Carbon accounting practices need improvements, may misdirect efforts to reduce emissions

Winnipeg, April 3, 2019 – Construction practices, policies, building and energy codes and other regulations need to change if Canada is to meaningfully reduce GHGs from the building sector, a new report finds. (Français suivre)

Emission Omissions: Carbon accounting in the built environment, a new peer-reviewed study conducted by the International Institute for Sustainable Development (IISD), examines Life-cycle Assessments (LCA) – the primary analysis tool used by industry and researchers to account for GHGs and other impacts of building products at each phase of their “cradle-to-grave” lifespan (i.e., production, use, end of life).

The report finds while they are the best-available tool for evaluating GHG performance of alternative building products and designs, current LCAs have limits that may misdirect efforts to reduce GHGs from the built environment – one of Canada’s largest sources of emissions. Major findings include:

1. LCAs may produce very different accounting of carbon for similar projects because data can be missing, while built-in assumptions and uncertainties are not disclosed.  
2. LCAs do not track or account for “biogenic carbon” from the extraction and end-of-life stages of wood building products. For example, carbon losses related to soil disturbance in logging operations, variable regeneration rates of forests, and conversion of primary to secondary forests are not counted. This may represent up to 70 per cent of total lifecycle emissions. These impacts challenge the prevailing assumption wood construction materials are less carbon intensive than steel or concrete and should be favoured.
3. Existing LCA models may misrepresent embodied emissions from materials, exaggerating their importance while ignoring embodied emissions from other building systems or the contribution of other significant lifecycle emissions, such as from a building’s energy use.
4. Important regional factors are often overlooked. For example, while production intensities and related emissions can vary significantly from site to site, LCAs typically use average national, continental or global data.

According to the researchers, LCAs need to become more robust and transparent. They should include more data and full disclosure of research assumptions if they are to guide GHG reduction strategies and reduce other environmental harms from buildings and infrastructure. Building efficiency and longevity as well as optimizing material use should also be priorities for decarbonizing the built environment.

The study was commissioned by the Cement Association of Canada and conducted under the guidance of an advisory group comprised of university affiliated academics, notable environmental organizations and architects/designers from the green building community.

The report is available here. A backgrounder is available here.

Quotes                                                                     

“LCA approaches are integral to understand how buildings and the materials they are made of will impact GHG emissions.  However, there are still several uncertainties in the LCA process that building designers and policymakers need to be aware of and should be taking into consideration, especially with respect to the embodied biogenic carbon and biodiversity impacts of wood products.” - Philip Gass, Senior Policy Advisor, IISD

“This study identifies serious gaps in the way we currently account for carbon emissions from building materials, particularly emissions from forestry products. Soil disturbance, conversion of old-growth primary forest and variable silvicultural success rates are potentially significant sources of carbon that current LCAs don’t account for. We need to strengthen our metrics to make sure our strategies to reduce carbon from buildings hit their mark.” - Dr. Jay Malcolm, Professor with University of Toronto Faculty of Forestry and member of the study’s Advisory Committee

“It’s clear that LCAs are an important tool, but they have their limitations as well. More work needs to be done to unpack some of the assumptions that go into them.  The study has a clear message for the building industry and for policy makers. We have to get the carbon accounting right, get the evidence that we need and put it to work on reducing Canada’s greenhouse gas emissions.” - Keith Brooks, Programs Director, Environmental Defence and member of the study’s Advisory Committee

“This study demonstrates the importance of applying the best life-cycle evidence to policy decisions related to how Canada’s public forests and products interact with our atmosphere. Forests are complex systems that belie simple assumptions about renewability and carbon neutrality. When it comes reducing carbon in buildings and infrastructure, our policy frameworks and choices – including about how building materials are harvested, produced and used – need to reflect a more rigorous assessment of climate impacts, or they may be flawed and counterproductive.” - Janet Sumner, Executive Director, CPAWS Wildlands League

---

L'outil de suivi des GES liés aux bâtiments du Canada comporte des erreurs inhérentes: étude

Les pratiques de comptabilisation du carbone doivent être améliorées et risquent de mal orienter les efforts de réduction des émissions.

Winnipeg, le 3 avril 2019 – Un nouveau rapport révèle que les pratiques de construction, les codes du bâtiment et de l'énergie et d'autres réglementations doivent changer si le Canada veut réduire de façon significative les émissions de GES du secteur du bâtiment.

Émissions manquantes : Lacunes en matière de comptabilisation du carbone dans l’environnement bâti est une nouvelle étude menée par l'International Institute for Sustainable Development (IISD) et révisée par des pairs qui examine l'évaluation du cycle de vie (ACV) – le principal outil utilisé par l'industrie et les chercheurs pour tenir compte des GES et des autres impacts des produits de construction à chaque étape de leur cycle de vie (c.-à-d. production, utilisation et fin de vie).

