Rocky Mountain Outlook coverage of Canmore’s accepted Climate Emergency Action Plan
Canmore moves forward with new climate plan
“The decisions we make today can lock us into patterns of high energy use, high emissions, high cost for decades to come.”
Greg ColganJul 12, 2024 5:45 PM
CANMORE – A new climate emergency action plan was accepted for planning purposes by Canmore council to help guide future policies in addressing climate change.
But the plan – which outlines the need for both public and private sectors to work with one another – will do so without the immediate support of the largest private sector contributor in the community.
Bow Valley Builders and Developers Association (BOWDA) stated in a letter to council it didn’t support the new plan after reviewing it with members and internal committees.
“We are of the opinion that more work must be done to ensure that it is flexible, adaptive and responsive to practical, and economic realities when it comes to mitigation, implementation, and adaptation,” stated the letter from BOWDA executive director Ian O’Donnell.
“An optimistic and ambitious plan is laudable but venturing into ‘uncharted territories’ must be done in a manner responsible and respectful of all ratepayers (present, future, and commercial).”
The development sector would be the largest private sector in reducing greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. An aspect of the Town staff presentation highlighted a lifespan of a car is 10-18 years, but a building can be 80 years or more, making infrastructure a key piece in GHG reduction.
“The decisions we make today can lock us into patterns of high energy use, high emissions, high cost for decades to come,” said Amy Fournier, the Town’s energy and climate action coordinator. “This is because of the long lifetimes of infrastructure.”
Fournier stressed proactive changes such as having a new build be ready for electric vehicle charging is significantly more cost-effective than retrofitting.
The BOWDA letter, which wasn’t included on the agenda, listed 13 points such as it being unclear how the targets were determined; the engagement not feeling “authentic”, “rushed” and “it did not provide an adequate opportunity for various industry sectors to share feedback; and reviewing provincial acts and regulations “be respected to avoid potential overstep and/or overreach by the municipality.”
It outlined several cost-benefit analyses were needed to review the investments and associated costs; the infrastructure redundancy; and the economic benefits. It noted a “deeper exploration” was needed with industry groups and “urgent action must be paired with due diligence”.
“A successful and implementable plan requires not only municipal leadership, but industry and community buy-in and support. This must also be keenly aware of potential legislative limitations that could impact a variety of the items within the report.”
Though BOWDA said more work was needed and it was willing to work with the Town before implementing, council moved forward with the new plan.
Coun. Tanya Foubert called it a “strategic map that sets courses to begin to move down” in the Town’s efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.
“When I look at the plan I also want to make sure we’re setting up not just administration, but the community for success in implementation because we have partners in this plan that have to step up and have roles to play,” she said.
Coun. Jeff Mah echoed Foubert, noting it was important steps be taken by the Town and community.
“We’re not here forever and we’re trying to leave a better place for our kids than our grandkids and people beyond that, so I think pays to be bold and strong and to try these plans,” he said.
Bow Valley Climate Action (BVCA) supported the plan, with it aligning with “consensus best practices for the mitigating of climate change.”
It emphasized “climate change is real. It has profound negative impacts on people, the environment and the economy,” stated the letter, which wasn’t on the agenda, from BVCA chair Edmund Ong.
Though BVCA stated it would prefer “faster and bolder action”, it outlined a balance had to be reached.
“As a community, we do not demand immediate cost/savings payback when managing other sorts of pollution, like sewage and garbage,” wrote Ong. “It is fantastic that the CEAP has identified an economically beneficial pathway to ending GHG pollution. But we should acknowledge that net-positive monetary returns from pollution management is a test we only demand for GHGs.”
It highlighted five reasons the plan was needed, the importance of addressing climate change and costs and savings.
“The CEAP is clearly a high-level, strategic planning document. BVCA recognizes the role of high-level, long-term planning and sets our expectations accordingly. ... Now that it is before us, we welcome and support it,” stated Ong.
The plan was first shown to council at the June 18 committee of the whole meeting.
