While a $400 million contribution to energy efficiency for homes is getting a lot of air play, the truth is there is little for the environment and climate change in the federal budget, and it is indeed a step backwards.
Bearing in mind the questions I posed in my recent blog, here is some initial thoughts on Budget 2011. You can read the budget speech and plan here.
Will the EcoENERGY programs set to end this fiscal year be renewed?
A $400 million investment was announced for the ecoENERGY Retrofit Homes program, a popular program that helps people make their homes more energy efficient. While it is certainly good to see this money go towards ‘green jobs generating and emission reducing’ energy efficiency measures, it represents only one year of funding for the program. It is not a sustained multi-year program which we desperately need and again puts the future of the Canadian governments energy efficient measures into limbo.
Absent from the budget is money allocated to the ecoENERGY renewable power program meaning that it is likely ending. This program invested $1.48 billion increasing Canada’s supply of electricity from renewable sources such as wind, biomass, low-impact hydro, geothermal, solar photovoltaic and ocean energy. The goal was to produce enough clean electricity to power around one million homes.
Will this budget finally see the Canadian government phase out fossil fuel subsidies?
Nope. Responding to public pressure, the budget does change one subsidy directed to the tar sands that will increase government revenue $15 million this year and $30 million next year.
This pales in comparison to the $1.38 billion being wasted every year in subsidies and tax breaks to oil and gas companies. This money could go far, were it invested in energy efficiency, renewable energy expansion or public transit.
Will this budget see Canada repay our climate debt to the Global South?
The budget does not include any money for climate financing for the Global South. I have heard that an announcement could be expected at a later time responding to the government’s commitments under the Copenhagen Accord. This increases our concern that the government may be looking to existing aid budgets to meet these commitments. Funding needs to be increased. It should not be taken away from other aid priorities, it should be new and additional, it should be from public sources and innovative mechanisms such as a financial transaction tax and not dependent on volatile carbon markets.
Will this budget see Canada prioritize green infrastructure spending?
In short, no. While more analysis of the budget is needed, it is abundantly clear that it will not bring about the Council of Canadians recommendation of at least $10 billion dollars invested over each of the next two years in the following five areas: energy conservation through building retrofits and renewable energy projects, mass transit, passenger rail and affordable housing.
Some relevant highlights in the budget include $25 million towards the Canada U.S. Clean Energy Dialogue. One of the priorities under this dialogue is regulatory harmonization in the electricity sector. This could very well equate to increased pressure to adopt a market model like the U.S. with increased privatization of electricity generation and distribution.
There is also $8 million pledged over two years to renew funding for clean energy deployment in Northern and Aboriginal communities. Almost $100 million over two years of research, development and demonstration of clean energy and energy efficiency.
These points are linked to the next question I had raised.
Will the Canadian government continue to fund false solutions to the climate crisis?
The key question here is how the Canadian government defines clean energy. Does it include carbon capture and storage(CCS)? Does it include nuclear? Based on previous government statements and budgets, I’d wager that at least CCS will absorb a good chunk of these funds. This is another question we will be exploring further in the coming days. For the Council’s take on why CCS and nuclear energy are false solutions, refer to our real and false solutions fact sheets.
Will the Canadian government go through with a drastic spending to Environment Canada?
While some funding has been restored compared to the predictions of 20% spending cut to Environment Canada, the trend is still downwards. If you compare government money spending on energy efficiency and renewable energy over the last five years this trend is abundantly clear – I hope to provide more details on this point in the coming days. For now, take a look at this Postmedia News story, which reports that the budget is announcing $1 billion in new spending initiatives compared to the nearly $1.6 billion in projected cuts for federal spending on environmental and resource-based programs.