Selon le rapport, bien qu’il s’agisse du meilleur outil disponible pour évaluer les performances des produits et conceptions alternatifs de construction en matière de GES, les ACV actuelles ont des limites qui peuvent fausser les efforts visant à réduire les GES de l’environnement bâti – l’une des plus grandes sources d’émission au Canada. Les principales conclusions sont les suivantes:

1. Les ACV peuvent produire une comptabilisation du carbone très différente pour des projets similaires car des données peuvent être manquantes, alors que les hypothèses et incertitudes intrinsèques ne sont pas divulguées.
2. Les ACV ne suivent pas ou ne tiennent pas compte du "carbone biogénique" provenant des étapes d'extraction et de fin de vie des produits de construction en bois. Par exemple, les pertes de carbone liées à la perturbation du sol dans les opérations d'exploitation forestière, aux taux variables de régénération des forêts et à la conversion des forêts primaires en forêts secondaires ne sont pas comptabilisées. Cela peut représenter jusqu'à 72 % des émissions totales du cycle de vie. Ces impacts remettent en question l'hypothèse prédominante selon laquelle les matériaux de construction en bois sont moins intensifs en carbone que l'acier ou le béton et devraient être privilégiés.
3. Les modèles d'ACV existants peuvent représenter faussement les émissions intrinsèques de certains matériaux, en exagérant leur importance tout en ignorant les émissions intrinsèques provenant d'autres systèmes du bâtiment ou la contribution d’autres émissions significatives du cycle de vie, telles que la consommation d’énergie d’un bâtiment.
4. D'importants facteurs régionaux sont souvent négligés. Par exemple, alors que les intensités de production et les émissions connexes peuvent varier considérablement d'un site à l'autre, les ACV utilisent généralement des données moyennes nationales, continentales ou mondiales.

Selon les chercheurs, les ACV doivent devenir plus robustes et transparentes. Elles devraient comprendre plus de données et une divulgation complète des hypothèses de recherche si elles doivent guider les stratégies de réduction des GES et réduire les autres dommages environnementaux causés par les bâtiments et les infrastructures. L'efficacité et la longévité des bâtiments ainsi que l'optimisation de l'utilisation des matériaux devraient également être des priorités pour la décarbonisation de l'environnement bâti.

L'étude a été commandée par l'Association Canadienne du Ciment et menée sous la direction d'un groupe consultatif composé d'universitaires affiliés, d'organismes environnementaux de renom et d'architectes et concepteurs du secteur du bâtiment durable.

Le rapport est disponible ici. Un document d'information est disponible ici.

Citations

“Les approches ACV sont essentielles pour comprendre comment les bâtiments et les matériaux dont ils sont faits influent sur les émissions de GES.  Cependant, il existe encore plusieurs incertitudes dans le processus d'ACV que les concepteurs de bâtiments et les décideurs doivent connaître et prendre en considération, en particulier en ce qui concerne les impacts du carbone biogénique intrinsèque aux produits du bois et les effets sur la biodiversité, car ne pas le faire pourrait compromettre l'efficacité des décisions stratégiques.” - Philip Gass, conseiller principal en politiques, IISD

"Cette étude identifie de sérieuses lacunes dans la façon dont nous comptabilisons actuellement les émissions de carbone provenant des matériaux de construction, en particulier les émissions des produits forestiers. La perturbation des sols, la conversion des forêts primaires anciennes et les taux variables de réussite sylvicole sont des sources potentiellement importantes de carbone dont les ACV actuelles ne tiennent pas compte. Nous devons renforcer nos paramètres pour nous assurer que nos stratégies de réduction des émissions de carbone des bâtiments atteignent leurs objectifs." - Dr. Jay Malcolm, professeur à la faculté de foresterie de l'Université de Toronto et membre du comité consultatif de l'étude.

"Il est clair que les ACV sont un outil important, mais elles ont aussi leurs limites. Il reste encore du travail à faire pour démêler certaines des hypothèses qui les sous-tendent.  L'étude contient un message clair à l'intention de l'industrie du bâtiment et des décideurs politiques. Nous devons bien comptabiliser les émissions de carbone, obtenir les preuves dont nous avons besoin et les mettre à profit pour réduire les émissions de gaz à effet de serre du Canada." - Keith Brooks, directeur des programmes, Environmental Defence et membre du comité consultatif de l’étude

"Cette étude démontre l'importance d'appliquer les meilleures données probantes du cycle de vie aux décisions stratégiques relatives à la façon dont les forêts publiques et les produits forestiers du Canada interagissent avec notre atmosphère. Les forêts sont des systèmes complexes qui vont à l'encontre d'hypothèses simples sur le renouvellement et la neutralité carbone. Lorsqu'il s'agit de réduire les émissions de carbone dans les bâtiments et les infrastructures, nos cadres politiques et nos choix – y compris la façon dont les matériaux de construction sont récoltés, produits et utilisés – doivent refléter une évaluation plus rigoureuse des impacts climatiques, faute de quoi ils pourraient être erronés et contre-productifs." - Janet Sumner, directrice générale, CPAWS Wildlands League

Demand for minerals in electric vehicles, solar panels and wind turbines predicted to exceed supply this decade

OTTAWA, APRIL 3, 2019 – Extracting cobalt and lithium from old products and infrastructure is essential to heading off predicted metal shortfalls, empowering clean energy transitions and reducing risk of human exploitation.

