Thank you very much. It's an enormous honour for me to be here. I'm speaking to you as a scientist who has been working in the field as a climate scientist since the late 1980s. I served as a lead author in the second IPCC assessment, the third IPCC assessment, the fourth IPCC assessment and the fifth IPCC assessment, and numerous other international committees.
Like you, I have some experience also in political decision-making, having served as the leader of the B.C. Green Party, holding the balance of power in a minority government in British Columbia when we put in place CleanBC, the policy plan in British Columbia.
I'm speaking to you largely as a climate scientist today. I want to emphasize some of the historical misconceptions with respect to the carbon cycle, as well as emissions reductions or lack thereof in Canada. For example, we all know that you around the table, the decision-makers of today, have very difficult decisions to make, yet the irony is that you will never have to live the consequences of the decisions you've made, for the warming we have and the climate change over the next decade or so, the next couple of decades, your political lifetime, is in essence in the cards as a direct consequence of inertia in our socio-economic systems. However, the decisions you make today will have a profound effect on the future generations who are not here to be part of the decision-making process. Therefore, fundamentally the question is do we, the present generation, owe anything to future generations in terms of the quality of the environment we leave behind, yes or no? If the answer is yes, you have no choice but to implement bold action today, for failing to do so will lead us to a planet that frankly is in a lot of strife.
The two biggest issues, of course, are geopolitical instability associated with the rapidly changing climate, for which our built environment cannot adapt; and widespread species extinction, which is ongoing as we speak.
Coming to Canada, many people will say that Canada accounts for 2% of the global emissions, or a small player. In actual fact, Canada is the eleventh greatest emitter as a nation in the world, behind countries such as China, India, United States, Germany, Iran and South Korea, ahead of countries such as South Africa, Brazil and many others. Per capita, Canada is, if not the worst, one of the worst developed nations. I'm not counting small petro states such as Qatar or Palau, but in terms of nations.
However, what is also often not understood in the political decision-making process is that it is not the emissions of any given year that matter; the climate system and its response reflects cumulative emissions since pre-industrial times. In the cumulative sense, Canada is the eighth biggest emitter ever.
Canada's emissions since pre-industrial times are on par with those of India, which has a population greater than 38 times our nation's size. Therefore, we cannot as a developed nation, for which we have historically created the problem, point to others and say, “Well, you know, we'll only do this if you do,” because the problem that exists today, those cumulative emissions, is ours and that of other parts of the developed world.
Many have thought that the Kyoto protocol was somehow a failure. I would suggest that the Kyoto protocol, put in place in 1997, was a resounding success. It was a resounding success despite Canada. As you know, Canada joined the Kyoto protocol and then pulled out of it. However, collectively, the Annex B nations, even if you included Canada and the U.S. pulling out, had emissions go 9.9% below 1990 levels when averaged over the 2008-12 period. The Kyoto protocol was targeting 5.2% reductions globally. Some countries such as the U.K. averaged over the 2008-12 period emissions that were 24% below 1990 levels. Canada's shamefully were 16% above 1990 levels.
However, as I mentioned, even with Canada and the U.S. included, the Kyoto target was met. If Canada and the U.S. are excluded, the Kyoto target was met by more than 20% reductions from 1990 levels, averaged over 2008-12.
We know where emissions are coming from in Canada. We know the single biggest provinces of emitters are Alberta and Saskatchewan, and we know which sectors those emissions are coming from. We have per capita emissions, we know exactly where those sectors are, and we cannot ignore said sectors or give preferential treatment to said sectors.
Finally, in terms of further negotiations moving forward, it's absolutely critical that the notion of border tax adjustments also be put on the table, and perhaps a global carbon price to ensure that jurisdictions that show leadership are not left behind economically by being penalized by others in various sectors.
With that, I'll stop and summarize by saying that there is nothing preventing a cap and trade system and carbon pricing from being put in place. In fact, in British Columbia, when we introduced the first carbon pricing in Canada back in the 2008-09 era, we actually had enabling legislation there as well to tackle carbon. Thank you.