Reducing pesticide risk and use must be a priority to protect human health and biodiversity, say environmental groups

    Toronto | Traditional territories of the Mississaugas of the Credit, the Anishinaabeg, the Haudenosaunee, and the Huron-Wendat – Environmental groups welcome today’s announcement from the federal government stating its intention to end the cosmetic use of pesticides on federal lands and strengthen regulation of pesticides. The David Suzuki Foundation, Environmental Defence, Wilderness Committee, Ecojustice, Friends of the Earth and Prevent Cancer Now say the changes announced today are a positive first step towards more robust regulation of pesticides.

    However, the groups caution that legal changes, if adopted, will need to be properly implemented and adequately resourced in order to better protect human health and the environment from pesticide risks.  Furthermore, additional action to reduce pesticide use and risk will be needed if Canada is to meet its commitments under the Convention on Biodiversity to reduce the risks from pesticides by half by 2030.

    The federal government also indicated it will not immediately approve proposed increases to the amount of glyphosate permitted on imported foods. This is a temporary victory for environmental and health groups, who reiterate their call for the government to reject the proposed increases. The groups welcome further review of Canada’s flawed system for limiting pesticide residues on food. A comprehensive approach is needed to reduce — not increase — exposures to hazardous herbicides linked to cancer in humans, like glyphosate.

    Ashley Wallis, Environmental Defence said:

    “Today’s announcement signals that the federal government is considering actions to reduce pesticide risk. If we are going to achieve significant pesticide risk reduction by 2030, which Canada committed to at COP15 in Montreal last December, we need urgent action and leadership from this government. It’s long past time to end the overuse of under-regulated pest products.”

    Laura Bowman, Ecojustice lawyer said:

    “Canada urgently needs to reverse the trend of rapidly increasing pesticide use, and close regulatory loopholes that allow extremely dangerous products — banned in other countries — to continue to be heavily used even when there are no pest or weed outbreaks.  Worker protections from pesticides in Canada continue to be well behind those in other countries.”

    Charlotte Dawe, Wilderness Committee said: The harm that pesticides cause not only to the environment and biodiversity but to human health are widely known. Banning the cosmetic use on federal land is a good step forward but these toxic pesticides are still sprayed over non-federal land for logging and agricultural uses in this country, and that needs to stop too.

    Lisa Gue, David Suzuki Foundation said: 

    “We’re encouraged the government is taking first steps towards reducing pesticide risks. Ending the cosmetic use of pesticides on federal lands will eliminate needless risks to human health and the environment, while the proposed changes to federal pesticide regulation would be welcome improvements to the pesticide assessment process. Let’s hope this signals a new direction in Canada – one centered on protecting human health and the environment and prioritizing Canada’s international biodiversity commitments.”

    Beatrice Olivastri, Friends of the Earth Canada said:

    “The Government of Canada manages some 41,240,072 hectares of land area – we are very happy to hear that cosmetic pesticides will be banned on this federal land from coast to coast to coast. We look forward to visiting federal buildings across Canada where pollinators will be able to flourish safe from bee toxic neonicotinoids and glyphosate to name just a few of the pesticides to be banned. This must be a start, not a finish, to banning harmful pesticides in Canada.

    Meg Sears, Prevent Cancer Now said:

    “Turning the corner on biodiversity losses requires urgent reduction in pesticide products and their use. This is a great first step, to inspire provinces and municipalities across the country. As well, a proposed regulatory change for meaningful access to and re-analysis of test data is welcomed by scientists who see major omissions in pesticides assessments.”

    – 30 –

    For more information or to request an interview, please contact:

    Paula Gray, Environmental Defence, media@environmentaldefence.ca, 705-435-8611

    Venetia Jones, communications manager, Ecojustice
    613 903 5898 ext. 714, vjones@ecojustice.ca

    Stephanie O’Neill, communications specialist, the David Suzuki Foundation
    780 964 1192, soneill@davidsuzuki.org

    Beatrice Olivastri, CEO, Friends of the Earth Canada
    613-724-8690, beatrice@foecanada.org 

    Meg Sears PhD., Chair, Prevent Cancer Now
    613-297-6042, meg@preventcancernow.ca 

    The post Federal Government Signals Its Willingness to Get Serious on Pesticides appeared first on Environmental Defence.

    This post was originally published on Environmental Defence.

  • Statement on the Canada Energy Regulator’s Energy Futures 2023 Report, Which Includes Net-Zero Modelling

    Statement by Aly Hyder Ali, Oil and Gas Program Manager, Environmental Defence

    Ottawa | Traditional, unceded territory of the Algonquin Anishinaabeg People – While we are pleased to see that the Canada Energy Regulator (CER) has finally admitted that Canada’s oil and gas production must decline dramatically to avoid climate catastrophes, we are also disappointed in the continued overreliance on speculative technologies to achieve Canada’s climate commitments.

    For the first time ever, the CER, an independent energy regulatory agency, has modelled a net-zero scenario in their Energy Futures 2023 report – and what they found is no surprise. To keep global average temperature to 1.5 degrees, we must quickly transition off of fossil fuels. Canadian oil production must decline by 76 per cent and gas production by 68 per cent by 2050, from current levels. Global markets are moving away from fossil fuels, and Canada must do the same.

    However, as the CER finds in its report, Canada’s current suite of policies are not strong enough to avoid catastrophic climate impacts. With current policies in place, it is predicted that there will only be a 13 per cent  decline in Canada’s emissions from today’s levels to 2050 – a far cry from what is needed to achieve a 1.5 aligned future.

    Climate action in Canada needs to increase in pace and in its ambition to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. With upcoming federal policies such as the oil and gas emissions cap and the clean electricity regulations, the Government of Canada has an opportunity to do just that, but only if those policies are ambitious enough. Without massive emissions reductions from the oil and gas industry, approximately 90 per cent by 2050 from current levels, it is impossible to achieve Canada’s climate targets.

    It is disappointing to note that in Energy Futures 2023 there is still a vast overreliance on speculative, unproven technologies, such as carbon capture and storage (CCS), as well as direct air capture (DAC). Despite decades of trying, CCS has yet to make any significant contributions to reducing greenhouse gas emissions. The best shot at avoiding further climate catastrophe is to phase out fossil fuels and immediately move towards cleaner, renewable energy sources. And now is the best time to do it.

    CER clearly shows that renewable energy and electricity are becoming the new backbone of Canada’s energy systems. With the backdrop of raging wildfires that have burned through hundreds of communities and displaced hundreds of thousands of people, it is imperative that Canada moves full steam ahead in phasing out fossil fuels and investing in clean energy sources.

    ABOUT ENVIRONMENTAL DEFENCE (environmentaldefence.ca): Environmental Defence is a leading Canadian environmental advocacy organization that works with government, industry and individuals to defend clean water, a safe climate and healthy communities.

    – 30 –

    For more information or to request an interview, please contact:

    Allen Braude, Environmental Defence, media@environmentaldefence.ca

    The post Statement on the Canada Energy Regulator’s Energy Futures 2023 Report, Which Includes Net-Zero Modelling appeared first on Environmental Defence.

    This post was originally published on Environmental Defence.

  • Statement on Federal Government Considering Release of Tar Sands Tailings Ponds Into Athabasca River

    Statement from Aliénor Rougeot, Program Manager, Climate and Energy

    Toronto | Traditional territories of the Mississaugas of the Credit, the Anishinaabeg, the Haudenosaunee, and the Huron-Wendat – Oil companies’ irresponsible behaviour is now forcing Indigenous communities downstream of the site to consider a risky proposal: accepting the release of toxic industrial wastewater into the Athabasca River and its tributaries.

    This is a shameful example of environmental racism in Canada. Successive federal and provincial governments have approved every project in the tar sands for decades without any regard for how it would affect the Indigenous communities downstream. Now that the problem has grown to an overwhelming 1.4 trillion litres of toxic waste, it is impossible to ignore. Yet, the burden of finding safe solutions is being unfairly placed on the affected communities.

    Today’s update comes mere weeks after a massive leak from Imperial Oil’s toxic tailings posed a significant threat to the water and food supplies of several downstream communities. It is worrisome that there is still no credible plan to deal with the toxic tailings problem. Flushing the water down the Athabasca River isn’t the only way to deal with the toxic tailings, but it is the cheapest one, which is why the industry has been pushing for it.

    The option of release must be taken off the table, and the oil industry should not be allowed to pump more toxic waste into the tailings until they have proved they have a safe solution to clean them up.

    Background information:

    • Oil companies in the tar sands created massive lakes of toxic sludge, known as tailings ponds, without a plan for how they would clean them up.
    • Downstream communities have repeatedly publicly opposed the idea, as there is no evidence that release is safe for their health and for the environment.

    ABOUT ENVIRONMENTAL DEFENCE (environmentaldefence.ca): Environmental Defence is a leading Canadian environmental advocacy organization that works with government, industry and individuals to defend clean water, a safe climate and healthy communities.

    – 30 –

    For more information or to request an interview, please contact:

    Paula Gray, Environmental Defence, media@environmentaldefence.ca, 705-435-8611

    The post Statement on Federal Government Considering Release of Tar Sands Tailings Ponds Into Athabasca River appeared first on Environmental Defence.

    This post was originally published on Environmental Defence.

  • Statement on the Tabling of Bill C-50: The Canadian Sustainable Jobs Act

    Statement from Aliénor Rougeout, Program Manager, Climate and Energy

    Toronto | Traditional territories of the Mississaugas of the Credit, the Anishinaabeg, the Haudenosaunee, and the Huron-Wendat – We are encouraged by the proposed sustainable jobs legislation. With this act, the federal government is making a credible commitment to include affected workers and communities in the preparation for the energy transition.

    However, Members of Parliament will need to work together in the coming months to strengthen the legislation and avoid dangerous pitfalls such as greenwashing, ignoring obligations towards Indigenous peoples, and taking a one-size-fits-all approach to the transition.

    The legislation proposes a dedicated body, the Sustainable Jobs Secretariat, set up to anticipate disruptions and deliver programming throughout the transition. This will allow Canada to seize the opportunities of the shift while proactively supporting those at risk of being negatively impacted.

    Similar bodies were key elements to successful fair transitions in other jurisdictions – alongside independent advisory bodies like the proposed Partnership Council, which will allow those affected by the transition to guide the government’s policies and ensure their needs are met.

    The legislation fails to meet the urgency of the climate crisis, at a time when communities across Canada are experiencing its devastating impacts. We can not afford to direct workers and resources towards dead-end sectors like carbon capture for increased oil production.

    It would be more strategic and compassionate to link the definition of “sustainable jobs” to effective climate solutions such as energy efficiency, renewable energy, clean transportation and other low-carbon industries.

    Finally, Canada will not succeed with a one-size-fits-all approach to the transition. The legislation is missing a nation-to-nation transition mechanism that allows Indigenous communities to have sovereignty over their economic diversification plans. It also fails to provide a guarantee of federal support for local plans that align with a nationwide strategy.

    ABOUT ENVIRONMENTAL DEFENCE (environmentaldefence.ca): Environmental Defence is a leading Canadian environmental advocacy organization that works with government, industry and individuals to defend clean water, a safe climate and healthy communities.