Despite these benefits, lithium and cobalt recycling rates are low, says a study released by the International Institute for Sustainable Development (IISD).

Sustainability and Second Life: The Case for Cobalt and Lithium Recycling notes interest in renewable technologies (such as electric vehicles, solar panels and wind turbines) has increased demand for cobalt and lithium. However, global supplies of both minerals are not projected to meet demand, with research forecasting shortfalls in the coming decade.

Recycling conducted in a responsible and transparent way could help head off these shortfalls while reducing pressure on mining communities vulnerable to exploitation. However, recycling rates remain low due to a lack of transparency in recycling supply chains; manufacturers purchasing substitute minerals due to high prices for raw cobalt and lithium; and inefficient collection of cobalt and lithium from existing infrastructure, to name a few.

“It’s a balance. We have to meet demand for a green energy shift while protecting human rights,” said Clare Church, Research Officer at IISD and lead author of the report. “Recycling can play a key role in achieving these goals, and we hope our study prompts action to drive those rates up.”

Sustainability and Second Life: The Case for Cobalt and Lithium Recycling’s recommendations include:

• Increased transparency and responsible sourcing along primary and recycling supply chains
• Enhancing the eco-design of products containing lithium and cobalt
• Raising consumer awareness regarding current collection and recycling schemes
• New or revised investments to improve collection infrastructure, technology development and knowledge creation
• Clearly designating the actors responsible and liable for recycling materials

“Recycling has long been a central tenet in circular business models and sustainable development,” said Church. “Adopting recycling in the mining sector and in supply chains is essential to ensure the transition to a low-carbon economy is responsible and sustainable for the longer term.”

New Delhi, April 2, 2019 – Government concerns about the risk of stressed and stranded assets in the coal sector may be missing the big picture, according to a new independent study by the International Institute for Sustainable Development (IISD) and the Overseas Development Institute (ODI).

To date, discussions have focused on the right role for government in addressing the 21% of India’s coal power capacity that is stressed and at risk of entering bankruptcy proceedings. But this only makes sense if the drivers of stressed assets are indeed short-term. In fact, several drivers are likely to contribute to increasing costs for coal in future years, including concerns about air pollution, falling prices for renewables and increased water stress.

The Cabinet recently announced measures to improve coal linkages and allow greater flexibility for power producers in case of non-payment of PPAs. While this may help in the short term, it only considers the short-term needs of asset owners—and not the medium-term interests of workers. If pressure on coal costs continue, states with large coal mining sectors, such as Chhattisgarh, Odisha and Jharkhand, may be vulnerable to economic hardship as coal assets re-enter periods of stress and stranding. Rather than saving assets, smart thinking is needed to work out how government resources can be dedicated to ensuring a fail deal for workers.

Balasubramanian Viswanathan, IISD Associate, and co-author of the study says, “The financial liabilities of coal power plants are likely to increase as air pollution regulations, water scarcity concerns and competition from renewables become growing issues. It is time policy makers escalate India’s transition past coal.”

Leo Roberts, Operations and Partnership Manager at ODI, and co-author of the study says, “The growth of renewable energy will create a great deal of new jobs. But if there is a risk of coal power stranding in future, policy makers should start thinking now about the dialogue and complementary policies that will be needed to ensure a fair outcome for affected workers.”

This study follows a joint publication by IISD and ODI in September 2018, identifying Government interventions across the coal value chain and an assessment of India’s energy subsidies by IISD and CEEW in December 2018. The latter found the absolute size of the subsidy to coal-based power generation was INR 15,992 crore (USD 2.38 billion) in 2017 and has remained relatively unchanged since 2014.

Report: India's Energy Transition: Stranded coal power assets, workers and energy subsidies

About ODI

The Overseas Development Institute (ODI) is the UK’s leading independent think tank on international development and humanitarian issues. Our mission is to inspire and inform policy and practice which lead to the reduction of poverty, the alleviation of suffering and the achievement of sustainable livelihoods in developing countries.

Bangkok, Thailand – A new set of regional guidelines aim to help governments in the ASEAN region Asia avoid negative consequences of private investment in food, agriculture and forestry.

The ASEAN Guidelines on Promoting Responsible Investment in Food, Agriculture and Forestry launched this week at the Responsible Business Forum on Food & Agriculture, as well as at the World Bank Conference on Land and Poverty in Washington, D.C.

