Trump Wants Greenland and the Panama Canal. It’s About Climate.

Global warming is making both places more important to global shipping and trade.

By Lisa Friedman, The New York Times, Dec. 31, 2024

To imagine the kind of future a hotter, dryer climate may bring, and the geopolitical challenges it will create, look no farther than two parts of the world that Donald Trump wants America to control: Greenland and the Panama Canal.

The president-elect in recent days has insisted that both places are critical to United States national security. He’s called to reclaim control the Panama Canal from Panama and acquire Greenland from Denmark, both sovereign territories with their own governments.

They have something else in common as well: Both are significantly affected by climate change in ways that present looming challenges to global shipping and trade.

Because of warming temperatures, an estimated 11,000 square miles of Greenland’s ice sheets and glaciers have melted over the past three decades, an area roughly equivalent to the size of Massachusetts. That has huge implications for the entire world. If the ice melts completely, Greenland could cause sea levels to rise as much as 23 feet, according to NASA.

Greenland’s retreating ice could open up areas to drill for oil and gas and places to mine critical minerals, a fact that has already attracted international interest and raised concerns about environmental harms. And, ship traffic in the Arctic has surged 37 percent over the past decade, according to a recent Arctic Council report, as sea ice has declined. More melting could open up even more trade routes.

Amanda Lynch, a professor at Brown University who has studied climate change in the Arctic for nearly 30 years, said the new trade routes created by ice melt could also heighten the risk of environmental disasters. Ships from some countries, she said, are not designed to withstand Arctic conditions.

“An oil spill or some other toxic accident on that route is inevitable and could already have happened and we just don’t know it,” she said.

China has shown significant interest in a new route through the Arctic, and in November China and Russia agreed to work together to develop Arctic shipping routes.

“The traffic lanes in the Arctic are changing because of climate change,” Jose W. Fernandez, the State Department under secretary for economic growth, energy and the environment, said in an interview. “It’s something that we are devoting more and more attention to, and any new administration is going to have to address going forward,” he said.

Trump calls climate change a hoax. The Trump transition team did not respond to a request for comment. But his former national security adviser, Robert C. O’Brien suggested on Sunday that climate change was one factor in Trump’s interest in acquiring Greenland.

“Greenland is a highway from the Arctic all the way to North America, to the United States,” he told Fox News. “It’s strategically very important to the Arctic, which is going to be the critical battleground of the future because as the climate gets warmer, the Arctic is going to be a pathway that maybe cuts down on the usage of the Panama Canal.”

Which brings us to the Panama Canal.

Over 51 miles across the middle of Panama, the vital waterway uses a series of locks and reservoirs to connect the Atlantic and the Pacific. The canal spares ships having to go roughly 7,000 additional miles to sail around Cape Horn at the southern tip of South America.

In 2023, a lengthy drought caused widespread disruption at the canal. Water levels at Gatún Lake, the principal hydrological reserve for the canal, sank to historically low levels and the authorities reduced shipping through the canal to conserve the lake’s fresh water. The resulting lines of ships waiting for weeks to cross the canal threatened to trigger a domino effect across supply chains.

Scientists found the immediate cause was El Niño, a natural weather phenomenon that can last several years. But, they found, climate change may also be prolonging dry spells and raising temperatures in the region. The canal authority has proposed a $1.6 billion project to dam the nearby Indio River to secure freshwater.

Climate change is walloping the canal from several angles, said Kevin Trenberth, the former head of climate analysis at the National Center for Atmospheric Research. Its lock system also is facing increased threats from rising sea levels, which could cause floods and erode the canal banks.

Chris Field, director of the Woods Institute for the Environment at Stanford University, said Trump’s interest in both the Panama Canal and Greenland were “kind of an indirect acknowledgment” that climate change is real and creating new global challenges.

“It’s interesting that the narrative from Trump is that if we control these places, it would be better somehow. But the challenge is the climate change component doesn’t go away,” he said.