    – 30 –

    For more information or to request an interview, please contact:

    Alex Ross, Environmental Defence,  media@environmentaldefence.ca

    The post Statement on the Tabling of Bill C-50: The Canadian Sustainable Jobs Act appeared first on Environmental Defence.

    This post was originally published on Environmental Defence.

  • Industry’s “Recycle Everywhere” Program Would Cost Twice as Much and Deliver Far Less than Deposit Return

    Proposed plan for beverage containers relies on ineffective recycling bin system and will cost $44 million more than a quality deposit-return program

    Toronto | Traditional territories of the Mississaugas of the Credit, the Anishinaabeg, the Haudenosaunee, and the Huron-Wendat – The beverage industry’s plan to manage beverage containers in Ontario will cost approximately $44 million more than a deposit-return program and is very unlikely to deliver significant improvement to the collection of empties for recycling or reuse. The industry will take over full responsibility for managing containers for beverages such as juice, milk, water and pop starting next month.

    “The industry’s so-called ‘Recycle Everywhere’ program will cost retailers and consumers a lot of money for little more than greenwashing,” said Karen Wirsig, Senior Program Manager for Plastics at Environmental Defence. “We’re at a loss for why the government is allowing the industry to go ahead with this plan. It would be far more effective and far less expensive to establish a deposit-return system similar to the Beer Store program.”

    The blue bin recycling system only collects and recycles about 43 per cent of non-alcoholic beverage containers in Ontario. In comparison, the Beer Store’s successful deposit-return program collects 80 per cent of beer containers and packaging. Alberta and Saskatchewan both have deposit return for all beverage containers. These two provinces consistently achieve more than 80 per cent returns, which is the target Ontario’s non-alcoholic beverage producers will be required to meet by 2030.

    The Canadian Beverage Container Recycling Association (CBCRA), which designed Recycle Everywhere on behalf of the industry, released a budget earlier this year that includes collecting $84 million annually in fees on every container sold in Ontario. According to the association’s plan, that money would go to pay for collection of containers in household blue bins, new bins for public spaces, and a PR campaign to remind Ontarians to recycle beverage containers. The association has not laid out a viable path to achieve the 80-per-cent target by 2030.

    By contrast, a study prepared before the new Blue Box rules were finalized outlined how a high-quality deposit-return program targeting a 90 per cent return rate could be implemented in Ontario. The 2019 study estimated that a program with nearly 3,000 return locations across the province would cost less than one cent per redeemed container, for an annual total of less than $35 million. Even factoring in inflation since 2019, a deposit-return system like this would cost less than half the CBCRA’s proposed $84 million program.

    “If the province and the beverage industry let Recycle Everywhere go ahead, consumers and retailers will be on the hook to pay for an expensive program that doesn’t work,” added Wirsig. “We estimate that some 1.7 billion plastic bottles alone are thrown into garbage bins or littered in Ontario every year because of the ineffectiveness of the recycling bin system. We must stop this half-baked plan. Deposit return works. It’s past time to act on it in Ontario.”

    ABOUT ENVIRONMENTAL DEFENCE (environmentaldefence.ca): Environmental Defence is a leading Canadian environmental advocacy organization that works with government, industry and individuals to defend clean water, a safe climate and healthy communities.

    – 30 –

    For more information or to request an interview, please contact:

    Lauren Thomas, Environmental Defence, media@environmentaldefence.ca

    The post Industry’s “Recycle Everywhere” Program Would Cost Twice as Much and Deliver Far Less than Deposit Return appeared first on Environmental Defence.

    This post was originally published on Environmental Defence.

  • Statement on the Climate Aligned Finance Act advancing one step closer to becoming law

    Statement from Julie Segal, Senior Program Manager, Climate Finance

    Toronto | Traditional territories of the Mississaugas of the Credit, the Anishinaabeg, the Haudenosaunee, and the Huron-Wendat – The Climate Aligned Finance Act (CAFA) advanced one step closer to becoming law, and if passed, it would be the most thorough piece of climate finance legislation in the world. Bringing CAFA into law would better protect our economy, people’s savings, and our shared climate. Over $100bn of Canadian investments are at risk of nose diving in value because of climate-related risks, and a significant amount of Canadian assets remain allocated to polluting industries instead of the green economy. When it comes to financing clean energy, our banks rank in the bottom third globally but they lead in oil and gas investments. CAFA would fix this. 

    Our financial markets need to cut emissions and address climate risks, and voluntary commitments to “net-zero” from individual groups will never be sufficient. The market needs rules like CAFA which guarantee that banks and pensions set credible climate plans and are held accountable to deliver on them. With GFANZ membership floundering, policy would turn promises into action.

    With wildfires causing severe damage across the country, the Senate Banking Committee must act quickly to call climate experts to testify about the policies required to build a safe climate and a stable financial system. Policymakers in the Senate must quickly drive forward this important piece of financial legislation.

    Background: The climate-aligned finance act was tabled in the Canadian Senate on March 24. 2022. Senator Galvez convened a group of expert advisors when drafting the bill including Environmental Defence’s Julie Segal. Today, the Senate advanced the Bill to the next stage of study in the Senate by calling the bill to committee.

    ABOUT ENVIRONMENTAL DEFENCE (environmentaldefence.ca): Environmental Defence is a leading Canadian environmental advocacy organization that works with government, industry and individuals to defend clean water, a safe climate and healthy communities.

    – 30 –

    For more information or to request an interview, please contact:

    Alex Ross, Environmental Defence,  media@environmentaldefence.ca

    The post Statement on the Climate Aligned Finance Act advancing one step closer to becoming law appeared first on Environmental Defence.

    This post was originally published on Environmental Defence.

  • Statement on new research that shows PFAS companies suppressed decades of toxic data

    Statement from Cassie Barker, Toxics Senior Program Manager, Environmental Defence

    Toronto | Traditional territories of the Mississaugas of the Credit, the Anishinaabeg, the Haudenosaunee, and the Huron-Wendat – PFAS manufacturers must be held accountable for the widespread harm and contamination they have inflicted on people and the environment. They knew about the dangers, and now they need to know there’s a price to pay.

    We strongly condemn the chemical industry for being aware of the toxicity of PFAS since the 1970s, but keeping this information from the public for decades. Chemical companies get away with this because they are allowed to operate behind a wall of confidentiality. We aren’t allowed to know what hazards live behind that wall and are unleashed into our products, bodies, and ecosystems. This needs to end.

    The damage caused can never be properly compensated, but these companies can start by providing drinking water systems with the necessary technology and support to clean up their toxic mess.

    Canada has been complicit in this harm with decades of weak toxics laws. We urge the government to protect everyone living in Canada from PFAS and other toxic and hazardous substances. The government must develop tough new laws that protect us from companies profiting from “forever chemicals.” It must demonstrate urgent and comprehensive regulatory action on PFAS to address these corporate harms.

    Background information: 

    • Researchers have stated that the “lack of transparency in industry-driven research on industrial chemicals has significant legal, political and public health consequences.” This research can be found here.
    • PFAS impacts health by damaging our organs, such as the kidneys and liver, as well as our immune, reproductive, metabolism and hormonal systems.
    • Long-range movement of PFAS contaminants are disproportionately impacting the health of Northern Indigenous communities.
    • Canada has recently recognized that PFAS are toxic, and is currently outlining its plan for regulatory action on this class of chemicals – but this plan is limited to restricting PFAS in firefighting foam.

    ABOUT ENVIRONMENTAL DEFENCE (environmentaldefence.ca): Environmental Defence is a leading Canadian environmental advocacy organization that works with government, industry and individuals to defend clean water, a safe climate and healthy communities.

    – 30 –

    For more information or to request an interview, please contact:

    Paula Gray, Environmental Defence,  media@environmentaldefence.ca

    The post Statement on new research that shows PFAS companies suppressed decades of toxic data appeared first on Environmental Defence.

    This post was originally published on Environmental Defence.

  • MPs Pass First Major Update to Canada’s Most Important Environmental Law in More Than Two Decades

    ENVIRONMENTAL DEFENCE, BREAST CANCER ACTION QUEBEC, CANADIAN ASSOCIATION OF PHYSICIANS FOR THE ENVIRONMENT, DAVID SUZUKI FOUNDATION, ECOJUSTICE

    Coalition of health and environment groups celebrate milestone and look to next steps

    OTTAWA/TRADITIONAL, UNCEDED TERRITORY OF THE ALGONQUIN ANISHNAABEG PEOPLE – Long-awaited amendments to the Canadian Environmental Protection Act (CEPA) passed a final vote in the House of Commons today. Passage of Bill S-5 marks a significant milestone towards better protecting people in Canada and the environment from pollution and toxic chemicals. We look forward to the new provisions entering into force and call for them to be implemented to the highest standards.

    Bill S-5 is the first major update to Canada’s cornerstone environmental law since Parliament last reformed the law in 1999.

    Passage of Bill S-5 represents important progress for the following reasons. 

    • It introduces long-overdue updates for the control of toxic substances and dangerous chemicals, including requiring that priority be given to prohibiting the most hazardous substances. The bill also updates the framework for assessing and managing toxic substances and improves transparency and accountability.
    • The right to a healthy environment will be recognized for the first time under federal law. The legislation establishes a new duty for the government to uphold the principles of environmental justice, intergenerational equity, and non-regression — ensuring environmental protections cannot be rolled back. It also requires the federal government to consider the cumulative impacts of toxics and their effects on vulnerable populations. 

    The government introduced the bill first in the Senate last year. The Senate and House committees studying the bill both approved some important strengthening amendments. Bill S-5 will now become law after the Senate reviews the House of Commons’ amendments. 

    While we welcome passage of the bill, we note that MPs rejected many amendments that would have further strengthened it. There is more to do to complete the process of CEPA modernization, including removing barriers to citizen lawsuits when there are violations of the Act, action on air quality, labelling of hazardous substances in consumer products, and strengthening control of genetically engineered animals.

    Environment and Climate Change Minister Steven Guilbeault has indicated that he intends to introduce a second CEPA modernization bill. It will need to address these outstanding recommendations for CEPA reform to complement Bill S-5. 

    Cassie Barker, Toxics Senior Program Manager, Environmental Defence, said:

    “After more than a decade of advocacy, Canada’s cornerstone toxics law will soon have new legal tools to better protect us from hazardous substances. However, further action is needed, and we are eager to see the government get to work on the next CEPA bill. We urge the government to deliver on its promise to require mandatory labelling of harmful ingredients, because we all deserve the right to know what toxics are in the products we use every day.”

    Dr. Elaine MacDonald, Healthy Communities Program Director, Ecojustice, said:

    “While not a comprehensive modernization of CEPA, Bill S-5 introduces long-overdue updates for the control of toxic substances and dangerous chemicals. It also recognizes the right to a healthy environment for the first time in federal law – a right that is integral to the full enjoyment of a wide range of human rights, including the right to life, health, food, water, and sanitation.”

    Jennifer Beeman, Executive Director, Breast Cancer Action Quebec, said:

    “Bill S-5 introduces some much-needed new requirements and tools, such as the watch list, to reign in the widespread use of toxic chemicals. However, the bill also pushes the framework for action on a number of key issues, notably the implementation of the right to a healthy environment, to development after the bill’s adoption. The government will need to move quickly to demonstrate that it is serious about tackling our urgent issues of environmental health injustices due to toxic pollution.”