The guidelines were adopted last October by ASEAN Ministers on Agriculture and Forestry, and were prepared with support from the ASEAN Secretariat, Grow Asia, the International Institute for Sustainable Development (IISD), the Swiss Agency for Development and Cooperation (SDC), and a World Bank trust fund.

The guidelines include recommended actions for national and regional policy makers, given the important role of private investment for the region’s future potential. Recommended actions for the private sector, civil society and other stakeholders are also proposed.

The guidelines note that investment has a vital role in creating jobs and improving food safety and nutrition security, but that investment can also come with risks if not pursued responsibly. For instance, the guidelines note that these investments, when done badly, can have severely damaging implications for local communities, as well as indigenous peoples, ranging from diverting land use toward export-oriented or non-food crops to the occurrence of land disputes.

“ASEAN is a unique region, and this is reflected in the guidelines.” said Sarah Brewin, an international law advisor at IISD who helped develop the guidelines. “There is greater emphasis on technology, climate change, and the role of host states, which is important given that there is a lot of intra-regional investment in ASEAN.”

The success of these guidelines will rely on their uptake in ASEAN countries. Moving from recommendations to action will be key, particularly as individual member states grapple with increasing populations, rapid urbanization, and other economic and demographic changes.

“The guidelines reflect that achieving responsible investment in agriculture requires a multi-stakeholder approach.” said Grahame Dixie, Executive Director of Grow Asia. “While governments are in a position to take the lead, all players have a critical role to play, according to their size, ability and level of potential impact.”

Notes for Editors

• Ensuring responsible private investment in food, agriculture, and forestry is vital for countries in Southeast Asia to meet their growing food demands and development priorities over the coming years.
• More than 82 million people in South-eastern and Eastern Asia are experiencing severe food insecurity, and that the number is increasing, according to the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO).
• There are ten guidelines in total, focusing on food and nutrition security and safety; sustainable economic development and poverty eradication; engaging and empowering women, young people and indigenous peoples; respecting tenure rights over land, fisheries and forests, and water access; natural resource management; technology; and the rule of law.
• The guidelines are based on the Committee for World Food Security’s Principles for Responsible Investment in Agriculture, but have been customized to the specific needs and priorities of the ASEAN region.
• ASEAN is a 10-country group that includes Brunei, Cambodia, Indonesia, Lao PDR, Malaysia, Myanmar, Philippines, Singapore, Thailand, and Vietnam.

About Grow Asia

Grow Asia is a multi-stakeholder partnership platform that aims to reach 10 million smallholder farmers, helping them access knowledge, technology, finance, and markets to increase their productivity, profitability, and environmental sustainability by 20 percent. Grow Asia brings together South East Asia’s smallholders, governments, companies, NGOs, and other stakeholders, to develop inclusive and sustainable value chains that benefit farmers. It launches and supports locally-driven Country Partnerships, helping them define their strategy, engage new partners and develop innovative solutions.

Grow Asia enables stakeholders from different disciplines to leverage one another’s expertise, share insights and learn from regional experiences. Today Grow Asia collaborates with over 480 partners across five Country Partnerships, reaching nearly 1.2 million smallholder farmers. Grow Asia was established by the World Economic Forum, in collaboration with the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) Secretariat, to convene, facilitate, and help scale action-focused partnerships. Grow Asia builds on the experience and success of the Forum’s New Vision for Agriculture (NVA) initiative, which facilitates multi-stakeholder partnerships across the world focused on agriculture development to deliver food security, environmental sustainability, and economic opportunity.

Ottawa, 27 March – International trade agreements are not a barrier to innovative sustainable procurement, but procurers need to use the flexibility offered by these agreements instead of perceiving them as a barrier, according to a new study released today by the International Institute for Sustainable Development (IISD).

Canada’s International Trade Obligations: Barrier or opportunity for sustainable public procurement? focuses on how and to what extent Canada’s international trade commitments enable the transition towards strategic public procurement. The report looks specifically at the World Trade Organization’s Agreement on Government Procurement (WTO GPA) and the Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement (CETA).

“Sustainable procurement is an important strategic tool that governments can use to drive towards a low-carbon economy,” says report author Liesbeth Casier, a Policy Analyst with IISD's Economic Law and Policy Program. “But procurers often cite the complexities of international trade agreements and other legal frameworks as a barrier to implementing sustainable procurement.”

The report – based on desk research and interviews with Canadian procurers, policy-makers and international experts – includes examples of how sustainable public procurement already happens in Canada and in other jurisdictions in a manner compliant with international economic law.

“Providing more legal certainty about what a procuring authority can do under international trade obligations is one way to address the barriers and enable better use of sustainable procurement,” Casier said.