Trump’s aspirations face some big hurdles. President José Raúl Mulino of Panama has ruled out discussing control of the canal with Trump. And the prime minister of Greenland, Mute Egede, has said control of the island, which is an autonomous territory of Denmark, is “not for sale and will never be for sale.”

https://www.nytimes.com/2024/12/31/climate/trump-greenland-panama-canal-climate-change.html

Insurers Are Deserting Homeowners as Climate Shocks Worsen

Without insurance, it’s impossible to get a mortgage; without a mortgage, most Americans can’t buy a home.

By Christopher Flavelle & Mira Rojanasakul, The New York Times, Dec. 18, 2024

The insurance crisis spreading across the United States arrived at Richard D. Zimmel’s door last week in the form of a letter.

Mr. Zimmel, who lives in the increasingly fire-prone hills outside Silver City, N.M., had done everything right. He trimmed the trees away from his house, and covered his yard in gravel to stop flames rushing in from the forest near his property. In case that buffer zone failed, he sheathed his house in fire-resistant stucco, and topped it with a noncombustible steel roof.

None of it mattered. His insurance company, Homesite Insurance, dumped him. “Property is located in a brushfire or wildfire area that no longer meets Homesite’s minimum standard for wildfire risk,” the letter read. (Homesite did not respond to a request for comment.)

Mr. Zimmel has company. Since 2018, more than 1.9 million home insurance contracts nationwide have been dropped — “nonrenewed,” in the parlance of the industry. In more than 200 counties, the nonrenewal rate has tripled or more, according to the findings of a congressional investigation released Wednesday.

As a warming planet delivers more wildfires, hurricanes and other threats, America’s once reliably boring home insurance market has become the place where climate shocks collide with everyday life.

The consequences could be profound. Without insurance, you can’t get a mortgage; without a mortgage, most Americans can’t buy a home. Communities that are deemed too dangerous to insure face the risk of falling property values, which means less tax revenue for schools, police and other basic services. As insurers pull back, they can destabilize the communities left behind, making their decisions a predictor of the disruption to come.

Now, for the first time, the scale of that pullback is becoming public. Last fall, the Senate Budget Committee demanded the country’s largest insurance companies provide the number of nonrenewals by county and year. The result is a map that tracks the climate crisis in a new way.

The American Property Casualty Insurance Association, a trade group, said information about nonrenewals was “unsuitable for providing meaningful information about climate change impacts,” because the data doesn’t show why individual insurers made decisions. The group added that efforts to gather data from insurers “could have an anticompetitive effect on the market.”

Senator Sheldon Whitehouse, Democrat of Rhode Island and the committee’s chairman, said the new information was crucial. In an interview, he called the new data as good an indicator as any “for predicting the likelihood and timing of a significant, systemic economic crash,” as disruption in the insurance market spreads to property values.

“The climate crisis that is coming our way is not just about polar bears, and it’s not just about green jobs,” Mr. Whitehouse said Wednesday during a hearing on the investigation’s findings. “It actually is coming through your mail slot, in the form of insurance cancellations, insurance nonrenewals and dramatic increases in insurance costs.”

The map of dropped policies shows how the crisis in the American home insurance market has spread beyond well-known problems in Florida and California. The jump in nonrenewals now extends along the Gulf Coast, through Alabama and Mississippi; up the Atlantic seaboard, through the Carolinas, Virginia and into southern New England; inland, to parts of the plains and Intermountain West; and even as far as Hawaii.

Silver City shows how the insurance crisis is a result of several factors over decades — and how hard it is to solve.

Founded as a mining town in the 1870s, the city of 10,000 nestles up against the foothills of the Gila National Forest, 3.3 million acres of alligator juniper, ponderosa pine and Gambel oak draped across softly sloping mountains.

That forest has also become a firetrap.

Since its designation as a national forest in 1924, the U.S. government sought to protect the land by stopping forest fires. That policy failed to take into account that fires clear out vegetation, according to Adam Mendonca, the U.S. Forest Service’s Washington deputy director of fire and aviation, who lives in Silver City. The result was the buildup of decades of additional trees and brush, which means wildfires, when they do happen, now burn larger and hotter.

That threat has been exacerbated by climate change, which has brought higher temperatures and drier conditions. Wildfires are now more likely to break out any time of year.