    Dr. Melissa Lem, CAPE Board President and family physician said:

    “Whether it’s asthma, cancer or reproductive issues, health professionals manage patients suffering the negative health effects of polluted environments every day. This is why long-awaited reforms to the Canadian Environmental Protection Act (CEPA), and the passage of Bill S-5 today, are good news for environmental and human health, and environmental justice. Yet the government must take further action on toxics for the health of people in Canada—a next CEPA reform bill cannot come too soon.”

    Lisa Gue, National Policy Manager, David Suzuki Foundation, said:

    “Passage of Bill S-5 marks a major milestone for environmental rights in Canada, inscribing the right to a healthy environment in the Canadian Environmental Protection Act. Now the work begins to protect that right and uphold the principle of environmental justice.” 

    For more information see our media backgrounder on Bill S-5.

    – 30 –

    For more information or to request an interview, please contact:

    Paula Gray, Environmental Defence, media@environmentaldefence.ca, 705-435-8611

    Viorica Lorcencova, viorica.lorcencova@acsqc.ca, 514-443-8437 

    Reykia Fick, media@cape.ca, 647-762-9168 

    Brendan Glauser, bglauser@davidsuzuki.org, 604-356-8829  

    Sean O’Shea, Ecojustice, soshea@ecojustice.ca, 416-368-7533 ext. 523

    The post MPs Pass First Major Update to Canada’s Most Important Environmental Law in More Than Two Decades appeared first on Environmental Defence.

    This post was originally published on Environmental Defence.

  • New Mapping and Analysis Discredits the Ontario Government’s Excuses for Forcing Suburban Boundary Expansions and Removing Greenbelt, Floodplain and Wetland Protections

    Ontario could deliver the next 30 years of GTHA homes and workplaces while using just a portion of the 350 km2 of GTHA lands that were approved for development before 2022

    Toronto | Traditional territories of the Mississaugas of the Credit, the Anishinaabeg, the Haudenosaunee, and the Huron-Wendat – New expert mapping and GIS analysis reveals that even prior to the provincial government’s recent push to force suburban boundary expansions, Ontario’s Greater Toronto and Hamilton Area (GTHA) had more than 350 km2 of previously designated, but unused, land for new suburban housing and business premises. This figure was determined by combining information from official documents from the province and the GTHA’s six regional municipalities with transposition of recent satellite photographs that document how much land has actually been built.

    This amount of land far exceeds the approximately 150km2 that will actually be required to build “greenfield homes” (i.e., homes outside of existing neighbourhoods and built up areas) over the next 30 years. This shows that the Ontario government’s recent decision to force suburban regional and city governments to expand their boundaries even further outwards has created a massive land oversupply – a total of roughly 590 km2 – at the expense of farms, forests and wetlands.

    The total inventory of “greenfield” land supply in the GTHA conclusively discredits the Ontario government’s argument for stripping protection from key areas of the Greenbelt and raises renewed questions about what is actually motivating the onslaught of measures that have marked large areas of previously-protected farmland and natural areas for destruction.

    “Whatever the present Ontario government’s real reasons may be for stripping protection from the crown jewels of the Greenbelt and trying to push sprawl onto wetlands, floodplains and even more prime farmland, this mapping analysis shows that increasing housing supply and affordability is not the motive,” said Phil Pothen, Ontario Environment Program Manager.

    Environmental Defence’s analysis also demonstrates how much less land could be used with even modest efforts to create livable, transit-oriented communities instead of encouraging car-dependent sprawl. While the Ontario government’s own targets for population growth outside of existing built up areas up to 2051 would see roughly 1.5 million residents (of a total 3.0 million projected new suburban GTHA residents) pushed into new “greenfield” subdivisions, simply developing the pre-2022 supply of designated land at the same, modest densities as the former City of Toronto would house more than 2.5 million people, even if land for workplaces is factored in and natural areas, such as woodlots, ravines and wetlands, are kept off limits.

    This new mapping and analysis adds value to earlier reports created by the regions’ professional planning staff, which evaluated land supply based solely on tabulations of lands that were already approved for development.

    “Beyond the GTHA land supply figures, which are staggering, our analyses reveal how many people the land designated for development could house if it was developed responsibly. As long as we build homes in a way that supports public transit, walkability, and access to services, the GTHA would consume less land than had already been set aside for growth before any urban boundary expansions were imposed by the province,” said Pothen.

    See the map and find out more here.

    ABOUT ENVIRONMENTAL DEFENCE (environmentaldefence.ca): Environmental Defence is a leading Canadian environmental advocacy organization that works with government, industry and individuals to defend clean water, a safe climate and healthy communities.

    – 30 –

    For more information or to request an interview, please contact:

    Brittany Harris, Environmental Defence, media@environmentaldefence.ca

    The post New Mapping and Analysis Discredits the Ontario Government’s Excuses for Forcing Suburban Boundary Expansions and Removing Greenbelt, Floodplain and Wetland Protections appeared first on Environmental Defence.

    This post was originally published on Environmental Defence.

  • Alberta’s Superior Court Rejects Former Premier Kenney’s Arguments To Avoid Defamation Lawsuit Brought Forward By Five Environmental Groups

    ENVIRONMENTAL DEFENCE. WEST COAST ENVIRONMENTAL LAW, DOGWOOD INITIATIVE, STAND.EARTH, WILDERNESS COMMITTEE

    Vancouver, Edmonton, Toronto, Ottawa — Alberta’s superior court today dismissed attempts by former Premier Jason Kenney and the Alberta government to throw out a defamation lawsuit brought forward by five environmental groups. Environmental Defence, West Coast Environmental Law, Dogwood Initiative, Stand.earth and the Wilderness Committee are suing former Premier Jason Kenney and the Alberta government for lying about the findings of his Public Inquiry into Anti-Alberta Energy Campaigns. Over two years, groups and individuals were named publicly and targeted on social media, causing some individuals to receive death threats.

    “Truth matters in a democracy, and today’s court decision makes clear that the former Alberta Premier specifically targeted environmental organizations to undermine our efforts to communicate the risks of climate change, and the role an expanding oil industry plays in threatening the future of Canadians,” said Tim Gray, Executive Director, Environmental Defence.

    Former Alberta Premier Kenney tried to argue that he wasn’t referring to the groups specifically, but the court rejected that argument, writing, “Considering the Key Findings Document as a whole, the publication leads any reasonable person to understand that the alleged defamatory statements refer to campaigns of which the Plaintiffs who appear on the list of participants were part.”

    “Anyone who looks at the report or Kenney’s other public statements would know he was referring to our clients,” said Paul Champ, the lawyer for the five defamed groups. “The Court agreed, ruling that Mr. Kenney was trying to escape liability by hiding behind technical arguments that were unrealistic and baseless. Albertans are smarter than that.”

    Groups contended that statements in the Alberta government’s “Key Findings” document, which were subsequently repeated and amplified by Premier Kenney on social media platforms, were defamatory as they claimed the Inquiry concluded that the environmental groups had deliberately spread “misinformation” about the Alberta oil and gas industry. In his final report of the Public Inquiry into Anti-Alberta Energy Campaigns, Commissioner Steve Allan was unequivocal in his report that he made no such finding, noting environmental groups did nothing wrong, but simply care about climate change.

    “Jason Kenney wasted millions of taxpayer dollars on a personal vendetta that backfired. Albertans are still paying for his lawyers as he tries to dodge responsibility for what he said. The sooner he apologizes and retracts his defamatory statements, the sooner we can all move on from this sorry chapter,” said Kai Nagata, Communication Director of Dogwood BC.

    The defamed groups have asked Kenney and the Alberta government to retract their statements and issue public apologies. To date, former Premier Kenney and Danielle Smith’s government have refused.

    ABOUT ENVIRONMENTAL DEFENCE (environmentaldefence.ca): Environmental Defence is a leading Canadian environmental advocacy organization that works with government, industry and individuals to defend clean water, a safe climate and healthy communities.

    – 30 –

    For more information or to request an interview, please contact:

    Allen Braude, Environmental Defence, media@environmentaldefence.ca

    Paul Champ, Human Rights Lawyer, (613) 816-2441

    Jessica Clogg, Executive Director, West Coast Environmental Law, (604) 601-2508

    Sven Biggs, Stand.earth, Canadian Oil and Gas Programs Director, (778) 882-8354

    Peter McCartney, Climate Campaigner, Wilderness Committee (778) 239-1935

    Kai Nagata, Communications Director, Dogwood BC, (778) 829-6493

    The post Alberta’s Superior Court Rejects Former Premier Kenney’s Arguments To Avoid Defamation Lawsuit Brought Forward By Five Environmental Groups appeared first on Environmental Defence.

    This post was originally published on Environmental Defence.

  • Progress on Regulating PFAS “Forever Chemicals” Applauded by Environmental Health Advocates and Firefighters

    ENVIRONMENTAL DEFENCE, ECOJUSTICE

    Toronto | Traditional territories of the Mississaugas of the Credit, the Anishinaabeg, the Haudenosaunee, and the Huron-Wendat – Today, the federal government released its draft State of per- and poly-fluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) Report, signalling its intention to pursue a comprehensive regulatory approach to these “forever chemicals.” The proposal to regulate PFAS as a class of chemicals allows the government to more effectively address the human health and environmental harms associated with these thousands of chemicals in products.

    Canada’s risk management of PFAS currently lags behind other jurisdictions, and its regulatory scope will need to be extended to include the many products that contribute to PFAS exposures and environmental contamination in order to be on par with the E.U. — a leader in toxics policy.

    This report confirms that PFAS are associated with environmental and human health harms, and is an important step in the process of addressing PFAS chemicals as a class under the Canadian Environmental Protection Act (CEPA).

    Cassie Barker, Toxics Senior Program Manager, Environmental Defence, said: 

    “We applaud the federal government for moving forward with its proposed action on ‘forever chemicals’. This is the first time Canada has regulated a hazardous class of chemicals and is in line with the upcoming reforms to the Canadian Environmental Protection Act. It’s time to end an era of whack-a-mole toxics policy where one toxic chemical is simply replaced by another. Today’s proposal is a bold step in the right direction.”

    Lucy Grey, Inuk mother and public health research advisor for the Nunavik Regional Board of Health and Social Services, said: 

    “Accessing safe and uncontaminated country food is a matter of Inuit rights. Wildlife health is directly connected to Inuit health and well-being and it is essential to preserve resources for the next generations.”

    Amira Aker, Postdoctoral Fellow and Melanie Lemire, Associate Professor at the Universite Laval and CHU de Quebec, said: 

    “We especially welcome Canada’s conclusions surrounding consideration of highly exposed populations, the importance of regulating PFAS as a class rather than wasting time regulating them individually, and highlighting the importance of cumulative effects of PFAS mixtures on health.”

    Dr. Elaine MacDonald, Healthy Communities Director, Ecojustice, said: 

    “Strong action to prohibit and control PFAS will be essential to addressing the harm of these substances on us all, and particularly for Indigenous and other communities dealing with impacts from PFAS in their soil, drinking water and food.”