The report includes recommendations to governments stakeholders, including the development of a Procurement Package. This would include:

• A Social Procurement Policy to accompany the already well-established Green Procurement Policy
• A one-stop shop for questions
• A learning and sharing platform
• Further professionalization of procurers

Other recommendations include:

• Acceleration of the development of a national database on life-cycle assessments
• Development of tools that value sustainability tailored to procurers
• Implementing sustainable e-procurement
• Innovation brokers to facilitate sustainable public procurement implementation

On World Water Day, the Lake Winnipeg Foundation (LWF) and the International Institute for Sustainable Development (IISD) are releasing a report recommending an interim retrofit to Winnipeg’s largest sewage treatment plant. This retrofit could be implemented quickly and at low cost to significantly reduce the facility’s phosphorus contribution to Lake Winnipeg.

Research at the IISD Experimental Lakes Area shows that phosphorus is the nutrient responsible for potentially toxic algae blooms in freshwater lakes. Winnipeg’s North End Water Pollution Control Centre (NEWPCC) is currently the single largest point source of phosphorus flowing into Lake Winnipeg, a lake plagued by algae. The NEWPCC treats approximately 70 per cent of the city’s waste water, releasing an average of 600 kg of phosphorus into the Red River every single day.

Under its provincial operating licence, the City of Winnipeg must reduce phosphorus in NEWPCC effluent to 1 milligram per litre (mg/L), based on a 30-day rolling average, by December 31, 2019. In 2017 phosphorus concentrations in NEWPCC effluent averaged 3.54 mg/L.

The city has committed to fully upgrading the NEWPCC. However, the project has been repeatedly delayed. On February 28, 2019, city council approved a new plan to split the planned NEWPCC upgrade into three phases. Nutrient removal is the third phase and action is not projected to start before 2030. The report also explicitly states that the city intends to request yet another alteration of its provincial operating licence in advance of the December 31, 2019 deadline.

The retrofit being proposed by the LWF and IISD uses a chemical called ferric chloride, a type of iron salt, as a phosphorus-removal agent.

The NEWPCC currently uses ferric chloride as part of its operations to reduce odour and keep pipes clean, but does not currently use it to remove phosphorus. Simply by adjusting its timing and dose, ferric chloride could be used to bind to phosphorus in order to remove it from the waste stream.

This retrofit would reduce the NEWPCC’s phosphorus contribution to Lake Winnipeg by 70 per cent and bring the plant into compliance with the provincial 1 mg/L phosphorus limit. Implementing the retrofit would cost just $3 million in capital expenses and $2 million in annual operating expenses.

“Many jurisdictions throughout the Great Lakes region use ferric chloride in their wastewater treatment processes to remove phosphorus. Not only are they meeting the 1 mg/L phosphorus limit, some facilities are now voluntarily challenging themselves to meet a limit of 0.3 mg/L,” says Dimple Roy, Director of Water Management at the International Institute for Sustainable Development.

“What we’re proposing is standard practice elsewhere. This is a cost-effective solution that will enable the city to meet its provincial phosphorus requirement and help protect Lake Winnipeg until permanent upgrades to the North End plant can be completed.”

In the lead-up to Winnipeg’s 2018 civic election, a Probe Research survey found that nearly two-thirds of Manitoban adults (65 per cent) agree that upgrading the NEWPCC should be “a very urgent priority.”

“Further delays in addressing the NEWPCC’s phosphorus contribution to Lake Winnipeg are unacceptable; an urgent solution is required. We cannot wait another decade to get started,” says Alexis Kanu, LWF’s executive director.

“This retrofit provides a practical solution to a pressing environmental problem. It’s a win–win–win opportunity—a cost-effective, evidence-based and tried-and-true solution to fulfill our responsibility to Lake Winnipeg.”

World Water Day is celebrated annually on March 22.

Click here to read the full report.

IISD is pleased to find that Canada’s federal budget for 2019 offers meaningful support for workers and communities who will be affected by a shift away from fossil fuels—especially coal.

A transition to low-carbon, renewable sources of energy is needed for Canada to meet its Paris Agreement targets and join the global effort to avoid dangerous climate change impacts. IISD’s research shows that energy transitions can only succeed when it supports and involves affected workers and communities. In short, energy transitions must be just.

We applaud the Government of Canada for quickly moving on recommendations from the Task Force on Just Transition for Canadian Coal Power Workers and Communities and including in Budget 2019 commitments to:

• Create worker transition centres that will offer skills development initiatives and economic and community diversification activities in Western and Eastern Canada. These efforts are being supported by a federal investment of CAD 35 million over five years, funded through Budget 2018 and administered by Western Economic Diversification Canada and the Atlantic Canada Opportunities Agency.
• Work with those affected to explore new ways to protect wages and pensions, recognizing the uncertainty that this transition represents for workers in the sector.
• Create a dedicated CAD 150 million infrastructure fund, starting in 2020/21, to support priority projects and economic diversification in affected communities. This fund will be administered by Western Economic Diversification Canada and the Atlantic Canada Opportunities Agency

A key part of effectively, fairly and sustainably moving past fossil fuels involves full transparency on how tax and non-tax subsidies support the fossil fuel industry and slow a transition toward producing and using low-carbon energy. Along with the Climate Action Network, Équiterre, OCI and Environmental Defense, IISD and its Global Subsidies Initiative have continued to ask the Canadian federal government and provincial governments for a full accounting of fossil fuel subsidies, to help policy-makers and citizens understand the true economic math behind them.