“We used to take our wildland gear home, put it into storage about September, and then bring it back to the station in February,” said Milo Lambert, Silver City’s fire chief. “Now it doesn’t leave the trucks.”

Even as the threat of wildfires has grown, home construction has pushed further into the forest. On a recent afternoon, Eric Casler, an assistant professor of natural sciences at Western New Mexico University, surveyed the neighborhoods that have grown up north of the city limits.

“See all these scattered houses out here?” Mr. Casler said. If a wildfire started to burn through the area, “it’s going to be really hard for them to stop it.”

It’s not just where people build homes that puts them at risk, experts said, but how those homes are constructed. Outside city limits, Grant County has no zoning or wildfire building restrictions, according to Roger Groves, the fire chief for the county, which includes Silver City.

Taken together, those challenges have caused insurers to pull back, according to Susan Sumrall, an insurance agent in Silver City.

Across Grant County, 51 home insurance contracts were not renewed in 2018, based on the data provided to the committee. That’s about one in 100 policies. By last year, that number had doubled to 100 nonrenewals, even as the county’s total population shrank.

One of Ms. Sumrall’s clients who has lost her insurance is Charlene Rosati. Ms. Rosati and her husband had to spend months in Houston, where he was being treated for cancer. Her insurance company, State Farm, sent an inspector to check if the home was being properly maintained, Ms. Rosati said, and concluded it was not.

Ms. Rosati’s husband died in September last year. Soon after, State Farm told her it wouldn’t renew her coverage. The company did not respond to a request for comment.

Many homes in and around Silver City are mobile or manufactured homes, which can offer less protection against fires than traditional site-built houses. Lorri Williams lives in a manufactured home in a valley just outside of Silver City. She, too, got a letter from her insurer, Standard Casualty Company, based in Texas.

“Reason — unsatisfactory risk,” the company wrote in block letters. “Your home is either located inside of or in close proximity of an area that is identified as having a high risk of wildfire.”

Standard Casualty Company did not respond to a request for comment.

People who lose insurance often don’t have great options. Ms. Williams’s broker, Chelsea Hotchkiss, tried getting her another insurer, with no luck. Ms. Hotchkiss suggested the state-run high-risk insurance program, which offers coverage to homeowners who can’t find it on the private market. But that program is more expensive and provides less coverage.

After Mr. Zimmel got his nonrenewal letter last week, he called State Farm, which declined to cover him. His insurance agent struck out with three more carriers, including Travelers. (State Farm and Travelers did not respond to requests for comment.) Finally, a smaller company agreed to insure his house, but his premiums jumped by one-third.

Mr. Zimmel’s bigger worry, he said, is how the struggle over insurance could affect his home’s value, which his real estate agent estimates at about $725,000.

“I just don’t know what’s going to happen to the town if this keeps happening,” said Mr. Zimmel’s agent, Shelley Scarborough.

Officials are trying to reduce wildfire risk. The county is looking at setting building standards to cut fire exposure, Mr. Groves said. State officials are also considering ways to get more homeowners to clear the vegetation from their property, possibly through a pilot project in nearby Lincoln County that would make those steps necessary to qualify for the state high-risk insurance pool.

And the U.S. Forest Service is trying to clear out decades’ worth of thick brush and other excess vegetation — what experts call “treating” the forest. That process is anything but simple.

In the parts of the forest nearest the city, workers have cut down smaller trees, low-hanging branches and scrub oak, then stacked them into piles to dry out. After a year or so, the piles are set on fire — ideally during the winter, to reduce the risk of the fire spreading.

After those two steps, the Forest Service can perform a prescribed burn: deliberately setting fire to a patch of the forest to further clear out the vegetation. To maintain that work, the process should typically be repeated every five to 10 years.

The Forest Service has been treating between 25,000 and 30,000 of the 3.3 million acres in the Gila Forest each year, according to Mr. Mendonca. “It’s a constant struggle for the agency to try to address,” he said, citing a shortage of staffing, money and time.

The underlying challenges that are driving insurers from Silver City can be found across the country.