    Quincy Emmons, firefighter and FireRein (PFAS-free firefighting product) developer, said: 

    “Regulation of PFAS as a class is a bold step to mitigating this issue, as it is impossible to fully characterize the many thousands of precursors and terminal products individually.  The burden of proof should be on the manufacturers to show that a specific chemistry is safe, not on society to show that it is dangerous.”

    Richard Banting, Fire Chief, Tilden Lake Volunteer Fire Department, said: 

    “This is an important step to dealing with PFAS as a class, and we look forward to the government supporting firefighters to get these foams out of our fire halls, and also get PFAS out of our gear and other products we all use every day.”

    Additional information: 

    • The government signalled in 2021 that it would be proposing a class-based approach to PFAS regulation in Canada.
    • PFAS are a group of thousands of chemicals that are linked with adverse human and environmental health effects.
    • PFAS has been used to make waterproof, non-stick, stain-resistant, and grease-repellent products for decades, including clothing and other textiles, plastics, cosmetics, cookware, takeout, and food contact materials.
    • Canadians and stakeholders are invited to comment on the draft report and risk management scope and provide information that would help inform the development of the final report, until July 19.

    ABOUT ENVIRONMENTAL DEFENCE (environmentaldefence.ca): Environmental Defence is a leading Canadian environmental advocacy organization that works with government, industry and individuals to defend clean water, a safe climate and healthy communities.

    ABOUT ECOJUSTICE (ecojustice.ca): Ecojustice uses the power of the law to defend nature, combat climate change, and fight for a healthy environment. Its strategic, public interest lawsuits and advocacy lead to precedent-setting court decisions, law, and policy that deliver lasting solutions to Canada’s most urgent environmental problems. As Canada’s largest environmental law charity, Ecojustice operates offices in Vancouver, Calgary, Toronto, Ottawa, and Halifax.

    – 30 –

    For more information or to request an interview, please contact:

    Paula Gray, Environmental Defence, media@environmentaldefence.ca

    Dr. Elaine MacDonald, Ecojustice, emacdonald@ecojustice.ca

    The post Progress on Regulating PFAS “Forever Chemicals” Applauded by Environmental Health Advocates and Firefighters appeared first on Environmental Defence.

    This post was originally published on Environmental Defence.

  • Statement on proposed new U.S. pollution standards for cars and trucks, which Canada is expected to adopt

    Statement from Keith Brooks, Programs Director, Environmental Defence

    Toronto | Traditional territories of the Mississaugas of the Credit, the Anishinaabeg, the Haudenosaunee, and the Huron-Wendat – We applaud the Biden-Harris administration’s move to accelerate the transition to zero-emission vehicles with ambitious action on tightening vehicle emissions standards. These emissions standards will have a massive impact in the U.S., and will also help smooth Canada’s transition to 100 per cent electric cars by sending a strong signal to the North American automotive market.

    This move from the U.S., which is expected to be adopted in Canada “by reference”, compliments Canada’s even more ambitious zero-emissions vehicle (ZEV) sales targets, which provides a pathway to 100 per cent zero emission vehicle sales by 2035. This is the better regulatory tool in the Canadian context, and ensures that Canada can meet its greenhouse gas reduction targets regardless of who is elected to the White House.

    The Canadian government must now ensure that both regulations (the ZEV sales targets and vehicle emissions standards) work in harmony, such as was recently proposed in the UK, to avoid negative interactions such as double crediting.

    ABOUT ENVIRONMENTAL DEFENCE (environmentaldefence.ca): Environmental Defence is a leading Canadian environmental advocacy organization that works with government, industry and individuals to defend clean water, a safe climate and healthy communities.

    – 30 –

    For more information or to request an interview, please contact:

    Allen Braude, Environmental Defence, media@environmentaldefence.ca

    The post Statement on proposed new U.S. pollution standards for cars and trucks, which Canada is expected to adopt appeared first on Environmental Defence.

    This post was originally published on Environmental Defence.

  • Ontario to kill Growth Plan: Proposed new planning rules would kneecap housing supply efforts and unleash unprecedented sprawl on Ontario’s forests, farmland and wetlands

    Planned changes further exacerbate Ontario’s housing crisis

    Toronto | Traditional territories of the Mississaugas of the Credit, the Anishinaabeg, the Haudenosaunee, and the Huron-Wendat – Despite mounting concern that its approach to land use planning is impeding attempts to tackle the housing affordability crisis, Ontario’s government is doubling down on the sprawl-centric policies that have led to a housing shortage and pushed home and rental prices out of reach for new households.

    This afternoon, Ontario’s Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing, Steve Clark, revealed plans to entirely eliminate the Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe. This plan was designed to ensure efficient use of southern Ontario’s very finite land supply and limited construction capacity. The proposal would also weaken other key land-efficiency and construction-efficiency measures in the Provincial Policy Statement that presently govern development across the province.

    Rather than cracking down on the low-density land use plans that are seeing the region’s scarce labor, materials and serviced land squandered on oversized, infrastructure-intensive sprawl, this move appears calculated to lower the number of homes created for each unit of labour and serviced land invested. For example, it appears the government is proposing to:

    • Eliminate the mandate that at least 50 residents be housed on each hectare of farmland and wildlife habitat sacrificed for residential development. This comes after the government had already reduced the number of homes required from a previous 80 residents per hectare standard.

    • Eliminate the requirement that regions like Peel, York, Halton and Waterloo, where housing shortages – and constraints on construction capacity – are most acute, make use of their existing infrastructure and serviced land by upzoning them to accommodate at least 50% of their planned new households. Ontario had already reduced the mandate from 60%, but it would now be removed entirely.

    • Eliminate the Provincial Policy Statement requirement that municipalities seize all opportunities for efficient infill development, and improve the efficiency of existing development plans, before resorting to more labour and resource-intensive expansions of urban boundaries into farms and forests.

    • Allow land speculators to push through inefficent, on-demand piecemeal boundary expansions rather than requiring that they be coordinated as part of periodic reviews.

    These changes would further exacerbate the inefficiencies created by the elimination of meaningful regionally-coordinated land use and infrastructure planning through last October’s Bill 23.

    “Ontarians know that this government has been choosing to squander what remains of Ontario’s quality farmland and rare southern forests and wetlands to enrich well-connected land speculators. Today’s announcement makes it clearer than ever that Ontario is also willing to sacrifice progress on ending the housing shortage and affordability crisis. We know that unless we use land, labour and equipment MUCH more efficiently, and focus home building in existing neighborhoods, we will not have the capacity to deliver the 1.5 million homes we need in the next decade,” said Phil Pothen, Ontario Environment Program Manager, Environmental Defence.

    The good news is that there is still time to demand a course reversal on this misguided scheme. Unlike recent attacks on the Greenbelt, wetlands and conservation authorities, which were rushed through the legislature at very short notice, the government says it will be accepting comments on this planned dismantling of land efficiency measures until June 5th of this year.

    ABOUT ENVIRONMENTAL DEFENCE (environmentaldefence.ca): Environmental Defence is a leading Canadian environmental advocacy organization that works with government, industry and individuals to defend clean water, a safe climate and healthy communities.

    – 30 –

    For more information or to request an interview, please contact:

    Brittany Harris, media@environmentaldefence.ca

    The post Ontario to kill Growth Plan: Proposed new planning rules would kneecap housing supply efforts and unleash unprecedented sprawl on Ontario’s forests, farmland and wetlands appeared first on Environmental Defence.

    This post was originally published on Environmental Defence.

  • Tribal and First Nations rebuke Canada’s support of Line 5 pipeline to U.N. Human Rights Council

    Pipeline poses direct threats to the human rights of frontline Indigenous communities and the environment

    OTTAWA | TRADITIONAL, UNCEDED TERRITORY OF THE ALGONQUIN ANISHNAABEG PEOPLE – Representatives of fifty-one Tribal and First Nations located in what is now the United States and Canada submitted a report to the United Nations Human Rights Council calling on the Government of Canada to stop violating the human rights of Indigenous peoples through its support for Enbridge’s Line 5 crude oil pipeline. First constructed in 1953, Line 5 runs between Wisconsin and Ontario, traversing major waterways posing direct threats to Tribal Nations, communities, and ecosystems along its path.

    The groups submitted the report for consideration under Canada’s upcoming Universal Periodic Review (UPR). As a U.N. member state, Canada’s human rights record is periodically scrutinized by U.N. member States through the UPR at the Human Rights Council. Canada will be reviewed during the 44th session of the UPR Working Group, which will take place from November 6 through 17 this year, and it will be Canada’s fourth review.

    Line 5, which trespasses on traditional Anishinaabe territories in Wisconsin, Michigan, and Ontario, faces lawsuits from Tribal Nations and the State of Michigan. Rather than respect and defend the rights of Indigenous peoples, Canada’s government has shielded Enbridge from being shut down, invoking the 1977 Transit Pipeline Treaty with the U.S. and making legal submissions in U.S. courts to keep the pipeline operating.

    The communities and their council offered the following statements: 

    “The rights of Indigenous people, of my people, are rights that should be respected by all sovereigns both domestic and abroad,” said President Whitney Gravelle of the Bay Mills Indian Community. “Canada’s support of Line 5 is a disaster in the making for the entire Great Lakes region because an oil spill will poison our fish, harm our sacred sites, contaminate our drinking water – and ultimately destroy our Indigenous way of life.”

    “The Straits of Mackinac are central to the Anishinaabe creation story, which makes this location sacred from both a cultural and historical perspective in the formation of the Anishinaabe people,” said Chairperson Austin Lowes of the Sault Ste. Marie Tribe of Chippewa Indians. “Protecting the Straits is also a matter of the utmost environmental and economic importance – both to our people and the state of Michigan.”

    “The Bad River Band is saddened by the fact that Canada’s actions have required us to raise our complaints with the United Nations, but Canada has left the Tribes with no choice,” said Chairman Michael Wiggins Jr. of the Bad River Band. “Canada has deliberately interfered in our efforts to protect our homeland. It has sought to block us from evicting a company that has trespassed on our lands for a decade and whose actions pose an existential threat to the Bad River watershed and our very way of life. It has likewise interfered with the efforts of Bay Mills and our other sister tribes in Michigan to protect their sacred waterways and fisheries. Canada’s prioritization of the profits of its oil and gas companies over the rights of indigenous peoples on both sides of the border demands the attention of all people of good faith.”

    “The Anishinabek Nation supports the shutdown of Line 5,” said Reg Niganobe, Grand Council Chief of the Anishinabek Nation. “Our communities have collectively stood in solidarity with our relations along the pipeline to protect the land and water against the potential for catastrophic environmental damage. For centuries, peoples of our nations have been caring for the Great Lakes; we are reliant on the waters for our way of life. We will be relieved when this line is effectively decommissioned, and we express gratitude to our relatives who have been leading this critical fight for years.”

    “Canada’s international human rights obligations are clear,” said EarthRights General Counsel Marco Simons. “The State must respect and actively protect Indigenous peoples’ lands and way of life, including by regulating the activities of the corporations under its jurisdiction that pose threats to Indigenous rights. Not only has Canada failed in this obligation by refusing to decommission the degrading Line 5 or even consult with the affected Indigenous populations, but it is actively intervening legally and diplomatically to ensure that Enbridge can operate Line 5 for decades to come. Indigenous communities deserve better.”