IISD is pleased to see momentum in Budget 2019 toward transparency following Canada’s commitment to a subsidy peer review with Argentina. Specifically, the budget commits that:

• Canada will develop a self-review report, which will include a list of federal fossil fuel subsidies, including a description of the subsidies, annual costs, analysis of the subsidies and any potential plans to reform subsidies. Discussions with experts will be held to help inform the development of Canada’s self-review report, which will form the basis upon which an international expert review panel will assess Canada. This report will be made public once the peer review is finalized.
• Canada will also establish an international expert review panel to analyze the self-review report. The Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development has agreed to chair the panel, which is expected to include our partnering country, Argentina, as well as other countries and key stakeholders.
• The findings and recommendations of the international panel will be made public once the review is finalized.

IISD looks forward to this work, as well as an upcoming report from Canada’s Commissioner of the Environment and Sustainable Development, as the world accelerates a transparent, just energy transition.

IISD looks forward to further analysis of Canada's budget, including by other members of the Green Budget Coalition.

OTTAWA, JANUARY 16, 2019: A new report from the International Institute for Sustainable Development (IISD) sets out a three-year policy roadmap for Canada to adjust its financial ecosystem to support meaningful climate change action. Central to this policy map is mandatory transparency around climate change risks held by business.

“Disclosure on energy transition plans is what global investors are looking for,” says Céline Bak, author of Leveraging Sustainable Finance Leadership in Canada and Senior Associate at IISD. “Otherwise investors will assume that targets are just that and that capital is not being allocated to meet those targets. This is a risk to Canada’s financial sector – particularly given how much capital is invested in Canada’s energy sector.”

The report’s release comes as Colorado communities pursue legal action against Suncor and both New York and Massachusetts sue ExxonMobil, claiming the companies failed to disclose to investors their exposure to climate change risks and legislation.

The report, which estimates that Canadian oil and gas known reserves are in excess of a likely chance of meeting Paris Agreement targets by $120 to $270 billion, sets out recommended steps to encourage private sector investment in climate action. In advance of Canada’s Expert Panel on Sustainable Finance releasing their recommendations on the best finance and investment structures to help fight climate change and build the low carbon economy, the report notes the kind of changes necessary for Canada to meet its Paris Agreement targets require an infusion of capital beyond what governments and taxpayers can cover.

Key calls to action in the three-year roadmap for greening Canada’s financial ecosystem include:

• The federal government amends the Canadian Business Corporations Act – part XIV Financial Disclosure to require companies to include certain climate change-related disclosures and environmental reporting in their annual reports
• Environment and Climate Change Canada proposes legislation for regular reporting on the assessment/mitigation of climate-related physical risk by all federal public entities
• Natural Resources Canada proposes legislation for regular reporting on the assessment/mitigation of climate-related risk by companies in the natural resources sector
• The Toronto Stock Exchange (TSX) joins the UN Sustainable Stock Exchanges Initiative
• The Bank of Canada clarifies the degree to which mainstreaming disclosure of climate-related risks and opportunities is relevant to the 2019 Financial System Review
• The Chief Actuary of the Office of the Superintendent of Financial Institutions reports on the risk of climate adaptation to the fully funded status of the Canada Pension Plan Investment Board
• The Canadian Securities Administrators reviews members’ supervisory practices for climate-related financial disclosures

“Governments can ban products or fund environmental projects – and that matters,” says Bak, who was recently made a Knight of France’s National Order of Merit for her work on sustainable finance. “But greening the financial ecosystem will deliver exponential returns. That’s the kind of action needed for Canada to actually move the needle on productivity and clean growth.”

---

Un rapport demande au Canada d’exiger des sociétés qu’elles divulguent aux investisseurs et aux régimes de retraite les risques liés aux changements climatiques

OTTAWA, 16 JANVIER 2018 Un nouveau rapport publié par l’Institut international du développement durable (IISD) établit une feuille de route de politiques triennale pour que le Canada ajuste son écosystème financier afin d’appuyer des mesures efficaces dans le domaine des changements climatiques. La transparence obligatoire connexe aux risques liés aux changements climatiques courus par les entreprises est l’une des pierres angulaires de cette feuille de route.