In parts of Wyoming, the growing risk of wildfire is similarly pushing insurers to drop customers. Teton County, which includes Jackson Hole, saw nonrenewal rates increase 1,394 percent since 2018. Jeff Rude, the state insurance commissioner, said the state was focused on educating homeowners about how to reduce the risk on their land, because tougher building standards are unpopular in Wyoming.

In California, which has some of the country’s most stringent building codes to address wildfire risk, insurers have nonetheless been fleeing. In some counties, nonrenewal rates have increased more than 500 percent since 2018. Officials announced last week that they would make it easier for insurers to raise rates, but in exchange, those insurers must agree to keep doing business in fire-prone areas.

In Hawaii, the nonrenewal rate tripled between 2018 and 2023, one of the highest increases in the country. The growing risk from wildfires and other threats has led to what Gov. Josh Green, a Democrat, has called a “condo insurance crisis.” In August, he signed an emergency proclamation, setting up a task force to search for solutions.

In coastal South Carolina, which now has some of the highest nonrenewal rates in the country, insurers have been going out of business, reducing their exposure or just leaving the area, said Jay Taylor, an insurance agent in Beaufort County, which includes Hilton Head, an area particularly exposed to sea-level rise, hurricanes and other climate threats.

Homeowners complain about the difficulty and cost of getting insurance, he said. But the desire to live by the ocean, despite the danger, remains the stronger force.

“They may cuss us out,” Mr. Taylor said. “But they never stop building.”

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2024/12/18/climate/insurance-non-renewal-climate-crisis.html

Vanuatu calls on ICJ to recognize climate change’s harm

By Zack Budryk, The Hill, December 2, 2024

Representatives for the island nation of Vanuatu called on the International Court of Justice this week to recognize the harm caused by climate change, the first remarks the United Nations court heard as it considers international obligations to address climate impacts.

“The outcome of these proceedings will reverberate across generations, determining the fate of nations like mine and the future of our planet,” Ralph Regenvanu, the country’s special envoy for climate change and the environment, said in remarks Monday at The Hague. “Today, we find ourselves on the frontlines of a crisis we did not create, a crisis that threatens our very existence.”

Conversely, he said, the majority of planet-warming emissions come from “a handful of readily identifiable states” that will not suffer immediate consequences to the same degree as poorer and island nations.

Over the next two weeks, the 15-member court is set to hear arguments from representatives of nearly 100 countries, including China and the U.S., the two biggest national emitters, before issuing an opinion on states’ obligations regarding climate change. The court’s opinions are not legally binding, and neither China nor the U.S. fully acknowledges its authority. But if the court sides with Vanuatu and its allies, it could provide a major precedent for climate change-related lawsuits.

A group of law students in Oceanian nations worked in collaboration with Vanuatu for years to secure the ICJ hearing, and the United Nations General Assembly called on the court to issue an opinion on the matter in a unanimous vote in March.

Vanuatu, home to about 335,000 people, is an archipelago of 82 islands, many of which are as little as 3 feet above sea level, and has seen sea level increase by about 0.2 inches in the past 30 years, as well as an increase in extreme weather like tropical cyclones, flooding and landslides.

https://thehill.com/policy/energy-environment/5017658-vanuatu-climate-change-lawsuit-icj/

Whitehouse seeks to ‘reassure’ world at climate conference

Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse said much of the U.S. is still “committed to steering the planet away from climate catastrophe.”

By Emma Dumain, Politico, Nov. 10, 2024

The final U.N. climate summit of the Biden era is due to kick off next week amid gloom from many in the environmental community over the election of Donald Trump.

But a top Democrat will be there to “reassure the international community that large swaths of the U.S. remain committed to steering the planet away from climate catastrophe.”

This pledge from Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.), the chair of the Senate Budget Committee who has used his gavel to link climate change to economic calamity, comes days after Trump’s resounding victory and with Republicans on track to retake control of Congress.

It also comes as green advocates fear the new balance of power in Washington will lead to a rollback of environmental regulations and the end of climate leadership on the world stage.