    “Line 5 poses an unacceptable risk to the treaty-protected natural and cultural resources of Indigenous Peoples around the Great Lakes,” added Elizabeth Goldstein, Emma Schwartz, and Jack Schnettler, student attorneys in the Georgetown Environmental Law and Justice Clinic. “By supporting fossil fuel projects like Line 5, Canada is exacerbating climate change and perpetuating environmental injustices. The Clinic was thrilled to work with the Bay Mills Indian Community to expose these injustices and support frontline communities that experience devastating impacts of climate change while being excluded from decision-making affecting their lands and very way of life.”

    “Canada’s efforts to extend the operation of the Line 5 oil pipeline–over the objections and against the rights of Tribal and First Nations–flies in the face of its legal obligations,” said Tamara Morgenthau, Senior Attorney at the Center for International Environmental Law. “Rather than comply with its duty to respect and protect human rights and the environment from the destructive impacts of fossil fuels and the climate change they cause, Canada has instead sought to protect Enbridge’s Line 5 oil pipeline. Doing so only locks in further dependence on fossil fuels and further harm to people and the planet. Canada should reverse course.”

    “The ongoing operation of Enbridge’s leaky Line 5 in the Great Lakes basin is an ecological disaster in the making,” said Michelle Woodhouse, Water Program Manager for Environmental Defence Canada. “It is also a clear violation of the inherent and treaty rights of the Anishinaabeg Nations of the Great Lakes. The Government of Canada must uphold Indigenous rights as required by law under An Act Respecting the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. This includes withdrawing its use of the 1977 pipeline treaty, working with U.S. governments and the Anishinaabeg Nations of the Great Lakes to shut down Line 5, and implementing existing readily available alternatives to meet our energy needs.”

    The communities urge the Government of Canada to: 

    • Withdraw its invocation of the Pipeline Treaty and its positions in U.S. litigation opposing decommissioning Line 5.
    • Ensure that affected Indigenous Nations, who are sovereigns and human rights holders, are invited to participate in discussions regarding Line 5’s future, including any negotiations under the Pipeline Treaty, so long as they continue.
    • Interpret all international treaties, including the Pipeline Treaty, consistently with Canada’s human rights obligations.
    • Ensure affected Indigenous Peoples’ Free, Prior, Informed Consent (FPIC) before providing support for extractive sector projects and withdraw support from projects that do not have affected Indigenous Peoples’ FPIC.
    • Ensure that corporations under Canadian jurisdiction do not cause or contribute to foreseeable threats to human rights.

    The report was submitted by the Anishinabek Nation, Bad River Band of the Lake Superior Tribe of Chippewa Indians, Bay Mills Indian Community, Grand Traverse Band of Ottawa & Chippewa Indians, Hannahville Indian Community, Lac Vieux Desert Band of Lake Superior Chippewa Indians, Little River Band of Ottawa Indians, Little Traverse Bay Bands of Odawa Indians, Match-e-be-nash-she-wish Band of Pottawatomi Indians of Michigan, Nottawaseppi Huron Band of Potawatomi, Red Cliff Band of Lake Superior Chippewa, Saginaw Chippewa Indian Tribe, Sault Ste. Marie Tribe of Chippewa Indians, together with the Center for International Environmental Law, EarthRights International, Environmental Defence Canada, and the Georgetown University Law Center Environmental Law and Justice Clinic.

    View the submission here.

    – 30 –

    For more information or to request an interview, please contact:

    Paula Gray, Environmental Defence, media@environmentaldefence.ca

    The post Tribal and First Nations rebuke Canada’s support of Line 5 pipeline to U.N. Human Rights Council appeared first on Environmental Defence.

    This post was originally published on Environmental Defence.

  • Statement on the federal government’s role in ensuring a proper review of the proposed Highway 413

    Statement from Tim Gray, Executive Director, Environmental Defence

    Toronto | Traditional territories of the Mississaugas of the Credit, the Anishinaabeg, the Haudenosaunee, and the Huron-Wendat – Yesterday, Ontario Premier Doug Ford and Transportation Minister Caroline Mulroney criticized the federal government’s Impact Assessment Act review of the proposed Highway 413. This expensive and unnecessary mega-highway would parallel the underused Highway 407 and threaten a multitude of values. Review of its impacts and a decision on whether or not to permit its construction is fully within federal responsibility.

    “The Ontario government is running roughshod over Ontario’s environmental and planning rules. These attacks are creating massive economic and environmental liabilities that residents will have to bear for decades to come. The federal government has a responsibility to ensure nation-wide laws are followed to protect Ontario’s future. It must act to stop projects like Highway 413 that threaten our wallets, communities and future,” said Tim Gray.

    Background Information

    There are multiple ways that building Highway 413 would threaten people in Ontario and infringe on areas of federal government responsibility.

    • Highway 413 would cause over 17 million tonnes of additional CO2 emissions by 2050 – the same date by which Canada is committed to reach net-zero emissions.
    • The highway would enable and encourage expensive sprawl and make impossible the development of Brampton’s Heritage Heights, a transit-oriented, more affordable community.
    • Highway 413 would pave over 400 acres of the Greenbelt, and over 2,000 acres of Class 1 and Class 2 farmland – Ontario’s most productive farmland.
    • Highway 413 would cross over 85 rivers and streams, require a massive bridge over the Humber River and would pollute and destroy fish habitat.
    • The highway would cause real and unavoidable harm to a range of at-risk and endangered species by destroying their rare habitats.
    • Highway 413 would save drivers less than 1 minute on average across the region, and definitely not the 30 minutes that the Ontario government is claiming.
    • Highway 413 would be built only 15 km north of the underused Highway 407, which is owned by the Canada Pension Plan Investment Board.
    • The highway would cost taxpayers billions. Although the Ontario Ministry of Transportation (MTO) has failed to release updated cost estimates, in 2018, the cost of building the highway was estimated to be over $6 billion dollars.
    • Highway 413 could destroy important archaeological sites as the project passes through land that has long been inhabited by the Huron-Wendat. The highway would also bisect the sensitive headwaters of four watersheds within Mississauga of the Credit First Nation’s territory and impact their physical and cultural heritage, including ceremonial sites, burial sites and the cultural landscape.

    Additional Resources

    http://stopthe413.ca/

    https://environmentaldefence.ca/wp-content/uploads/2022/11/Highway413TheRoadToOurRuin_EnvironmentalDefenceNov.pdf

    https://environmentaldefence.ca/wp-content/uploads/2021/04/Highway-413-Paving-Paradise-Report_Environmental-Defence.pdf

    ABOUT ENVIRONMENTAL DEFENCE (environmentaldefence.ca): Environmental Defence is a leading Canadian environmental advocacy organization that works with government, industry and individuals to defend clean water, a safe climate and healthy communities.

    – 30 –

    For more information or to request an interview, please contact:

    Brittany Harris, media@environmentaldefence.ca

    The post Statement on the federal government’s role in ensuring a proper review of the proposed Highway 413 appeared first on Environmental Defence.

    This post was originally published on Environmental Defence.

  • Statement on the federal government’s response to RNNR committee recommendations on the proposed cap on oil and gas emissions

    Statement by Aly Hyder Ali, Oil and Gas Program Manager, Environmental Defence

    Ottawa | Traditional, unceded territory of the Algonquin Anishinaabeg People – We are pleased to see the Government of Canada agree with the recommendation put forward by the Standing Committee of Natural Resources (RNNR) that the proposed cap on emissions from the oil and gas industry must align with the goals of limiting global temperature increase to 1.5 degrees, as identified in the Paris Agreement.

    However, for the oil and gas emissions cap to align with Canada’s climate commitments, it needs to reflect the economy-wide target of reducing emissions from the oil and gas industry by 40-45 per cent from 2005 levels by 2030.

    Anything less than that would result in other industries and communities having to bear the burden of additional emissions reductions, while the oil and gas companies are let off the hook.

    Of course, for Canada to truly do its part to align with a 1.5 pathway, it would require a phase down of oil and gas production over the next decade.

    We are also pleased that the federal government has supported other recommendations put forward by RNNR, which includes considering the impacts of the cap on the workforce and Indigenous communities, and the impacts of the oil and gas sector on the environment.

    However, it is concerning that Canada continues to place big bets on supporting unproven and expensive speculative technologies like carbon capture and storage to reduce emissions.

    ABOUT ENVIRONMENTAL DEFENCE (environmentaldefence.ca): Environmental Defence is a leading Canadian environmental advocacy organization that works with government, industry and individuals to defend clean water, a safe climate and healthy communities.

    – 30 –

    For more information or to request an interview, please contact:

    Allen Braude, Environmental Defence, media@environmentaldefence.ca

    The post Statement on the federal government’s response to RNNR committee recommendations on the proposed cap on oil and gas emissions appeared first on Environmental Defence.

    This post was originally published on Environmental Defence.

  • Peter L. Markowitz, Professor of Law at Benjamin N. Cardozo School of Law, Joins the Innocence Project Board of Directors

    (March 31, 2023 — New York, NY) The Innocence Project announced today that Peter L. Markowitz, professor and Associate Dean of Equity in Curriculum and Teaching at the Benjamin N. Cardozo School of Law, has been elected to its Board of Directors.

    As the founder and co-director of the Kathryn O. Greenberg Immigration Justice Clinic, Professor Markowitz is an expert on the intersection of criminal and immigration law, which is the clinic’s prime focus, in addition to immigration enforcement issues. The clinic provides defense representation to individuals threatened with deportation and represents community-based and national advocacy organizations on various projects. Professor Markowitz and the clinic have played a central role in many critical innovations in the field of immigration law, including: creating the New York Immigrant Family Unity Project, the nation’s first public defender system for detained immigrants; developing the concept of sanctuary laws to protect undocumented immigrants; developing the first national immigration fellowship program, otherwise known as the Immigrant Justice Corps; and initiating the nation’s first full-service in-house immigration unit located in a public defender’s office at The Bronx Defenders. 

    “It is an honor to join the Innocence Project team, which has been a transformative force in the American legal system. They have not just exonerated scores of wrongly convicted people, but, in doing so, they have exposed some of the core defects and injustices that infect the criminal legal system and harm all those it ensnares. I look forward to learning from the staff and clients and supporting them in any way I can,” said Professor Markowitz.     

    “Peter Markowitz is a trailblazer in immigration law, with invaluable expertise in its intersectionality with the many challenges of the criminal legal system,” said Christina Swarns, executive director of the Innocence Project. “His commitment to justice and his leadership in this field are critical to our work and reflect the shared experiences of many of our clients. We are thrilled to welcome him to the Innocence Project.”

    Under Professor Markowitz’s guidance, the Greenberg Immigration Justice Clinic has been honored with numerous awards, including the Daniel Levy Award for outstanding and innovative advocacy. It has also been recognized by the New York City Council for groundbreaking work on behalf of immigrant communities.

    “It is a privilege to have Peter Markowitz join the Innocence Project Board of Directors,” said Innocence Project Board Chair Jack Taylor. “Professor Markowitz has committed decades to leading innovations in immigration law, establishing a groundbreaking clinic, as well as creating integral programs in the court system to ensure equitable and just pathways for all. This is a central part of the Innocence Project’s mission, and his experience at the forefront of this field, as well as a public defender, make him a vital asset to our work.”