[Translation] « C’est une communication des plans de transition énergétique que recherchent les investisseurs mondiaux », affirme Céline Bak, auteure de Leveraging Sustainable Finance Leadership in Canada et  associée principale à l’IISD. [Translation] « Autrement, les investisseurs assumeront que les objectifs ne sont que cela, de simples objectifs, et que le capital n’est pas réparti de façon à les atteindre. Cela représente un risque pour le secteur financier du Canada, tout particulièrement eu égard au volume des investissements en capital dans le secteur de l’énergie de ce pays. »

Le rapport paraît alors que les communautés du Colorado ont intenté des poursuites juridiques à l’encontre de Suncor et que New York et le Massachusetts poursuivent ExxonMobil en justice, alléguant que les sociétés n’ont pas informé les investisseurs de leur exposition aux risques et à la législation connexes aux changements climatiques.

Le rapport, qui estime que les réserves canadiennes connues de pétrole et de gaz excèdent les probabilités d’atteindre les objectifs de l’Accord de Paris de 120 à 270 milliards de dollars, énonce les mesures recommandées pour encourager le secteur privé à investir dans les mesures de lutte contre les changements climatiques. En prévision de la publication, par le Groupe d’experts en financement durable du Canada, de leurs recommandations quant aux meilleures structures financières et d’investissement pour aider à lutter contre les changements climatiques et à développer l’économie sobre en carbone, le rapport souligne que les sortes de changements nécessaires pour que le Canada atteigne les objectifs qu’il s’est donnés lors de l’Accord de Paris exigent un apport de capital bien au-delà de ce que les gouvernements et les contribuables peuvent fournir.

Les suivants figurent parmi les principaux appels à l’action contenus dans la feuille de route triennale pour l’écologisation de l’écosystème financier du Canada.

• Le gouvernement fédéral modifie la Partie XIV, Présentation de renseignements d’ordre financier de la Loi canadienne sur les sociétés par action pour exiger des sociétés qu’elles incluent, dans leurs rapports annuels, des communications et des rapports environnementaux spécifiques connexes aux changements climatiques.
• Environnement et Changement climatique Canada propose une législation exigeant de toutes les entités publiques fédérales qu’elles rendent compte régulièrement de leur évaluation ou atténuation du risque physique lié au climat.
• Ressources naturelles Canada propose une législation exigeant des sociétés du secteur des ressources naturelles qu’elles rendent compte régulièrement de leur évaluation ou atténuation du risque lié au climat.
• La Bourse de Toronto (TSX) adhère à l’initiative des Nations Unies pour une bourse durable (UN Sustainable Stock Exchanges Initiative)
• La Banque du Canada clarifie la mesure dans laquelle la généralisation de la communication des risques et possibilités connexes aux changements climatiques s’applique à la Revue du système financier de 2019.
• L’actuaire en chef du Bureau du surintendant des institutions financières rend compte à l’Office d'investissement du régime de pensions du Canada du risque d’adaptation au climat pour la capitalisation intégrale.
• Les Autorités canadiennes en valeurs mobilières examinent les pratiques de supervision des membres concernant les communications financières liées au climat.

[Translation] « Les gouvernements peuvent interdire des produits ou financer des projets environnementaux, et c’est important », dit madame Bak, qui a récemment été nommée Chevalier de l’Ordre National du Mérite par le gouvernement français pour ses travaux sur les finances durables. [Translation] « Cependant, l’écologisation de l’écosystème financier récompensera les efforts au centuple. Il s’agit du genre de mesure dont a besoin le Canada pour progresser en matière de productivité et de croissance propre. »

Investors and insurers with more than USD $742 billion in assets under management have urged the G20 to end fossil fuel subsidies by 2020, warning of the severe risks this continued government support brings to the financial sector.

The group of nine investors, including Aviva and Sarasin and Partners, have signed a joint statement calling for G20 governments, meeting in Argentina this week, to set a concrete timeline to end all forms of government support to fossil fuels by no later than 2020.

In the statement, investors warn continued government support for fossil fuels increases the risk of creating stranded assets within the energy sector and can also decrease the competitiveness of key industries, including low-carbon businesses.

New research published today by the International Institute for Sustainable Development (IISD), the Overseas Development Institute (ODI), Oil Change International (OCI), and Fundación Ambiente y Recursos Naturales (FARN) shows that some G20 governments have made progress in shifting support away from fossil fuels and increasing taxation of fossil fuels. However, the report, Stories from G20 Countries: Shifting public money out of fossil fuels, warns this shift must accelerate significantly if the G20 is to meet the Paris Agreement targets and the Sustainable Development Goals by 2030.

The report includes examples from around the world of where progress has been made and where countries could do more, including:

• Indonesia saved USD $15.6bn by cutting back on inefficient subsidies for gasoline and diesel in 2015
• India collected USD $12bn in revenue between 2010 and 2018 through taxing coal production
• Since 2011, Canada has either completely phased out or reformed seven policies that subsidised the production of oil, gas and coal

Steve Waygood, chief responsible investment officer at Aviva Investors, said: 'Governments beginning to take stock of their commitment to Paris are falling at the first hurdle if they refuse to factor in fossil fuel subsidies for producers – including tax concessions and placing the burden of decommissioning the sector’s infrastructure on taxpayers.