“Cracking down on methane leakage, decarbonizing our economy, and combatting sea level rise are firmly on my agenda for COP29,” said Whitehouse in a statement to POLITICO’s E&E News. “But we can’t ignore that Donald Trump, Republicans, and their fossil fuel mega-donors are aiming a torpedo at the climate progress Democrats have made in the last four years.”

He added, “We will not give up the fight for climate action and against the fossil fuel corruption that’s soon to take power in Washington.”

Whitehouse had already announced plans to head to Baku, Azerbaijan, for the climate talks, which are set to take place from Nov. 11-22. His office confirmed Thursday he will still be leading a “smaller delegation of just Democrats” from Nov. 16-17.

House Energy and Commerce ranking member Frank Pallone (D-N.J.) said in September he, too, would be attending the summit. His spokesperson had no further details to share this week about whether he would be traveling with colleagues.

But the significance of this year’s summit has intensified in the aftermath of the election, which will usher in a dramatic shift in climate policy. Trump, who has called climate change a “hoax,” withdrew the U.S. from the Paris climate accord during his last time in the White House and deprioritized climate action across the federal government.

The expectation is he’ll take similar steps during his second administration. He’s similarly likely to target aggressive emissions reduction measures put in place by President Joe Biden’s EPA and stymie implementation of the Inflation Reduction Act.

A Republican Congress, meanwhile, could also take steps to gut spending in the IRA for climate grant programs and clean energy investments.

Dan Lashof, director of the World Resources Institute, said in a press call with reporters Thursday morning that he didn’t believe the election results would “reverse progress on the path to a clean energy economy,” citing the bipartisan popularity of many IRA clean energy tax credits and recognition around the globe that there are good business reasons to embrace a clean energy economy.

“At the same time,” he warned, “I do think we have to recognize it will stall federal leadership at a time when we not only need to continue the progress we’ve been making, but accelerate it. … I don’t want to be Pollyanna-ish about it: There will be consequences.”

‘The worst outcome’

While members of Congress don’t get to negotiate on behalf of the United States at the annual climate conferences, they do play an important role in representing their country on the world stage and showing that elected officials are eager to engage.

Last year’s COP had a record number of lawmakers attending on both sides of the aisle and chamber, with Republicans making a particularly strong showing. This year’s attendance will be significantly scaled back, with lawmakers citing a variety of reasons why.

Some say they feel uncomfortable traveling to Azerbaijan given its concerning human rights record; others aren’t confident the host country, as a petrostate, can be trusted to act against its own economic self-interests when it comes to phasing out fossil fuels.

Mostly, however, Democrats and Republicans both cited the inconvenient timing, with COP29 coming so close after the elections and at the start of the lame duck session of Congress.

While neither party could have anticipated what the lame duck agenda would look like several months ago when they were making their plans, this could now be Democrats’ last chance for at least two years to fight steep spending cuts and protect certain priorities Republicans might otherwise let fall to the wayside.

Ben Jealous, president of the Sierra Club, said in a call with reporters Thursday morning he didn’t begrudge members for making that calculation: “Given all the questions about what folks were going to be facing in the lame duck session, people had to make some tough choices. It strikes me as very reasonable for them to opt to stay here and fight.”

Jonathan Pershing, the program director of environment at the William and Flora Hewlett Foundation who previously had a leading role in U.N. climate talks on behalf of the Biden and Obama administrations, suggested in the press call hosted by the World Resources Institute that the international community wouldn’t miss Congress’ participation one way or the other.

Congress has an important role to play in approving aid for climate projects abroad, but Republican opposition to foreign assistance has prevented the U.S. from meaningfully increasing funding, Perishing said.

The Biden administration has increased climate finance from the previous Trump administration, but it remains well below what small economies in Europe contribute. In other words, U.S. contributions won‘t be missed.

At the same time, Pershing recalled the time it took to “rebuild trust” between the international community and the United States in 2008, when President Barack Obama was elected after eight years of President George W. Bush. When Biden was elected to replace Trump in 2020, Pershing continued, “it took the first entire year to establish the sense that the U.S. was a worthy partner.”