    Professor Markowitz’s work has been published widely in leading law journals and in the press, with op-eds appearing in The New York Times, The Nation, Huffington Post, and more. Prior to his role at Cardozo, Professor Markowitz taught at both New York University and Hofstra Schools of Law. He received his J.D. from New York University School of Law in 2001. Following graduation, Professor Markowitz clerked for the Honorable Frederic Block — the U.S. District Judge for the Eastern District of New York —  and was a Soros Justice Fellow at The Bronx Defenders before entering the field of academia.

    The post Peter L. Markowitz, Professor of Law at Benjamin N. Cardozo School of Law, Joins the Innocence Project Board of Directors appeared first on Innocence Project.

    This post was originally published on Innocence Project.

  • MPs pass long-awaited legislation to tackle environmental racism in Canada

    Advocates celebrate milestone, call on Senate to prioritize Bill C-226

    OTTAWA | TRADITIONAL, UNCEDED TERRITORY OF THE ALGONQUIN ANISHNAABEG PEOPLE – Advocates for social justice and equity, environmental protection and public health celebrate passage of Bill C-226, the National Strategy on Environmental Racism and Environmental Justice Act, in the House of Commons.

    The bill now moves to the Senate. If approved by both chambers of parliament, Bill C-226 will become law, and require the government to examine the links between racialization, socio-economic status and environmental risk, and develop Canada’s first national strategy on environmental racism and environmental justice.

    Advocates say this is long overdue. A 2020 report by the UN Special Rapporteur on Toxic Wastes and Human Rights pointed to “a pattern in Canada where marginalized groups, and Indigenous peoples in particular, find themselves on the wrong side of a toxic divide, subject to conditions that would not be acceptable elsewhere in Canada.”

    The United States established a program on environmental justice nearly three decades ago, with an executive order issued in 1994. Canada lacks any parallel requirements.

    Dr. Ingrid Waldron, Co-Founder and Co-Director of the Canadian Coalition for Environmental and Climate Justice (CCECJ), said, “We know the stories about where and how environmental racism exists in Canada. The formal data on these realities is incomplete and therefore there is a lack of understanding about how real this problem is.

    Bill C-226 will be a starting point for data to be collected and acted upon. The consequences of inaction on environmental racism would be ongoing negative impacts on people’s health and well-being. The strategy created with Bill C-226 means action to redress environmental racism and action for environmental justice for all.”

    The strategy must reflect the needs of the communities and peoples most knowledgeable about the impacts of environmental racism and injustice, whose expertise will contribute to a meaningful framework to prevent further injustice and ill health, say advocates.

    Bill C-226 was first introduced by former MP Lenore Zann as Bill C-230 in the last session of Parliament. It was approved by the House of Commons environment committee in June 2021 but then died on the order paper when Parliament dissolved for elections. On February 2, 2022, MP Elizabeth May re-introduced the same legislation as Bill C-226. Government and NDP MPs supported the bill, ensuring its passage in the House of Commons.

    The Canadian Coalition for Environment & Climate Justice (CCECJ), supported by a number of civil society groups, now urges the Senate to make time for consideration of Bill C-226 at the earliest opportunity. It is our hope that this bill will become law before the summer so that the important work of developing a national strategy on environmental racism and environmental justice can begin.

    Groups supporting this statement:

    • Canadian Coalition for Environmental and Climate Justice (CCECJ)
    • Environmental Noxiousness, Racial Inequalities and Community Health Project (The ENRICH Project)
    • Black Environmental Initiative
    • Breast Cancer Action Québec (BCAQ)
    • Canadian Association of Physicians for the Environment (CAPE)
    • Canadian Environmental Law Association
    • Canadian Federation of Medical Students Health and Environment Adaptive Response Task Force (CFMS HEART)
    • Climate Strike Canada
    • Coalition for Environmental Rights
    • David Suzuki Foundation
    • Ecojustice
    • Environmental Defence
    • For Our Kids
    • KAIROS: Canadian Ecumenical Justice Initiatives
    • McGill Nurses for Planetary Health
    • Nova Scotia Voice of Women for Peace
    • Prevent Cancer Now
    • Shake Up The Establishment
    • Sierra Club Canada Foundation
    • South End Environmental Injustice Society (SEED)
    • West Coast Environmental Law
    • Women’s Healthy Environments Network (WHEN)

    Background information:

    • Text of Bill C-226
    • Environmental racism refers to the disproportionate siting of polluting industries and other environmental hazards in Indigenous, Black, and other racialized communities, and uneven access to nature and environmental benefits.
    • The US EPA defines environmental justice as, “the fair treatment and meaningful involvement of all people regardless of race, color, national origin, or income, with respect to the development, implementation, and enforcement of environmental laws, regulations, and policies. This goal will be achieved when everyone enjoys: The same degree of protection from environmental and health hazards, and Equal access to the decision-making process to have a healthy environment in which to live, learn, and work.”
    • More information about environmental racism is available on the The ENRICH Project website.

    – 30 –

    For more information or to request an interview, please contact:

    Paula Gray, Environmental Defence, media@environmentaldefence.ca

    The post MPs pass long-awaited legislation to tackle environmental racism in Canada appeared first on Environmental Defence.

    This post was originally published on Environmental Defence.

  • Private Members Bill C-234 weakens carbon pricing and should not become law

    Statement from Tim Gray, Executive Director, Environmental Defence

    Toronto | Traditional territories of the Mississaugas of the Credit, the Anishinaabeg, the Haudenosaunee, and the Huron-Wendat – Yesterday, a majority of opposition parties’ federal MPs voted for the 3rd reading passage of Private Members Bill C-234 entitled “An Act to Amend the Greenhouse Gas Pollution Pricing Act”. This bill, if left unamended by the Senate, would weaken the carbon price by expanding the definition of eligible farming machinery and extending the exemption from carbon pricing for qualifying farming fuel to include marketable natural gas and propane.

    It is important to recognize that price signals are an important aspect of encouraging a shift to the use of lower or zero carbon emission technologies and should be preserved and enhanced, not weakened with more exemptions.

    We also recognize that farmers do not yet have a full suite of options available to replace fossil fueled grain dryers and barn space heating. However, tax rebate programs have been used to support farmers, while still preserving the incentive to consistently evaluate options to reduce emissions by the farming community.

    Exempting these high emission activities from carbon pricing for farmers will only further encourage other sectors to demand similar treatment. This is already a problem as many industries, especially the oil and gas sector, have successfully lobbied for, and achieved, favourable treatment, which allows them to pay a much lower carbon price than others, regardless of their lack of actual degree of being energy intensive and trade exposed.

    For these reasons, the Senate should conduct a thorough review of this proposed legislation and consider making amendments that would require the government to make changes to the tax and regulatory regime that will help accelerate the development and adoption of clean energy technologies that can be used in farm operations.

    ABOUT ENVIRONMENTAL DEFENCE (environmentaldefence.ca): Environmental Defence is a leading Canadian environmental advocacy organization that works with government, industry and individuals to defend clean water, a safe climate and healthy communities.

    – 30 –

    For more information or to request an interview, please contact:

    Allen Braude, Environmental Defence, media@environmentaldefence.ca

    The post Private Members Bill C-234 weakens carbon pricing and should not become law appeared first on Environmental Defence.

    This post was originally published on Environmental Defence.

  • Reaction to Canada’s 2023 Budget from Environmental Defence Experts

    Ottawa | Traditional, unceded territory of the Algonquin Anishinaabeg People – Environmental Defence experts on climate change, climate finance, Just Transition, clean transportation and, safeguarding freshwater react to the Federal 2023 budget, released today.

    Julia Levin, Associate Director, National Climate:

    Today’s budget does include significant investments in renewable energy and electrification, however, the support given to climate solutions is still a fraction of what is being spent on subsidizing the fossil fuels that are causing the climate emergency. Rather than finally delivering on the government’s promise to end fossil fuel subsidies, this budget throws more fuel on the fire by funneling even more public dollars into false solutions that serve to prop up the fossil fuel industry. Carbon capture and hydrogen are great for greenwashing oil and gas, but they won’t deliver meaningful emissions reductions.

    Michelle Woodhouse, Program Manager, Water:

    For decades, elected governments have chronically underfunded fresh water initiatives, including those in the Great Lakes basin. Today’s federal budget announcement finally includes much-needed funding for fresh water, and that’s a reason for celebration. We welcome the government’s decision to provide $650 million over ten years to restore and protect Canada’s precious fresh water resources – including the Great Lakes. These investments must address the most critical threats facing Canada’s fresh waters, including nuisance and toxic algae blooms, toxic chemical and plastic pollution, deforestation, and wetland loss. The funds also need to support climate resilience and adaptation, address the impacts of environmental racism, and prioritize just and equitable outcomes for fresh water communities.

    Nate Wallace, Program Manager, Clean Transportation:

    Public transit systems across the country have been crying out for operating funding support to stave off steep fare hikes and deep cuts to service that will push people into their cars, further reducing revenue, and lead to a transit death spiral. A public transit death spiral will make cities more congested, increase carbon emissions, and have the greatest impact on society’s most vulnerable. It is very disappointing to see that this budget does not include much-needed funds to support transit systems now. The federal government’s update on the future of the permanent public transit funding program later this year must accelerate the start of this program and include much-needed funds for transit operations.

    The tax credit for investment in Canada’s zero-emission vehicle manufacturing, batteries and critical minerals is a well measured response to production incentives in the Inflation Reduction Act. Scaling-up investments in clean electricity sourced from renewables will help support grid infrastructure needs for meeting regulated zero-emission vehicles sales targets. Helping more automakers invest in Canada to make more clean cars for more Canadians is a win-win for both the economy and the environment.

    Keith Brooks, Programs Director:

    Budget 2023’s investments in clean electricity are welcome and needed, though extending that support to abated natural gas fired power is a bad idea. There are no examples of natural gas power plants with carbon capture and storage – and the attempts that have been made for coal plants are abject failures. Additionally, even if the emissions from the plant itself could be captured, that would not address the massive fugitive emissions that come from fracking and other forms of gas extraction.

    Aliénor Rougeot, Program Manager, Climate and Energy:

    Today’s budget makes investments in climate solutions that have the potential to create good, green jobs across the country. We welcome the historic addition of labour conditions to tax incentives and the reserved seats for unions on the board of the Canada Growth Fund. However, the government still needs to detail how it will support workers and communities directly impacted by the transition as we phase out fossil fuels and other high-carbon sectors. Canada needs dedicated funding for communities and Indigenous nations to diversify their economy and prepare for a global energy transition – and ensure income support and retraining programs are accessible to those who have been historically excluded from economic opportunities. Regrettably, today’s budget still embraces a polluter-gets-paid principle. While Indigenous communities downstream from the tar sands are currently grappling with massive toxic leaks, the government is handing our taxpayer dollars to the companies causing the damage.”

    Julie Segal, Senior Manager, Climate Finance:

    The federal government seems to understand that both public and private dollars must flow to climate solutions. Today’s budget creates incentives for private capital to shift towards climate action, but still no rules to make sure it happens.

