Hello to the viewers of the Etobicoke Climate Action blog! As of today, the ability to comment on this blog has been enabled. Here are the rules:

• Only registered subscribers can comment. If you try to add a comment, the dialogue will guide you through the registration process.
• The 1st time you post a comment, the blog admin must approve the comment. After that, your comment’s will not require approval
• Comments that are not on topic, or which are not deemed appropriate will be removed. Repeat offenders will no longer be allowed to comment

Thats it! Enjoy!

Cheers, Alex Cameron, on behalf of Etobicoke Climate Action

Opinion, by Alex Cameron

This is a brief overview of four things that have really caught my attention lately regarding getting the Oil & Gas industry in Canada to take the required actions to reduce their GHG emissions. 

1. The Government of Canada has recently published a very interesting discussion paper entitled “Options to cap and cut oil and gas sector greenhouse gas emissions to achieve 2030 goals and net-zero by 2050 – discussion document”
   
   The paper’s purpose is to “invites input on the design and implementation of an approach to cap and cut emissions from the sector. The document seeks input on two potential regulatory approaches: The development of a new cap-and-trade system under the Canadian Environmental Protection Act, 1999 (CEPA); and The modification of existing carbon pollution pricing systems under the Greenhouse Gas Pollution Pricing Act (GGPPA).
   
   The paper also states that “The Government of Canada is seeking views on the guiding principles, policy design considerations, and regulatory options presented in this paper”, and that written comments can be submitted until 2022-09-30. So, there is time to do a detailed review (I have nearly completed my first read) and draft a reasonable response.

2. The Globe and Mail reports that as result of this paper, the “Energy sector fears higher costs under new carbon pricing system”. Key points in the article include the following.
   • “A cap-and-trade system would provide more certainty in meeting emissions targets, but the industry would incur a higher administrative burden, the document says”
   • It talks about the caps leading to production cuts, which Ottawa says is not the immediate aim – the aim is reduce the GHGs emitted in Scope 1 and Scope 2 
   • Lots of commentary about the provinces and the industry lining up to push back hard against these measures
   • The NZAB supports the report
   • Chris Severson-Baker of the Pembina Institute state that they support the report and that “ the federal government needs to nail down its approach for the emissions cap as quickly as possible”. He goes on to state that their review of the two options is ongoing and that “ “In our view, you’ve got to go with the one that is going to get you there the fastest” .

3. I just finished watching the extremely scary PBS documentary “The Power of Big Oil”. Available on Youtube at:
   The Power of Big Oil – Part 1 – Denial
   The Power of Big Oil – Part 2 – Doubt
   The Power of Big Oil – Part 3 – Delay
   
   This does a great job talking about the use of denial, then sewing doubt, followed by delay as a tactic to delay action. It also does a great job talking about the fact that “we won’t solve the climate crisis unless we solve the misinformation crises”
4. The collapse of the climate bill in the United States after a Democratic senator (Joe Manchin) – could not be persuaded to support it. Many sources (CNN, the NY Times) state that Senator Manchin is deeply beholden to the fossil fuel industry

First of all, I think we all agree that we need to stop burning oil and gas – possibly with some rare exceptions with compensating controls.

Secondly, I think we likely all agree that the complicated part is getting from where we are now to that target state. I am hopeful that we can define paths to achieve that goal – and this brief article contains some highlights on that effort.

Third, I think it is important that we realize that a lot of powerful forces will attempt to use the the same delay and focused attack methods that have worked so well in the USA to try and delay action on the Oil and Gas cap and cut approach that Canada wants to take.

I think it is very important that we as citizens make sure that our MPs, as well as our MPPs,  know that we support these measures to cap and cut. I also think that we need to look at legislation that allows the windfall profits that the industry is currently making be directed towards cap and cut efforts.  BUT – this is where I start to run out of ideas – because I also think that we need to see what we can do to get the industry and the provinces to cooperate with this effort – instead of opposing it. I think the key is education – as per the quote from the Frontline special “we won’t solve the climate crisis unless we solve the misinformation crises”.

Opinion, by Alex Cameron

The Ontario Climate Emergency Campaign has published a 12 Point Climate Action Plan. This plan is well worth reading, and you will see that a large list of organizations have endorsed it. 

