Category Archives: Environmental

Preliminary Reflections on COP26 and the Glasgow Climate Pact, Part 1

By: David V. Wright

PDF Version: Preliminary Reflections on COP26 and the Glasgow Climate Pact, Part 1

Matter Commented On: COP26 (Twenty-sixth Conference of the Parties to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change) and the Glasgow Climate Pact (Decision -/CMA.3)

This is the first of two posts that discuss several notable developments from COP26, some of which took place within the formal negotiations process (e.g. market mechanism rules, financial assistance), and some of which took place in parallel (e.g. Global Methane Pledge, US-China bilateral announcement). This post is focused on the latter parallel developments, which primarily emerged in the first week of the conference. My next post will focus on the former, which largely materialized in the second week.

Overall, the stakes were particularly high at this COP because the parties needed to reach an agreement on final elements of the rulebook containing details of how the Paris Agreement would be implemented, many parts of which will be the most important and consequential as implementation unfolds in years to come. Additionally, a number of long-standing issues remain unresolved, including with respect to long-term financial assistance for the most vulnerable countries to reduce emissions and respond to the impacts of climate change. Overall, COP26 was a key juncture for ensuring that party commitments would add up to keeping within reach the overarching goal of keeping global mean temperature rise to below 1.5 degrees. It was these high stakes that led some to characterize this COP as “now or never” and a “last-chance saloon” scenario. Continue reading →

Alberta Heads the Wrong Direction with Bill 79 – the Proposed Trails Act

By: Shaun Fluker and David Mayhood

PDF Version: Alberta Heads the Wrong Direction with Bill 79 – the Proposed Trails Act

Bill Commented On: Bill 79, the Proposed Trails Act, 2nd Sess, 30th Leg, Alberta, 2021

On November 2, 2021, the Minister of Environment and Parks (Jason Nixon) introduced Bill 79 – the proposed Trails Act – into the legislative assembly for first reading. Initial public reactions varied significantly from the positive endorsements given by recreational trail user groups (such as those quoted in the government’s media statement) to the critical assessments on social media (see here) and environmental groups (such as the Alberta Wilderness Association). One thing Bill 79 does not implement is the trail permit fee on off-highway vehicle (OHV) users which the Minister previously indicated was forthcoming. This omission not only further highlights the glaring absence of the McLean Creek area from the access fee imposed by the Kananaskis Conservation Pass, it also reinforces the view that OHV users have the Minister’s ear on policy development. In this post, we critically examine the actual content in Bill 79 and explain why the proposed Trails Act will result in further damage and destruction to public lands in Alberta. Continue reading →

Another Year Gone Under the Mine Financial Security Program

By: Drew Yewchuk

PDF Version: Another Year Gone Under the Mine Financial Security Program

Legislation Commented On: Annual Mine Financial Security Program Submissions, 2021 Submissions for 2020 Reporting Year

In a post back in May 2021, I complained about a change to Alberta’s Mine Financial Security Program (MFSP). This is a follow-up post in response to the Alberta Energy Regulator (AER) posting the annual submissions under the program on September 30, 2021. Note that each annual submission is for the September of the previous year, so the 2021 report is relevant to the situation in September 2020.

The MFSP is Alberta’s system for ensuring that companies pay for the reclamation and remediation of their mines, both oilsands and coal (but not conventional oil and gas, which is handled by a different liability management system that also does not work properly). In short, the MFSP allows companies to use an asset safety factor against their estimated future environmental liabilities, such that if a mine’s resource assets are worth more than three times the total anticipated reclamation costs (3:1), nothing beyond an initial (and wholly inadequate) ‘base deposit’ is required, provided also that the planned reclamation is conducted as scheduled, and the mine has more than 15 years of reserves remaining. Companies may also choose to skip those calculations and pay full security based on an estimate of the total cost of clean-up. Continue reading →

Province Issues Request for Expressions of Interest for Carbon Sequestration Hub Proposals

By: Nigel Bankes

PDF Version: Province Issues Request for Expressions of Interest for Carbon Sequestration Hub Proposals

Documents Commented On: Request for Expressions of Interest for Carbon Sequestration Hub Proposals, September 9, 2021 and Carbon Sequestration Tenure Management

In early May of this year, the Department of Energy issued Information Letter 2021-19 on Carbon Sequestration Tenure Management. In that letter, the Department indicated that it would be calling for proposals for sequestration hubs by “late spring” (at 2). I commented on the Information Letter here. Well, late spring morphed into late summer, and a call for proposals morphed into a Request for Expressions of Interest (REOI) with the expectation that a Request for Full Project Proposals (RFPP) will be posted in December of this year and successful proponents selected by the end of March 2022 (Alberta Energy web page). Continue reading →

Beyond Carbon Pricing: An Assessment of the Major Parties’ Other Environmental Policies

By: Martin Olszynski and Sharon Mascher

PDF Version: Beyond Carbon Pricing: An Assessment of the Major Parties’ Other Environmental Policies

Matter Commented On: Secure the Future (Conservative Party of Canada); Forward, For Everyone (Liberal Party of Canada); Ready For Better (New Democratic Party); Be Daring (Green Party of Canada)

Climate change is widely recognized as the most important environmental problem facing humanity. Indeed, in its recent opinion upholding the constitutionality of the federal Liberals’ carbon pricing regime, the Supreme Court of Canada acknowledged not only that climate change is real and caused by human activity, but also that “it poses a grave threat to humanity’s future” (References re Greenhouse Gas Pollution Pricing Act, 2021 SCC 11 (CanLII) at para 2). The unsurprising result is that climate change now dominates environmental law and policy discourse. Indeed, at times – such as the current election period – it feels like climate policy has displaced all other environmental policy entirely. As one manifestation of this, Canadian voters have access to several independent and expert assessments of the parties’ climate policies (see here, here, here, and here), but very little with respect to the parties’ remaining environmental commitments. This post is intended to help remedy that situation by focusing on the non-climate aspects of each of the major federal parties’ environmental policies. We do also provide some relatively minor commentary on those aspects of the parties’ climate policies that we feel haven’t been sufficiently addressed. Continue reading →