    This budget should have also put money on the table to support vulnerable communities across the world who face the biggest burdens from climate disasters. Canada could have shown leadership by proactively reserving dollars for the United Nation’s loss and damage mechanism. This would have shown the federal government’s commitment to paying off global climate damage debts. Canada previously helped advance commitments from high-emitting countries to support communities and countries most vulnerable to climate damage, and this year Canada needs to step forward with the accompanying funds.

    ABOUT ENVIRONMENTAL DEFENCE (environmentaldefence.ca): Environmental Defence is a leading Canadian environmental advocacy organization that works with government, industry and individuals to defend clean water, a safe climate and healthy communities.

    – 30 –

    For more information or to request an interview, please contact:

    Allen Braude, Environmental Defence, abraude@environmentaldefence.ca

    The post Reaction to Canada’s 2023 Budget from Environmental Defence Experts appeared first on Environmental Defence.

    This post was originally published on Environmental Defence.

  • Statement from Michelle Woodhouse, Water Program Manager, Environmental Defence, on historic $420 million funding for Great Lakes protection

    Federal government is committing $420 million over the next 10 years to protect and preserve the Great Lakes

    Toronto | Traditional territories of the Mississaugas of the Credit, the Anishinaabeg, the Haudenosaunee, and the Huron-Wendat – Today’s announcement by the government of Canada to devote $420 million over ten years to protect and preserve the Great Lakes is a moment for celebration. This is a historic step towards the protection and restoration of the world’s largest surface freshwater system. Working together with the United States and Indigenous Nations of the Great Lakes is critical if we are to preserve these freshwater lakes for generations to come.

    This investment must address the most critical threats facing the Great Lakes, including nuisance and toxic algae blooms, toxic chemical and plastic pollution, deforestation, and wetland loss. The funds also need to support climate resilience and adaptation, and address environmental racism impacts in the basin by prioritizing just and equitable outcomes for Great Lakes communities.

    The importance of these precious water bodies to this region and the world cannot be overstated. We look forward to working with the Canadian government to ensure this historic investment addresses the most imminent threats to drinkable, swimmable, and fishable waters.

    Background information:

    • The money for the Great Lakes — which will be spread out over 10 years — will add to Ottawa’s action plan to protect large bodies of freshwater in Ontario and Manitoba.
    • The Great Lakes hold 84 per cent of North America’s surface freshwater, 20 per cent of the global surface freshwater systems, and are a drinking water source for over 40 million Great Lakes residents. They are also home to more than 4000 species of animals and plants.
    • The United States has been successful in securing bipartisan funding under the Great Lakes Restoration Initiative since 2010. The increased Canadian funding is a welcome addition to this.

    ABOUT ENVIRONMENTAL DEFENCE (environmentaldefence.ca): Environmental Defence is a leading Canadian environmental advocacy organization that works with government, industry and individuals to defend clean water, a safe climate and healthy communities.

    – 30 –

    For more information or to request an interview, please contact:

    Paula Gray, Environmental Defence, media@environmentaldefence.ca

    The post Statement from Michelle Woodhouse, Water Program Manager, Environmental Defence, on historic $420 million funding for Great Lakes protection appeared first on Environmental Defence.

    This post was originally published on Environmental Defence.

  • Environmental Defence experts react to the 2023 Ontario budget

    Toronto | Traditional territories of the Mississaugas of the Credit, the Anishinaabeg, the Haudenosaunee, and the Huron-Wendat –

    Keith Brooks, Programs Director: 

    Ontario continues to talk up its “Clean Energy Advantage” though the province is planning to build new gas plants and increase our reliance on gas, making the electricity grid dirtier. This is working at cross-purposes with the goal of attracting more clean energy manufacturing and at odds with the federal government’s commitment to a 100 per cent clean electricity sector by 2035. Ontario’s commitment to gas will prove to be a costly mistake, hurting taxpayers who will be on the hook for paying for gas plants that cannot operate due to their carbon emissions and due to missed economic opportunities thanks to an increasingly dirty grid.

    No one, including businesses, should be fooled by Ontario’s “clean energy credit registry.” It will not increase clean energy generation in any way. It’s a shell game with nothing under any of the shells.

    Nate Wallace, Clean Transportation Program Manager: 

    Public transit systems across the province have been crying out for operating funding support to stave off steep fare hikes and deep cuts to service that would lead to a vicious death spiral. A transit death spiral will make cities more congested, increase carbon emissions and have the greatest impact on society’s most vulnerable. With no transit operating funding in this budget, Ontario has set the stage for a public transit catastrophe. The federal government must now intervene to save public transit in Ontario, before it is too late.

    Phil Pothen, Ontario Environment Program Manager:

    It is disappointing to see that the Ontario government continues to pay lip service to tackling “gridlock” while throwing away public money on discredited highway and sprawl schemes it knows will make motor vehicle traffic – and the resultant greenhouse gas emissions – far worse. The government’s Highway 413, Holland Marsh Highway (a.k.a. Bradford Bypass) and 401 widening schemes, in particular, are nothing more than public subsidies for car-dependent sprawl in Caledon, East Gwillimbury and the outer reaches of Durham that will destroy vast swathes of farmland and habitat.

    While we are relieved to see that the Ontario government has not fully abandoned plans for Transit Oriented Development around major transit stations, its refusal to commit to any significant increase in funding for infrastructure like new and expanded schools (beyond what was allocated in previous budgets) casts doubt on whether it actually intends or expects to see much-needed densification happen. It seems calculated to provoke opposition to the new housing in existing neighborhoods that we desperately need to curb sprawl.

    ABOUT ENVIRONMENTAL DEFENCE (environmentaldefence.ca): Environmental Defence is a leading Canadian environmental advocacy organization that works with government, industry and individuals to defend clean water, a safe climate and healthy communities.

    – 30 –

    For more information or to request an interview, please contact:

    Brittany Harris, media@environmentaldefence.ca

    The post Environmental Defence experts react to the 2023 Ontario budget appeared first on Environmental Defence.

    This post was originally published on Environmental Defence.

  • House of Commons must make passing Bill S-5 a priority

    Long-awaited bill to update Canadian Environmental Protection Act faces final MP vote

    OTTAWA/TRADITIONAL, UNCEDED TERRITORY OF THE ALGONQUIN ANISHNAABEG PEOPLE – Bill S-5 which seeks to reform the Canadian Environmental Protection Act (CEPA) for the first in more than two decades, must be passed into law as soon as possible this spring, says five leading health and environmental groups. The House of Commons committee studying the legislation reported the bill with amendments yesterday. MPs must now approve the bill in a final vote.

    While Bill S-5 does not address all aspects of CEPA in need of modernization, its passage will represent important progress for the following reasons.

    • It introduces long-overdue updates for the control of toxic substances and dangerous chemicals, including requiring that priority be given to prohibiting the most hazardous substances. The bill also updates the framework for assessing and managing toxic substances and improves transparency and accountability.
    • The right to a healthy environment will be recognized for the first time under federal law. The legislation establishes a new duty for the government to uphold the principles of environmental justice, intergenerational equity, and non-regression. It also requires the federal government to consider the cumulative impacts of toxics, and their effects on vulnerable populations.

    We welcomed the introduction of the original version of this bill in April 2021 and called for it to be prioritized and strengthened. Following the 2021 elections, the bill was reintroduced in the Senate as S-5 last year and then progressed to the House. The Senate and House committees that studied the bill passed amendments that improve key provisions, addressing some – though  not all – of our recommendations.

    We now call on all MPs to prioritize the passage of these important updates to CEPA, Canada’s cornerstone environmental law.

    While passage of the bill is urgent, it is regrettable that members of the Standing Committee on Environment and Sustainable Development rejected proposed amendments to require action on air pollution, labelling of hazardous substances in consumer products, and clear timelines for action on toxics, among other proposals such as improving control of genetically modified animals and strengthening CEPA requirements for pollution prevention planning, to further strengthen Bill S-5.

    Environment and Climate Change Minister Steven Guilbeault has indicated that he intends to introduce a second CEPA modernization bill. It will need to address these outstanding recommendations for CEPA reform, to complement Bill S-5.

    The groups supporting this statement are:

    – 30 –

    For more information or to request an interview, please contact:

    Paula Gray, media@environmentaldefence.ca, 705-435-8611

    Viorica Lorcencova, viorica.lorcencova@acsqc.ca, 514-443-8437

    Jane McArthur, media@cape.ca, jane@cape.ca, 647-762-9168

    Brendan Glauser, bglauser@davidsuzuki.org, 604-356-8829

    Sean O’Shea, Ecojustice, soshea@ecojustice.ca, 416-368-7533 ext. 523

    The post House of Commons must make passing Bill S-5 a priority appeared first on Environmental Defence.

    This post was originally published on Environmental Defence.

  • Will Budget 2023 Eliminate Fossil Fuel Subsidies?

    Aerial view of A large oil refinery along the Athabasca River in Alberta's Oilsands, showing multiple smoke stacks.

    Ottawa | Traditional, unceded territory of the Algonquin Anishinaabeg People – On March 28, Minister Freeland will publish this year’s federal budget. Environmental Defence is calling on the Minister to fulfill the government’s promise and use this budget to finally eliminate fossil fuel subsidies.

    Our new analysis shows that in 2022, the federal government provided at least $20.215 billion in financial support to the fossil fuel industry despite oil and gas companies making record profits last year. The Pathways Alliance – a coalition of the six companies that make up 95 per cent of the oilsands – spent only 0.4 per cent of their total 2022 cashflow on their climate and environmental goals. Yet, the federal government extended even greater financial support in 2022 than the previous two years, which totalled $8.6 billion and $18 billion respectively.

    “Budget 2023 is a critical opportunity for the Government of Canada to uphold its commitment to ending all fossil fuel subsidies and redirect that support into clean energy,” said Julia Levin, Associate Director, National Climate at Environmental Defence Canada. “Oil and gas companies – which are raking in huge cash flows and funneling that money towards their shareholders instead of reducing their emissions – keep lobbying for more and more subsidies for carbon capture and hydrogen. These technologies are not climate solutions: they are dangerous distractions that will prolong our dependence on fossil fuels. Every dollar spent on carbon capture or hydrogen is a dollar that cannot be spent on proven, effective and affordable climate solutions, such as solar and wind energy.”

    What Environmental Defence is Looking For in Budget 2023:

    • An end to fossil fuel subsidies. The Government of Canada has committed to ending fossil fuel subsidies this year (a promise first made in 2009). The federal budget would be an ideal moment to lay out a clear roadmap and framework to ensure that promise is met. In addition, Budget 2023 should eliminate existing tax breaks, as President Biden did earlier this month in his proposed budget plan.

    • No subsidies for false solutions (Carbon Capture Utilization and Storage, fossil-derived hydrogen). The science is clear: fossil fuels are causing the climate crisis. A transition off of fossil fuels is necessary to meet international goals of limiting temperature rise to 1.5 degrees. Carbon Capture Utilization and Storage (CCUS) and fossil hydrogen prolong our dependence on fossil fuels, with limited impact on lifecycle emissions. They are not part of a net-zero plan. The proposed hydrogen investment tax credit should only be made available for hydrogen produced from renewable energy, based on the recommendations of over 100 academics and 55 environmental and health organizations. Similarly, there should be no funding made available for CCUS (a recommendation made by over 400 of Canada’s leading academics and experts ahead of Budget 2022).