Personally, and even though I support all 12 points – I feel that some of the wording: 

• pushes away potential new allies for the climate movement – it sounds very “left” – and we want to appeal to “centre” and “centre-right” as well.
• tends to pull in (“coat-tailing”) other issues into the climate issue.
• is such that the current provincial government will stop listening after about the 2nd sentence.
• may be overly aggressive with some of its targets instead of aligning with targets which already exist .

I think it is really important to choose words that the Ontario government can listen to – even if that means pulling your punches on issues which you think should be tied into the climate debate. I would be happy to discuss this further.

How would I reword this 12 point program? See below.

1. Keep the pressure on to ensure that the science-based targets Canada has set for GHG emission reduction are actually met. 
   Canada’s current targets of  “40‑45 percent below 2005 levels by 2030” and “achieving net-zero emissions by the year 2050” including the “Canadian Net-Zero Emissions Accountability Act” are reasonable, and include the requirement to “set national emissions reduction targets for 2035, 2040, and 2045, ten years in advance. Each target will require credible, science-based emissions reduction plans to achieve it.”
   
   These targets for planning seem reasonable. However, more must be done to ensure that the federal government,  provinces, municipalities, and industry work together to actually meet these targets.   As citizens, we must make sure that all levels of government, and the businesses we interact with know that we will hold them accountable to meet these targets.
2. not included
3. Increase pressure on the Ontario Government to invest significantly in creating a thriving, regenerative, zero emissions economy.
   Work with the Ontario Government to help them better understand that investing in the training, industrial scale-up in green industry and industry required to convert multiple sectors of the economy including transportation and buildings to a green economy. This  will both grow the economy and reduce GHG emissions. Promote the creation of a cabinet-level “Minister of the Green Transition”  position within the Ontario government responsible for ensuring that this investment in a green economy happens.
4. Rapidly wind down all fossil fuel use.
   Further thoughts on actions to wind down fossil fuel usage as rapidly as possible are forthcoming.
   
   Ensure that the IESO meets its current target to phase-out all NG generation of electricity by 2035. 
5. not included
6. Accelerate the transition to zero emission buildings.
   Establish and implement stringent net-zero emissions building codes on all new builds by 2025 including elimination of fossil fuel based heating, while incentivizing the study to evaluate when and where deep retrofits for existing buildings, as well as district energy, should be used to achieve net-zero emissions for all buildings in Ontario by 2050, including setting interim targets. These targets can be modeled on the approach taken in   “Canadian Net-Zero Emissions Accountability Act” (CNZEAA). Immediately establish a task force to determine a reasonable date to ban new natural gas connections. Mandate the ““Minister of the Green Transition” to create a Crown Corporation to mobilize the workforce for the sustainable employment opportunities that will be generated.
7. Accelerate the transition to zero emissions transportation and ensure ongoing sustainable community development.
   Invest in affordable, accessible, and convenient zero-emissions public transit connecting and interconnecting communities, including northern communities. 
   
   As part of the  “Canadian Net-Zero Emissions Accountability Act”, ensure that Canada’s Zero-Emission Vehicle (ZEV) sales targets (CZEVST) establish a targets  to phase out the sale of light duty vehicles (LDVs) and medium and heavy duty vehicles (MHDVs) which are not zero emission. The current LDV targets outlined in CZEVST of “achieving 100% ZEV sales by 2035, including interim targets of at least 20% by 2026 and at least 60% by 2030” make sense – but we need to ensure that we work to meet this target. 
   
   Ensure that attainable targets for MHDVs and rail are also in place – including the required investigation and incentivization.
   
   Ensure that attainable targets for air transportation are also in place – including the required investigation and incentivization.
   
   Promote the creation of livable walkable / rollable neighbourhoods that reduce the need for mechanized transportation.
   
   Prevent urban sprawl through sustainable urban development and intensification, while promoting healthy walkable, cycling-friendly communities with ample green infrastructure. Promote increased density and the ability to live near where you work, and shop near where you live.
   
