Environment committee  I can even name all seven if you really want me to, but probably not.

Environment committee  The thing in the pan-Canadian framework right now is the supply-side measures, how we are going to take action on the supply side so that we are, as economists say, “cutting with both sides of the scissors”. By reducing supply, we also increase the price. We make alternatives more attractive.

Environment committee  Sure. If you go through those delightfully written federal-provincial working group reports on mitigation and carbon pricing that were prepared in advance of the pan-Canadian framework, they actually do a good job of laying out things that carbon pricing does really well and things it doesn't, as well as things that regulations do well and the things carbon pricing doesn't.

Environment committee  There's a pretty decent model in Alberta with the approach to coal where they've set up coal phase-out dates. They said they're going to shut down the coal plants and come up with an agreement with the companies involved to manage that economically for them, but they're also providing support to the communities that mine coal and the workers there to make sure they don't bear a disproportionate impact of this policy decision.

Environment committee  I think one of the ways is that you could try to work this into agreements like the UNFCCC. There are mechanisms that deal with this. One of them is, or could be, ITMOs.

Environment committee  ITMOs are the tradeable emissions allowances, the internationally traded mitigation options. In terms of national emissions, these are relatively, or usually, at the margin. If we actually had that work toward a global carbon pricing system, for instance, or even had a system of carbon tariffs, we would be accounting for this and rewarding those people who are lower carbon producers.

Environment committee  I would say that if you want to increase those objectives, the best thing would be to reduce consumption here to free that up, rather than invest in new, expensive infrastructure to extend the life of fossil fuels. The real question in Asia—again, there's a lot of research on this—is that it's not actually clear that natural gas exports to Asia at this moment would displace coal or displace renewables.

Environment committee  Sure. There's huge literature on this in terms of how you assign these things. The basic principle that the current treaty comes down to is this: Countries are responsible for the emissions that they control directly, that happen within their territory, because that's a principle of sovereignty.

Environment committee  The Europeans have implemented more of these types of measures. They actually have more teeth in their environmental policies. I would say that one of the eight was to get rid of the chapter 11 investor-state dispute system, which is now done, which is good, but I will share that with the committee.

Environment committee  Yes, there's been lots of academic research done on the B.C. carbon tax. It's the perfect study that economists love to do, a nice case study. It's shown that emissions would have gone up much more without the carbon tax in there. The example I use with my students is that I now weigh 10 pounds more than I did 10 years ago.

Environment committee  There is some work being done on energy efficiency standards, but I would say it doesn't go fast enough. To answer your question, and also to come back to one of the previous comments, if we were having this discussion when I first went to one of these meetings in 1994, I would have asked, “Do we do this or that?”

Environment committee  The federal government has a model building code that provinces can opt into or out of. The government can provide incentives for provinces to opt into that. It could greatly improve that. It can drive efficient appliance standards and make them much higher. In particular, the big decision coming up is on autos.

Environment committee  I have a very similar answer. A lot depends on what else you are doing. If you're doing big investments in public transit, which is going to help people get out of cars, if you're bringing in a zero emissions vehicle mandate so that there is a required percentage of vehicles that are electric, you can do it with a lower carbon price.

Environment committee  Thank you, Mr. Chair. Thank you so much for having me here today. My name is Keith Stewart, and I'm a senior energy strategist with Greenpeace Canada. I've previously worked with World Wildlife Fund, the Toronto Environmental Alliance and some other environmental groups. I am also a part-time instructor at the University of Toronto, where I teach a course on Canadian energy and environmental policy.