    • Aggressive spending on renewable energy, electricity transmission and energy efficiency.

    “The Government of Canada promised to end fossils back in 2009, yet continues to give billions of dollars to the very companies fueling the climate crisis,” said Levin. “The pathway to zero emissions and a climate–safe future does not include subsidies or public financing for the oil and gas industry. It’s time for Canada to turn off the financial taps to Canada’s most polluting industry.”

    See our backgrounder for more details on Canada’s 2022 subsidies as well as what Environmental Defence will be watching for in Budget 2023.

    Additional Material: Letter to Minister Freeland on hydrogen subsidies in Budget 2023 from 100+ academics and 55 civil society organizations:

    ABOUT ENVIRONMENTAL DEFENCE (environmentaldefence.ca): Environmental Defence is a leading Canadian environmental advocacy organization that works with government, industry and individuals to defend clean water, a safe climate and healthy communities.

    – 30 –

    For more information or to request an interview, please contact:

    Allen Braude, Environmental Defence, media@environmentaldefence.ca

    The post Will Budget 2023 Eliminate Fossil Fuel Subsidies? appeared first on Environmental Defence.

    This post was originally published on Environmental Defence.

  • ATU Canada and Environmental Defence Call on Premiers, Minister Freeland to Save Public Transit in Upcoming Budgets

    ATU Canada is the latest in a series of groups sounding the alarm bell on the public transit death spiral

    Ottawa | Traditional, unceded territory of the Algonquin Anishinaabeg People – Today, Amalgamated Transit Union (ATU) Canada joined forces with Environmental Defence to call on federal and provincial governments to work together and save public transit systems from a financial crisis caused by pandemic-related lower ridership and over-dependence on farebox revenues. They also called on federal and provincial governments to work together on long-term solutions to permanently increase operating funding for public transit.

    “Over the next two weeks, the Federal Government as well as the Government of Ontario will be unveiling their budgets. We need to see crucial operating funding for public transit to prevent drastic service cuts and fare increases that will push people into their cars, further reducing revenue, and lead to a transit death spiral. The federal government has worked with provinces to save public transit before, and they can do it again,” said John Di Nino, President of ATU Canada. “We’re calling on all Premiers and Minister Freeland to make funding for public transit operations a priority in their budgets.”

    “As this week’s IPCC report highlighted, we have a limited window to prevent the catastrophic impacts of a heating climate and it requires deep reductions in greenhouse gas emissions, now. Canada is currently off track from meeting its 2030 transportation sector emissions reduction target by eight million tonnes. Allowing a public transit death spiral to occur is an unacceptable policy choice. Instead, we need the federal government and provincial governments to invest in improving public transit service, to bring back riders and tackle the climate emergency,” said Nate Wallace, Clean Transportation Program Manager at Environmental Defence.

    • The City of Toronto has budgeted $366 million in its 2023 budget in expected transit assistance from federal and provincial governments, and the TTC expects a further $350-$420 million sized hole in its budget in 2024. The City of Ottawa has a $39 million dollar hole in its transit operating budget this year. A January 2023 internal survey by the Ontario Public Transit Association has estimated an operational deficit of at least $510 million for Ontario’s entire public transit sector.
    • In February, more than 100 academics in the Toronto region signed an open letter to the municipal, provincial and federal governments calling on them to intervene and prevent a death spiral caused by Toronto Transit Commission (TTC) service cuts.
    • The Canadian Urban Transit Association (CUTA) estimates that for every 10 per cent loss in transit ridership below pre-pandemic levels, transit systems across Canada collectively lose $470 million per year. Ridership is currently at approximately 70 per cent Canada-wide. Last week, CUTA called on federal and provincial governments to come to the aid of public transit systems.
    • Last week, a coalition of 15 Environmental Groups, including Environmental Defence, Équiterre, Greenpeace Canada, the David Suzuki Foundation and Climate Action Network Canada, signed an open letter calling on Finance Minister Chrystia Freeland to intervene and stop the public transit death spiral.

    Issue Backgrounder

    https://environmentaldefence.ca/report/stopping-the-public-transit-death-spiral/

    Additional Resources

    https://cutaactu.ca/canadian-transit-systems-need-renewed-operating-support/

    https://cutaactu.ca/cuta-urges-ontario-government-to-follow-bcs-lead-in-supporting-public-transit/

    ABOUT ENVIRONMENTAL DEFENCE (environmentaldefence.ca): Environmental Defence is a leading Canadian environmental advocacy organization that works with government, industry and individuals to defend clean water, a safe climate and healthy communities.

    ABOUT ATU CANADA (atucanada.ca): The Amalgamated Transit Union Canada (ATU Canada) is a strong voice representing over 34,000 transit professionals across Canada.  We lobby all levels of government for policy changes that protect and improve the rights of transit workers and riders, as we continue to  service our communities.

    – 30 –

    For more information or to request an interview, please contact:

    Allen Braude, Environmental Defence, media@environmentaldefence.ca

    Rose Carusone, ATU Canada, rose@atucanada.ca

     

    The post ATU Canada and Environmental Defence Call on Premiers, Minister Freeland to Save Public Transit in Upcoming Budgets appeared first on Environmental Defence.

    This post was originally published on Environmental Defence.

  • Public Interest Groups at Supreme Court of Canada to Defend Federal Environmental Law from Alberta Challenge 

    Ottawa | Traditional, unceded territory of the Algonquin Anishinaabeg People – This week, the federal government is defending its Impact Assessment Act (IAA) (formerly Bill C-69) at the Supreme Court of Canada. Last year, the Alberta Court of Appeal issued a non-binding opinion that the IAA is unconstitutional; the Government of Canada is appealing that opinion. The hearing will be heard on March 21 and 22.

    The IAA is the federal government’s primary tool for assessing the environmental and social impacts of major projects and proposals, such as pipelines, mines, transmission lines, and dams. It is one of Canada’s most fundamental environmental laws, and plays a key role in ensuring sound decisions over projects affecting nature, communities, and Indigenous rights.

    MiningWatch Canada and Environmental Defence Canada, represented by Canadian Environmental Law Association (CELA); Nature Canada, represented by West Coast Environmental Law (West Coast); and the Canadian Association of Physicians for the Environment (CAPE) are intervening in the hearings to defend environmental protections in the IAA. CELA and West Coast are also representing themselves.

    The IAA, which came into force in 2019, was an attempt to strengthen Canada’s environmental laws and fix the project review process, which had been gutted in 2012 by the  government of the day. The IAA does not fully restore protections lost by the 2012 rollbacks – for example, the IAA only triggers around a dozen assessments per year, compared to thousands of projects assessed annually under Canada’s original assessment law. However, it makes important strides forward, including legally requiring assessments to consider a project’s climate impacts.

    “Impact assessment is all about looking before you leap,” says Stephen Hazell, interim Policy Director with Nature Canada. “Provincial and federal governments share the legal authority to protect the environment and conserve nature. As intervenors, we will be making submissions to the court that the IAA sits squarely within federal authority.”

    While it was before Parliament, Bill C-69 was the target of massive opposition from the oil and gas lobby. Back in May 2019, Alberta Premier Jason Kenney threatened that if all the amendments to Bill C-69 demanded by the oil and gas industry were not adopted, the Province would launch a constitutional challenge on the grounds that the law intrudes on provincial rights. In February 2021 – despite many of the oil and gas industry’s amendments being adopted – Alberta did just that, arguing that the IAA goes beyond the federal government’s constitutional authority.

    “For the first time, we have a law that requires the consideration of a project’s total carbon pollution before it gets approved. The Government of Alberta is attacking that, just as they have other important climate and environmental rules,” says Julia Levin, Associate Director, National Climate with Environmental Defence. “We’re in a climate emergency. The federal and provincial governments must use every tool in the toolbox to tackle the climate crisis together.”

    Given some provinces’ weak environmental protection and weak environmental assessment frameworks, it is more important than ever to have strong federal laws.

    “The federal government has a crucial role in safeguarding our communities, our health, and the environment where provincial governments can’t, or won’t. Ontario, for example, doesn’t even require mining projects to undergo environmental assessments, and most provinces have major gaps when it comes to cleaning up closed mines and wells and making them safe,” says Jamie Kneen, MiningWatch Canada’s national program co-lead. “We need to be able to make informed decisions to ensure that only acceptable projects go forward, and that those projects are as safe as they can be.”

    “Fundamentally, affirmation that the federal government has jurisdiction to consider climate-polluting greenhouse gas emissions and Canada’s climate commitments when assessing major projects is essential to securing human and planetary health,” says Dr. Joe Vipond, emergency physician and CAPE Past President. “This view aligns with CAPE’s physician-led approach to mitigate climate change in order to protect human health.”

    The Supreme Court of Canada’s hearing is scheduled for March 21 and March 22, with appearances by the above interveners scheduled for March 21. The hearing will be live-streamed here.

    About MININGWATCH: MiningWatch Canada is a non-profit organization created to provide a public interest response to the threats to public health, the environment, and community interests posed by irresponsible mineral policies and practices in Canada and around the world. It provides timely information and support to mining-affected communities and related organizations, and works for better mining-related policies.

    About ENVIRONMENTAL DEFENCE CANADA: Environmental Defence Canada is a leading Canadian environmental advocacy organization that works with government, industry and individuals to defend clean water, a safe climate and healthy communities.

    About NATURE CANADA: Nature Canada has been a voice for nature for more than 80 years. We are a charitable organization advocating the conservation of land and the protection of waterways, and oceans to help stop the loss of species. We facilitate mobilization among more than 900 nature organizations and 100,000 nature-lovers while helping Canadians connect to nature.

    About WEST COAST ENVIRONMENTAL LAW: West Coast Environmental Law is a non-profit group of environmental lawyers and strategists dedicated to safeguarding the environment through law. West Coast works to transform environmental decision-making and strengthen legal protection for the environment through collaborative legal strategies that bridge Indigenous and Canadian law.

    About the CANADIAN ASSOCIATION OF PHYSICIANS FOR THE ENVIRONMENT: The Canadian Association of Physicians for the Environment works to better human health by protecting the planet. CAPE supports physicians to be advocates for healthier environments and ecosystems, and collaborates with other organizations, nationally and internationally, to work effectively and build power together.

    About CANADIAN ENVIRONMENTAL LAW ASSOCIATION: Canadian Environmental Law Association (“CELA”) is a public interest law clinic dedicated to environmental equity, justice, and health. Founded in 1970, CELA is one of the oldest environmental advocates for environmental protection in the country. With funding from Legal Aid Ontario (LAO),  CELA provides free legal services relating to environmental justice in Ontario, including representing qualifying low-income and vulnerable or disadvantaged communities in litigation. CELA also works on environmental legal education and reform initiatives.

    – 30 –

    For more information, or to request an interview, please contact:

    The post Public Interest Groups at Supreme Court of Canada to Defend Federal Environmental Law from Alberta Challenge  appeared first on Environmental Defence.

    This post was originally published on Environmental Defence.