Green stimulus is needed for the environment and economy

We were disappointed with the response, but not surprised. The old fallacy of jobs versus the environment remains. Even as more entrepreneurs and businesses embrace the benefits of a new emerging greener economy, old beliefs die hard. And frankly, how does a government defend a position that makes no economic, technological or scientific sense?

So what could Canada's federal government do to benefit the environment and build a better economy? By the time you read this, the federal government will have introduced its 2009 budget. Presumably, the same pressure from the opposition parties last fall that prompted the Prime Minister to suspend Parliament will have produced a budget now intended to stimulate our economy with an influx of public spending.

The following is just a sample of what Greenpeace believes can and should be done to provide economic stimulus, create jobs, and begin moving our economy to a more sustainable one. It is not intended to be a comprehensive stimulus package, rather some low hanging fruit that would quickly put money into use, create the greatest number of jobs and have a lasting and rapid benefit to the environment and individuals.

Conservation

Conserve the energy we already produce. A massive retrofit program for homeowners is both labour intensive (putting people back to work in a hard hit industry) and has a multiplying effect (put money into the pockets of individuals who would save money on their heating and cooling bills AND substantially reduce their carbon footprint). Fast off the mark: simple approval processes and immediate environmental cuts to greenhouse gases.

Generation

Don't turn to mega-projects (dams, nuclear, coal) for generation

Boost the renewable energy industry in Canada and fund an energy revolution - transition us to decentralized electricity production. Provide incentives to landlords and homeowners through a solar hot water program. A goal of one million installations would create jobs across the country, cut GHG emissions and firmly establish what is now a fledgling industry in Canada. Incentive for small scale solar, wind and geothermal generation is stimulus that is community based and nation wide.

Public transit investment

Canada is increasingly an urbanized country but we are one of a handful in the world that provides little or no federal funding to public transit. Well-funded, reliable transit has proven to get people out of their cars in urban areas. If we are going to reduce our carbon foot print, people have to drive less. All levels of government know what is required to move people, so again - an immediate stimulus with corresponding reduction in carbon.

Water infrastructure

Canada is rich in fresh water. It is also one of the worst offenders at wasting and poisoning fresh water. Embarrassingly, Canada lags far behind the USA in its protection and stewardship of the Great Lakes. The number of First Nation communities living with boil water advisories is a national disgrace.

Investment in an aggressive water and sewage infrastructure program would have an immediate, long-term, economic, environmental and health benefit, leave a lasting legacy and begin to address a festering national disgrace.

What we don't need

Government spending that addresses the economic crisis but not the global ecological crisis would be a massive disservice and wasted opportunity at a critical juncture. Government has a rare opportunity to leverage industry, provinces, municipalities and citizens alike to stimulate the economy and help the environment.

If we are going to subsidize the auto industry, the subsidies should be tied to mandated fuel efficiency standards, elimination of HFC's in automobile air conditioning and vendor take-back models. Rather than public relations exercises for the forest industry, assistance in transitioning their operations to FSC certified and job retraining for those who have already lost their jobs.

Stop the subsidies to nuclear power

After fifty years and some $2 billion in past subsidies, the industry still cannot produce affordable or reliable electricity. Assistance to nuclear defines the term “good money after bad”. At this point we must start wrapping our collective minds around how to fund the next 400,000 years of storage for our existing radioactive waste.

Not a penny to the oil industry

As the leading driver of climate change, the beneficiaries of windfall profits, the funders of climate denial and the wealthiest corporations in the land, it would be a horrific injustice to reward them with citizens' tax dollars - particularly in the name of environmental protection. Carbon capture, water and land rehabilitation in the Tar Sands have been dismal failures, research and development for the oil industry should all be factored into their cost of business - only then can we establish a truly competitive market for alternatives.

A word of caution:

Greenpeace agrees we need to move fast to protect our environment but beware of those who will use “shovel ready projects” and “cutting red tape” to circumvent environmental assessments and citizen input into proposals. Ontario's exemption of nuclear plants from the environmental assessment process may speed up their construction but is a real danger and disservice to our environment.

Ban Ki Moon, Secretary-General of the United Nations, said in response to the unfolding economic crisis: “Together, we face two crises: climate change and the global economy. But these crises present us with a great opportunity - an opportunity to address both challenges simultaneously. Managing the global financial crisis requires massive global stimulus. A big part of that spending should be an investment- an investment in a green future. An investment that fights climate change, creates millions of green jobs and spurs green growth.”

Let's ensure our leaders are listening.