‘As corporates are being asked to disclose the potential impact of climate risk on their balance sheets, we as investors are also asking governments to disclose the impact that fossil fuel subsidies have at country balance sheet level, providing us with useful information so that we can support economies as they make this important change.'

Shelagh Whitley, head of the Overseas Development Institute’s Climate and Energy Programme, said: ‘The message is clear from global investors to G20 governments, fossil fuel subsidies not only lead to air pollution and climate impacts, they’re bad for business too. G20 Ministers must listen to investors and ensure that country leaders commit to a firm deadline to end fossil fuel subsidies at the G20 Leaders’ Summit in Buenos Aires this November.’

Ivetta Gerasimchuk, Lead for Sustainable Energy Supplies at IISD, said: ‘If there is a way to stop taxpayers’ money going into the pockets of oil, gas and coal companies and rich energy guzzlers, it is through G20 countries learning from each other’s experiences: the hard-won reforms and steps forward that some have made.’

Notes to editors

• The full statement and list of signatories will be published on Wednesday, November 28
• Investors and insurers Aviva, CCLA Investment Management, Earth Capital, Environment Agency Pension Fund, Glenmont Partners, Joseph Rowntree Charitable Trust, Sarasin & Partners, USS and WHEB Asset Management have USD $741,535.68 billion in assets under management.
• The G20 leaders’ summit will take place in Buenos Aires, Argentina, on Friday, November 30, and Saturday, December 1, 2018

WINNPEG, November 13, 2018—Experts from across the nation are meeting in Winnipeg at Canada’s first-ever Natural Infrastructure Forum.

They will kick start a national discussion on how we can direct the millions of dollars invested by governments, including the governments of Manitoba and Canada, in natural infrastructure to build cities, towns and landscapes that are more resilient to climate change.

The event will is being hosted in Winnipeg at Convocation Hall at the University of Winnipeg on Wednesday November 14, 2018, and media are invited to attend from 9:00 a.m. to 12:00 p.m.

Manitoba’s Minister for Sustainable Development Rochelle Squires, as well as Ontario MPP Toby Barrett will open the event at 9:00 a.m. Craig Stewart, from the Insurance Bureau of Canada, will lead a panel discussion on how we can utilize existing federal and provincial programs aimed at preserving Canada’s abundant natural infrastructure resources.

In the face of rising climate uncertainty, Canada is increasingly using natural infrastructure (such as wetlands and urban forests) as a complement to traditional grey infrastructure to build resilience in the face of climate change.

In fact, a recent report from the Insurance Bureau of Canada revealed that Manitoba, and Canada more broadly, could save millions of dollars and mitigate the impacts of natural disasters such as flooding, by investing in natural infrastructure, that can bring humans and the environment a whole host of benefits.

“Investing in natural infrastructure like wetlands can be cheaper and more effective than traditional built infrastructure” said David McLaughlin, Director of Climate Change for Canada at the International Institute for Sustainable Development. “It is fast becoming a smarter option for cities and communities looking to adapt to climate change and protect residents from flooding.”

 “It is important to get the right people in the room, so we can work together to move Canada’s natural infrastructure agenda forward,” said Lara Ellis, Vice-President, Policy and Partnerships at ALUS Canada. 

With presentations and discussions led by 14 expert speakers from across the country, the Forum will explore why natural infrastructure is an important and efficient use of financial resources, and how we can accelerate natural infrastructure projects and activities across the country through financing and implementation measures.

The Natural Infrastructure Forum is being organized by the International Institute for Sustainable Development (IISD), ALUS Canada, A Weston Family Initiative, and the Insurance Bureau of Canada (IBC), with support from the Province of Manitoba.

MEDIA CONTACTS

Sumeep Bath, Communications Manager, IISD Experimental Lakes Area

[email protected]; (204) 599-2595

ABOUT US

The international team of multi-disciplinary experts at the International Institute for Sustainable Development, headquartered in Winnipeg, delivers the knowledge to act. We tackle some of the world’s most pressing problems by conducting innovative research, generating evidence and championing sustainable solutions. IISD.org

ALUS Canada, A Weston Family Initiative, is a national charitable organization that works with farmers and ranchers to establish and maintain green infrastructure projects that produce ecosystem services for Canadian communities. There are currently more than 18,500 acres enrolled in the ALUS program by 575 participants, from 21 communities in five provinces, and the program is rapidly expanding. ALUS.ca

​​​Established in 1964, the Insurance Bureau of Canada (IBC) is the national industry association representing Canada’s private home, auto and business insurers. Its member companies represent 90% of the Canadian property and casualty insurance market. IBC works on a number of fronts to increase public understanding of home, auto and business insurance. IBC.ca