   This will require increased cooperation between the municipalities and the Ontario government – and working to reduce the number of cases where they are at loggerheads.
8. Urgently protect natural biodiversity.
   Support and invest in science-based conservation initiatives. Restore natural ecosystems functions, preserve biodiversity, and increase carbon sequestration, including important carbon sinks such as the Greenbelt, the boreal forests of northern Ontario, and the James Bay lowlands, thereby improving human and ecosystem resilience to climate impacts. Protection must include at least 30% by 2030 of forests, wetlands, greenspaces and fresh water including our Great Lakes and other sources of drinking water. Restore powers and funding to Conservation Authorities.
9. Invest in local, organic, regenerative agriculture and plant-rich food systems.
   Incentivize carbon storage in soil, restore biodiversity, restore degraded ecosystems, and ensure Canadian food sovereignty and food security across the country. Increase public access to locally-sourced, affordable, sustainably-produced, and plant-rich foods and implement reductions in food waste. Support farmers in shifting operations to regenerative agriculture. Support all communities (including Indigenous communities) wishing to maintain traditional food systems and enhance their food security, including hunting and fishing.
   
   Ensure that dairy and other animal husbandry farming methods are humane, and that their GHG production is reflected in the product costs.
10. Institute a broad public education campaign to educate the public on what’s at stake.
    Ensure that the public knows about the climate and biodiversity crises and their critical impacts on human survival, in order to educate and mobilize broad community-based and societal action. Recognize climate change as the single greatest threat to human health of our time. Highlight the multiple co-benefits and massive opportunities that will result from taking climate action, including health and economic benefits, as well as employment opportunities.
11. In Ontario, immediately reinstate an independent office of the Environmental Commissioner.
    Empower and adequately fund the Environmental Commissioner on an ongoing basis to independently oversee the implementation of the essential environmental actions to be taken.
12. Ensure a just transition to a green economy which leaves no one behind.
    As we make the massive and urgent transformations critically needed to secure our shared future, ensure a just transition for Indigenous, resource-dependent, remote, and marginalized communities, low income families, fossil fuel workers, and all others disproportionately affected by the necessary shift to a low carbon economy. Prepare our communities for the impacts of the climate crisis to minimize human suffering and infrastructure damage. Address environmental racism and intergenerational justice by supporting those most vulnerable to climate change impacts including future generations. Recognize that our only way forward is to act together urgently, collectively, massively to safeguard the present and secure the future for ourselves, our children, and for generations yet to come.
13. Flex regulations, Border Carbon Adjustments, and other regulatory measures
    Ensure that a thorough investigation of the role of flexible regulations, as well as carbon pricing; the role of carbon border adjustments; and other regulatory issues are thoroughly addressed both at a federal and provincial level so as to ensure that we can safely make the required just green transition.

Opinion –  Alex Cameron

This is an opinion piece – and I think it should provoke some disagreement! I would love to see some discussion on the ECA Google Group, and if somebody wants to write another column with a different opinion – I would love that even more.

This article will focus on “people transportation”. Future articles will look at other aspects of transportation – key among those – “goods transportation” – the trucks, trains, and aircraft that deliver goods both locally and over longer distances.

Lets define “green people transportation” as transportation with low or zero GHG emissions that allows  individuals and families to conduct their lives: go shopping, get to work, visit friends, and just generally go about their business.

I consider “green people transportation” to be far more difficult to achieve than Zero Emission Buildings. That’s because we need to deal with some tightly coupled issues that just make it more complicated:

1. Self Image
   Few, if any, people see the way that they heat and cool their house as part of their self image. That is not the case with transportation. There are a lot of people who think of car and motorcycle transportation as a key part of their self image, including their “freedom”.  
2. Urban Design
   In 1908, Henry Ford introduced the Model T – the first mass produced automobile. One hundred and fourteen years later, I think even the hardest-core “car guy” would admit that cars have affected a ton of aspects of city design in a negative way. We have a lot of paved space used solely for parking, not to mention having lots of streets that are very focused on car use – and not on the other users.
3. Urban – Rural Divide
   For a politician looking for a divisive issue, this is an issue that is perfect for dividing urban opinion from rural opinion. I think it is 100% possible to look for solutions that work for both – but that is a harder job – and not as easy as simply “pumping up the volume” on being divisive.

So, it is hard to talk just about reducing GHGs from personal transportation. You need to deal with differing views for what cities will look like in the future, you need to ask people to think differently about their self image, and you need to understand that the solutions for green people transportation in a rural and an urban environment may well need to be different.

What are the main options that are currently available for people transportation in urban places like Etobicoke?