It estimates the cost to reach near net-zero by 2050 will be $843 million or $32 million annually in investments throughout the community.
The implementation plan outlines 93 action items that can be done by public and private sector, homeowners and others in Canmore, but also projects long-term savings of more than $1.2 billion by 2050.
The financial analysis highlights it doesn’t include administrative, education and marketing costs with the actions as well as land purchases for renewable energy infrastructure and installation of transit infrastructure in Canmore and large-scale renewable energy outside the Town’s boundary.
It emphasizes with Canmore getting “warmer and wetter, with wilder weather,” the additional risk of wildfire, flood and drought impacts could damage local infrastructure.
The plan notes initial costs will be higher in the early years of implementing action items, but by 2028 the savings could outweigh costs. The draft action plan indicates average household energy costs of about $4,000 could drop to between $2,600 to $3,400 by 2050, depending on what is implemented.
As part of accepting the plan for planning purposes, it led to the rescinding of the Environmental Sustainability Action Plan, Climate Change Adaptation Background Report and Resilience Plan and Climate Action Plan.
Canmore council declared a state of climate emergency in 2019. One of the strategic plans of council is the environment, with safe human-wildlife interactions and climate change.
The plan also ups council direction on reducing greenhouse gas emissions to align with federal aims of near net-zero by 2050. It was originally set to reduce community GHG emissions by 30 per cent of 2015 levels by 2030 and 80 per cent by 2050 and Town GHGs by 50 per cent by 2030 and 80 per cent by 2050.
According to the draft action plan, Canmore used 6,343 megajoules of energy in 2022, which came from fueling vehicles, heating homes and running appliances. Along with landfill emissions, it created 461 kiloton carbon dioxide emissions (ktCO2e) of greenhouse gas emissions, with two-thirds coming from transportation. The draft action plan noted Canmore’s 2022 permanent population created 27.8 tonnes of carbon dioxide (tCO2e) per person, which is higher than the 2021 national average of 17.5 tCO2e).
“It’s not just a climate plan, but it’s also an intention to how we move forward for a more resilient and thriving community,” said Caitlin Van Gaal, the Town’s supervisor of environment and sustainability.
The letter from BOWDA outlined its members “continue to look at new ways to improve energy efficiency with their designs, products and in our building systems – approaching this issue in a realistic, balanced and thoughtful manner.”
For success of the plan, it has several partners such as Tourism Canmore Kananaskis, BOWDA, Alberta Parks, BVCA, EPCOR and TransAlta.
Foubert gave the example of hearing Andrea Reimer, a former long-serving City of Vancouver councillor, speak to the Municipal Climate Leadership Caucus. She noted Reimer said getting community buy-in through a committee was helpful “because then the community saw themselves in the plan as well. They saw themselves engaged and more involved in it and it wasn’t just a document, it was collaborative.”
Fournier noted she worked with the City of Vancouver when its plan was developed, which had a specific committee for each one of its goals.
Earlier in the term, council disbanded the longstanding Environmental Advisory Review Committee.
Van Gaal noted establishing a committee would be a council decision, but the approach is to “engage with as many people as possible”.
“We want to make sure we’re engaging a diverse sector of the population that represents our community so our actions are benefitting as many people as possible,” she said.
Lori Williams, a political scientist with Mount Royal University, stressed the importance of listening to residents, but also seeking out the opinions of the community before implementing wide-ranging plans.
“Democratically elected officials have to find ways to open channels of communication. If you don’t … If you handle it well, you manage it well, you plan it and have it in place regularly, then chances are very good you’re going to get more positive results than if you look like you have something to hide,” she said.
Coun. Jeff Hilstad said CEAP is a high level plan to set the stage for future change and policy.
“It’s a plan. It’s goalposts. There’s change. Nobody likes change. … Any time change is put out there, people put their back up because why would we change something? We don’t go and whale anymore to get oil from whales, so we can change how we fuel things,” he said.