He predicted a similar dynamic will be at play this time around, where the United States would “abdicate” its role as a leader on climate action and the country’s reputation would suffer for it.

“To me,” Pershing said, “that is the worst outcome.”

Democratic lawmakers could fill that void, said Lori Lodes, president of Climate Power.

“One of the most important things” members can tell counterparts in Baku, she told reporters, “is that America is still all in. Just because Trump is president doesn’t mean that those 26 governors are all of a sudden going to walk away from their 100 percent clean energy plans.”

“The emissions reductions are happening at the state and local levels, the investments in clean energy are skyrocketing, and so the U.S. is not going anywhere,” Lodes continued. “This changes nothing.”

Reporter Sara Schonhardt contributed.

https://www.politico.com/news/2024/11/10/sheldon-whitehouse-cop29-climate-00188335


Voters uphold groundbreaking Washington state climate law

By Rachel Frazin, The Hill, Nov. 6, 2024

Voters in Washington state on Tuesday night upheld a groundbreaking climate law despite opposition from conservatives.

The Associated Press projected that a ballot initiative seeking to repeal the law has failed. 

The law in question sets a cap on major polluters’ greenhouse gas emissions. Under the law, those companies are required to either bring their emissions down below a certain threshold or pay to purchase allowances.

The money from those allowances, which will become more scarce over time, goes toward funding climate-friendly projects including purchasing electric school buses and electric vehicle charging stations.

Opposition to the initiative came from a group called “Let’s Go Washington” which described the law as a “hidden gas tax.” The group is funded by Brian Heywood, who the AP described as a hedge fund executive. 

Advocacy groups cheered the ballot initiative’s failure, describing it as a significant win for climate change.

“The defeat of Initiative 2117 is a major victory for bold state-level climate action and a decisive affirmation of [Washington Gov. Jay] Inslee’s popular policies that made Washington a national leader on climate change,” said a statement from Justin Balik, senior state program director at Evergreen Action, a group that was founded by former Inslee staffers. 

Canada’s carbon tax is popular, innovative and helps save the planet – but now it faces the axe

As prime minister Justin Trudeau trails in polls, opposition seek to persuade voters environmental policy is a burden

The situation in Canada, described in Leyland Secco’s story in The Guardian, demonstrates why carbon pricing must be both well communicated and bipartisan.

By Leyland Cecco, The Guardian, Oct. 5, 2024

Mass hunger and malnutrition. A looming nuclear winter. An existential threat to the Canadian way of life. For months, the country’s Conservative leader Pierre Poilievre has issued dire and increasingly apocalyptic warnings about the future. The culprit? A federal carbon levy meant to curb greenhouse gas emissions.

In the House of Commons this month, the Tory leader said there was only one way to avoid the devastating crisis: embattled prime minister Justin Trudeau must “call a ‘carbon tax’ election”.

Hailed as a global model of progressive environmental policy, Canada’s carbon tax has reduced emissions and put money in the pockets of Canadians. The levy, endorsed by conservative and progressive economists, has survived multiple federal elections and a supreme court challenge. But this time, a persistent cost-of-living crisis and a pugnacious Conservative leader running on a populist message have thrust the country’s carbon tax once more into the spotlight, calling into question whether it will survive another national vote.

In 2018, Trudeau announced plans for the “pan-Canadian climate framework”, modelled after British Columbia’s pioneering carbon tax. Notably, the levy is revenue neutral: the government doesn’t keep any money. Instead, it remits all of it back to taxpayers in the form a quarterly rebate. Any increase in costs from a tax on fuel is offset by a rebate of roughly equal value.

According to the federal government, a family of four in Ontario will receive C$1,120 (£630) this year in rebates. Those living in a rural community receive C$1,344. A rural family of four in the province of Alberta receives C$2,160.

Anyone willing and able to change their behaviour would end up in the black. Economists, political scientists – and the parliamentary budget officer – have found low-income households receive more from the rebate than they pay in additional costs. But the Conservatives, with a significant lead in the polls, are keen to capture mounting frustration with the incumbent government and transform a federal vote into a referendum on Trudeau’s marquee climate policy. Their campaign message, on billboards and T-shirts, has been simple: “axe the tax”. They argue that levy burdens Canadians at a time when rents, groceries and transportation costs have all surged.