1. Public transit – the TTC and GO. Depending on your personal mobility, where you live in Etobicoke, where you shop, and where you work – this may be either a really good option, or not realistic at all. In many cases, it will be somewhere in between.
2. Walking and rolling – walking, cycling, skateboards, scooters, etc.  As with public transit, this may be a good option, not realistic, or in many cases it will be somewhere in between.
3. Traditional motorized vehicle – a car or motorbike. Currently, the layout of the city is very focused on this as a primary source (with public transit and walking playing supporting roles) of transportation.
4. Ride-Sharing Services – things like Uber and traditional taxi services.
5. Non-traditional motorized vehicles – things like e-bikes, e-scooters, e-unicycles.
6. Long Distance Trains – Via Rail.
7. Long Distance Buses – things like Coach Canada, Ontario Northland, and Megabus.
8. Airplanes. Yikes – from a green point of view these have very high GHG profile and we would like to avoid when other options are available.

As soon as we make this list – something starts to jump out at us:

1. Intra-City ( Short Distance / Medium Distance) has more options.
   One set of these options is focused on shorter  and medium distances – within the city. So, these are the options that must work well together in dense population areas.
2. Inter-City (Long Distance) has fewer options. The other set of these options is much more focused on traveling longer distances.
3. The traditional motorized vehicle is the only form of transportation that is widely used for both Intra-City ( Short Distance / Medium Distance) and Inter-City (Long Distance)  use cases.

A little bit of research, and we end up finding out that “Canadians love their cars, but they hardly ever use ’em”. When you look at these statistics – it starts to become pretty clear just how expensive it is to own a car – without even including the environmental impacts. But many people currently have no other choice:

1. If they want to go out of town to visit friends, a cottage, a ski resort, or anywhere like that, there really is no viable alternative in Ontario to the car. Is there?
2. If you are going to Costco, or to the supermarket for the weekly grocery shop, could you really get all that stuff home some other way than by car? I know – people will suggest a cargo bike – and I think that for a subset of people – that might work. But for many people, a motorized, protected from the weather, option is always going to be what they want.

So, I think that leads us to a conclusion something like this:

1. We are already at a point where urban residents can use their cars less. I think many of us have already tried to reduce our car usage. Keep it up. This makes sense. Walk and roll when you can. Take public transit when you can.
2. Leave the car parked. When you need to take the car out, try to be mindful about it, plan your route. How about considering carpooling with others? Can you and some friends or neighbours use a single car trip to accomplish several errands, and thus reduce the traffic on the streets, as well as reduce the GHG impact?
3. If you currently don’t own a car – don’t buy one. It should just continue to get easier to not need one. And  they are expensive.
4. We need to keep the pressure on our governments to continue to fund the evolution towards “complete streets” – that is – “streets should safely accommodate all users – pedestrians, cyclists, transit services and motor vehicles – and also support and enhance local neighbourhood context and character.” 
   
   This likely means lower speed limits on urban streets. Why not? Also, convert a lot of streets to one way – so that you can use the space to segrate “heavy motorized”, “light motorized”, human powered wheels, and walkers into separate lanes to deal with with velocity and exposure profiles.
   
   Martin Green, one of our core team, expands upon this:
   
   [In addition to complete streets], I think it is even more important to have complete (15-minute) communities. In much of Etobicoke, the only viable way to get to shops and services for daily needs is to drive – it’s simply too far to walk or cycle, especially as we get older.
   
   A major change in planning strategy (Official Plan) is needed to both increase density in existing neighbourhoods (with up to 5 or 6 storey buildings) and provide affordable space for small businesses (shops and services) within a 15 minute walk of any residence. Even high density areas, where tall condos are becoming dominant, have inadequate local shops and services, and the problem is only getting worse. A redevelopment proposal for Six Points Plaza will replace the heavily used shops and services with more than a thousand condo units, Cloverdale is to go the same way, and construction at Humbertown has already started. Before long, we will all have to drive to Mississauga just to get milk.
5. Have a hard look at using things like Mobility as a Service, or taxis, or ride sharing. If your use case for a car is mostly around town, then these things might make sense when you run the budget numbers.
   
