Do not ratify Kyoto Protocol, CTA tells Canadian government
Nov 1, 2002 12:00 PM
The Canadian Trucking Alliance (CTA) has joined the Canadian Coalition for Responsible Environmental Solutions (CCRES), a newly formed group comprising many of Canada's other business associations.
This coalition will tell Canadian federal and provincial governments that while it is committed to working to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, the business community believes the Kyoto Protocol, which the prime minister may ratify before the end of 2002, is the wrong approach to achieving this. Instead, it urges government to consider a “made-in-Canada” alternative to Kyoto that will, among other things:
- Combine immediate actions with a more realistic time frame
Kyoto requires Canada to reduce its emissions to 6% below 1990 levels, which is 25% to 30% below current levels.
- Protect the environment
Only GHG emissions are targeted under the protocol. CTA prefers a solution that also addresses pollutants like sulfur and nitrogen oxides.
- Protect Canadian jobs
A figure widely used for expected GDP loss to Canada under Kyoto is 1.9% per annum according to recent government estimates. This translates into nearly $30 billion taken out of the Canadian economy by 2010.
- Protect Canada's competitive position as a trading nation
Kyoto does not apply to all nations. Mexico is not a signatory to the agreement, and the United States has announced that it will not ratify the protocol.
- Keep capital in Canada to invest in new environmental technologies
Under the protocol, Canada will be required to buy emissions “credits” from other countries in order to meet Kyoto targets. CTA would prefer this money stay in Canada to be invested in new energy, emissions, and environmental technologies.
- Negotiate agreements with specific economic sectors
Under the made-in-Canada approach, emissions performance targets would be agreed on by all stakeholders, including federal and provincial governments, and industries impacted.
© 2013 Penton Media Inc.
Acceptable Use Policy blog comments powered by Disqus