Kathryn Harrison, a political scientist at the University of British Columbia, who has spent years studying the effects of carbon levies on behaviour and emissions, laments the “outright falsehoods” peddled for political benefit.

“The current political discourse means a lot of Canadians misunderstand how the policy affects them. They don’t think it works. They think they’re paying more than they are. And that’s a very distressing thing for me, from not just a climate policy perspective, but a democratic perspective,” she said. “This isn’t a debate about how much emphasis to put on one issue or another. The unpopularity of the carbon tax is, to a large degree, driven by voters misunderstanding it and having the facts wrong.”

For Canada’s environment minister, Steven Guilbeault, the fractious debate represents a crossroads for the country in addressing the effects of the climate crisis.

“The reality is, it’s easy to say ‘axe the tax’,” he said. “No one likes to pay taxes. It is more complicated to explain that climate change is real, it’s costing Canadians billions of dollars and carbon pricing is one of many measures we’re putting in place to try and fight climate change. That’s harder to communicate than a slogan.”

But the tenor of the debate – and the misinformation – also suggests something deeper is at stake.

“Climate, and more generally, the environment is now caught into this culture war where facts don’t matter, where the truth has no currency,” said Guilbeault. “This is an issue that speaks to the fundamental elements of our democracies around the world, many of which are being weakened by those campaigns of disinformation.”

Still, the perceived benefits of abandoning the tax have lured in other party leaders. Last month, the New Democratic party leader Jagmeet Singh suggested his support was waning because he doesn’t want a policy that puts the “burden on the backs of working people” – a claim dismissed by experts.

“It is surprising the federal NDP are turning their back on a very progressive policy that both reduces carbon pollution, but also delivers rebates greater than carbon payments for lower income households – the people he purports to be most supportive of,” said Harrison.

Guilbeault admits federal government was “a bit slow” in course-correcting the waves of misinformation surrounding the levy.

“We could have done better, but the 2019 and 2021, and partially, the 2015 elections were fought in part on the issue of carbon pricing – and we won those elections,” he said. “

Initially, the tax was remitted in the form of a tax cut that few people noticed when they filed their taxes. Later, the government began directly depositing the money – but couldn’t get the banks to indicate the money was a rebate from the carbon tax. It took a change to the law that finally compelled banks to label government payments as the “Canada Carbon Rebate” or “CdaCarbonRebate”.

As nations around the world unveil politics to blunt the effects of a rapidly changing climate, recent report from the Canadian Climate Institute found the national carbon levy, which targets both consumers and industry, is projected to reduce emissions by as much as 50% by 2030.

In the event that a Conservative government abandons the national carbon levy, Canada will have “no way” of meeting its 2030 emissions targets,” said Guilbeault, adding it “reduces our credibility” when negotiating with other nations moving ahead with plans to lower emissions.

Most of the debate right now is on the fuel charge the consumer-facing carbon price, with little focus on the industrial carbon tax, said Dale Beugin, vice-president of the Canadian Climate Institute, which “delivers three times the emissions reductions by 2030” than the consumer component of the tax.

Opposition party leaders, including Singh, have vaguely suggested strengthening the industrial part of the carbon tax to make up for the lost benefits of the consumer tax.

“But the reality is, when you remove one policy – in this case, the consumer carbon tax – you’re forced to pushing harder on other levers to go after emissions,” said Beugin. “And there aren’t many sources – buildings, vehicles – that haven’t been looked at yet.”

For Beugin, the debate underscores an uncomfortable reality about policies meant to unwind the sustained environmental damage from unfettered emissions.

“Climate policy isn’t easy. It requires some effort to push against the things that are easy and simple politically, because that’s this transformation that we need,” he said. “Yes, technology is getting cheaper, but climate policy is inevitably hard – and you don’t want to shy away from that.”

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2024/oct/05/canadas-carbon-tax-is-popular-innovative-and-helps-save-the-planet-but-now-it-faces-the-axe