Environment committee  I'll be quick. I heard three questions. As to my comments about the government abandoning Kyoto, I've already explained the practical purposes. I think the government has abandoned Kyoto because it clearly doesn't intend to comply with the target. I don't see that Bill C-288 has anything to do with a particular government's plan.

Environment committee  I simply fail to see the relevance of the question. Bill C-288 is about meeting the Kyoto targets--

Environment committee  --using all the mechanisms that Kyoto provides for. It's just an irrelevant question.

Environment committee  I've said many times that for practical purposes I believe the Government of Canada has abandoned Kyoto, because Kyoto is, above all, about meeting the emissions target. I believe the actions the government has taken and the statements it has made in the past several months make it clear that the government has no intention of meeting that target.

Environment committee  No, the Pembina Institute and in fact--

Environment committee  I think all of the members of Climate Action Network Canada are strong supporters of Bill C-288. To suggest that is partisan--

Environment committee  Yes.

Environment committee  We absolutely need to have a domestic emissions trading system, with the ability for projects in Canada to create what are called offset credits, so that companies have a choice of investing domestically or internationally. In fact the previous government was developing a domestic offset system that was expected to begin to be in place during 2006, and I think it's unfortunate that hasn't happened.

Environment committee  As far as carbon capture and storage is concerned, the technology is already available. The cost is evaluated at over $30 per tonne of CO2. This means that if the government wanted to immediately begin implementing a regulated system of targets with an emission right trading system for about $30 per tonne of emissions, carbon capture would happen on a wide scale, and all this would begin immediately.

Environment committee  The Stern report's main conclusion was that it would be irrational, from a strictly economic point of view, not to act immediately to reduce greenhouse gases. Apart from every other environmental consideration, and from a strictly economic logic, it would be irrational for us not to begin making changes beginning now.

Environment committee  I think I made it clear in my initial intervention that there's no doubt we can meet the target if we want to meet the target. We have this full flexibility to combine domestic action and international action. We want to do the most we possibly can domestically, and when we've done that we can complete the rest of the job by using the international mechanisms.

Environment committee  It is essential to have short, mid and long term targets. In fact, that is what the Commissioner of environment said in her report last September. We absolutely need to have short term targets in order to keep this issue at the top of the list of the government priorities. We need not only short term commitments, but also short term targets.

Environment committee  Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Although this isn't the first time I've had the privilege of addressing the committee, I'll take a moment to introduce myself. I'm the director of the climate change program at the Pembina Institute, which is one of Canada's largest environmental NGOs. The Pembina Institute is a strictly non-partisan, not-for-profit organization focused on sustainable energy solutions.

Environment committee  Emissions in a number of sectors have grown more rapidly than overall emissions in Canada. Because the large industrial emitters are responsible for almost 50% of emissions, there is an urgent need to set greenhouse gas emission reduction targets, through regulation, for all heavy industry sectors, particularly electricity generation using fossil fuels, which accounts for almost 20% of our emissions in Canada.

Environment committee  In Canada, the other major source of emissions is road vehicles. Approximately 10% of emissions in Canada are produced by private vehicles, almost 8%, by industrial and commercial transportation, and some 10% by the agricultural industry. As regards CEPA, the objective for the time being is to regulate emissions produced by the major industrial emitters.