   The other part of this is modularity – if your transportation need could be met by a short bike ride, a longer train / bus leg, and a final short bike ride – and the transportation system allowed you to transport the bike, or park it securely on one end, and rent one on the other end – that would mean less hanging around for crummy public transit connections, as well as being good for you to get out and get some exercise. I think modularity and Mobility as a Service are going to be key.
6. If the primary use case for the vehicle is long trips, in my opinion, if you already own an ICE (Internal Combustion Engine) car, and it is well maintained and has reasonable fuel economy, I would be in no hurry to trade it in for a BEV (battery electric vehicle) – especially when your primary destination(s) does not have “fast charging”, or if those destinations are mostly further than the range of your planned BEV.
   
   This is because charging infrastructure is still fairly sparse, and even at a fast charger, it still takes a fair amount of time. So –  these are the “range anxiety” issues that hurt BEVs for me.
   
   BTW – Fast Charging – Yikes – still early days – and I think fairly confusing:
   
   There is a lot of different terminology about this. But the bottom line is that AC charging is slow – (Level 1, and Level 2 which is much faster than Level 1 but still slow) and you need to get to DC for truly fast charging. See the Wikipedia “Charging Station”, “SAE J1772”, and “Combined Charging System (CCS)” articles. 
   
   Note that the Tesla plug is proprietary to Tesla. You can buy an adapter cable to allow your CCS car to charge at a Tesla Supercharger. It appears that the Non-Tesla Supercharger Pilot might be available in Canada. Anybody know for sure? The internet is confusing about this.
   
   I can’t find a reference to show me a cable to plug a Tesla into a CCS charger – but it may exist – and frankly, it is not clear.
   
   So, for me, charging is the issue on long drives. I would encourage rural citizens to be in no hurry to convert to a BEV.
7. If you live in Etobicoke, and if you can afford to, sell one of the ICE (Internal Combustion Engine) vehicles and get a BEV for running those errands around the city where range anxiety is not an issue. Frankly, this is the path I want to get on – my family owns two ICE cars – and I want to make the case to my wife that we should sell one and get a BEV for running around town. She is willing to hear the business case on this, but I need to finish getting it straight in my own head. 
   
   One of the complexities for me – I am fairly convinced that we need to upgrade our electric panel so that we can add a 40 Amp (or 50 Amp?) circuit for the AC Level 2 charger. Or, do we? Can we manage having a BEV without having a home charger? At any rate, if I decide to do that, and I also decide to add a CC-ASHP, then I will need to also add some Solar-PV – and that means further electric work. Being thrifty, I hate the idea of multiple electrician visits if I can plan for just one!
8. Keep monitoring the technology stack. Some things worth reading:
   1. The 10 Biggest Problems With Electric Cars has a lot of interesting things to say, including dealing with the problem that a BEV is still a car and all the problems associated with being a car in an urban environment. If you have time to read just one link in this newsletter, read this one.
   2. Toyota CEO Defends Combustion Engines: ‘The Enemy Is Carbon’ – This is really interesting. ICE that uses a green fuel. This is research by the world’s biggest automaker – so not to be dismissed.
   3. Hydrogen gas (H2) in general is very interesting – lots of work is going on to make the creation of green H2 cheaper, and much more scalable. Lots of people are talking about using H2 to get to zero-carbon steel manufacture, and to the future of goods transportation.
      
      Some interesting competitions are going on how to use the H2 – either directly in an ICE, or in a fuel cell, or by converting to ammonia – and then using the ammonia in an ICE or a special type of fuel cell.

This turned into a long article. What do I think are the key takeaways?

1. Embrace the fact that urban transportation must change. Embrace using your car less in the city, and encourage the politicians to make this easier to do.
2. If you can afford a BEV for usage in the city, that might make sense. It is far less clear that BEVs make sense for rural folks, or for those who do a lot of long distance travel.
3. Keep monitoring the evolving tech, keep your ICE well tuned (including tire pressures) for those long trips, and watch for the future of long distance personal green transportation to become clearer.
4. Keep up the pressure on the city, provincial, and federal governments to decarbonize and improve public transportation.
5. I honestly think that for the short term you need a fuel-efficient ICE for longer distance travel in Ontario and the rest of Canada. So keep your existing ICE well tuned, buy a more fuel-efficient one, or sell the one you have and rent a fuel-efficient one when you need it.

Thanks for making it to the end – Alex