Collaborative Proposal Creation
Create, improve and sponsor proposals in a respectful, fully bilingual environment. Grow proposals in the "Hothouse", for promotion to the "Workshop", to become official GPC policy.
- Proposal text
- The GPC supports revising the Greenhouse Gas Pollution Pricing Act to include all GHG emissions from the animal agriculture industry.
- Type of Proposal
- Public policy that the party would represent
- Objective / Benefit
- Animal agriculture is either the largest or second-largest carbon emitter globally of any industry. The IPCC estimated livestock rearing's global emissions contributions to be 14.5%. However, studies using top-down measurement rather than bottom-up approaches including land use and deforestation have shown the number is closer to 37% of all global GHG emissions coming from animal agriculture. Amending the Greenhouse Gas Pollution Pricing Act to include emissions from animal agriculture would send a clear price signal to this heavily-polluting industry and would help Canada reach net-zero emissions much faster.
- If your proposal replaces an existing policy or policies, which one does it replace?
- Add to current GPC policy.
- List any supporting evidence for your proposal
- 1. Animal agriculture's emissions are chronically underestimated. The IPCC says 14.5% but this comprehensive study shows the number is closer to 37% https://sentientmedia.org/the-climate-crisis-secret/ 2. "You Want to Reduce the Carbon Footprint of Your Food? Focus on What You Eat, Not Whether Your Food Is Local,” Our World in Data. https://ourworldindata.org/food-choice-vs-eating-local 3. Climate change: 'Global veganisation is now a survival imperative' - IPCC expert reviewer https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/national/468715/climate-change-global-veganisation-is-now-a-survival-imperative-ipcc-expert-reviewer 4. Interactive: What is the climate impact of eating meat and dairy? https://interactive.carbonbrief.org/what-is-the-climate-impact-of-eating-meat-and-dairy/ 5. Meat and dairy provide just 18% of calories and 37% of protein, uses the vast majority – 83% – of farmland and producing 60% of agriculture's direct GHG emissions. https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.aaq0216
- Does this proposal affect any particular group and what efforts have been made to consult with the group or groups?
- N/A
- Jurisdiction: Is this proposal under federal jurisdiction?
- Yes
- Please indicate the language the proposal is being submitted in.
- English
We're building a new kind of politics. One that is open, participatory, and people-powered
If you believe in what we're doing, please consider making a small donation to help us build it
Reference: PVC-PROP-2023-08-4150
Version number 1 (of 1) see other versions
Related images
.png)
Report inappropriate content
Is this content inappropriate?
Comment details
You are seeing a single comment
View all comments
Derek, this is my first comment since all HotHouse comments were purged, and I have no idea if you've already gone over this. Am dropping notes as I try figure out what "Greenhouse Gas Pollution Pricing Act" excludes, so I get a sense how animal agriculture fits into it.
https://www.canada.ca/en/revenue-agency/campaigns/pollution-pricing.html
https://publications.gc.ca/collections/collection_2022/eccc/En11-17-2020-eng.pdf
I'm trying to see the exclusion and this is the sort of prose I find. (Not looking at the actual legislation but just summaries.)
2.1.3 Fuel charge relief "The purpose of the GGPPA is to reduce GHG emissions by ensuring that carbon pollution pricing applies broadly throughout Canada. At the same time, the Government recognizes that particular groups or sectors have a need for targeted relief from the fuel charge – in particular because of the small number of alternative options they may have in the face of carbon pollution pricing. Generally, relief is provided upfront through exemption certificates, when certain conditions are met. Groups eligible for targeted relief include farmers, fishers, greenhouse operators, remote power plant operators, and users of aviation fuel in the territories."
...is that how animal agriculture is included, is just relief-for-farmers and the relief-for-farmers isn't distinguishing between the various types of farmers?
I'm interested in this proposal, as I agree with the reasons you state.
Why would we want to single-out animal agriculture though? Say it is the highest-carbon among farming activities, then trying for something simpler like slowly including ALL farming should send the same signal and impact animal-farming more significantly than non-animal? I mean there's already a price signal there, right? Because of the relative carbon-intensity of animal farming.
If GPC simply pushes for faster elimination of all-farming carve-out then...
We won't be criticized for making life-choices for people.
Don't make enemies of animal farmers. We're not targeting them, it is the emissions intensity of their business which is targeting them.
Don't we want a price signal on as many industries as possible? A weaker signal on less intense industries, but ideally every industry needs it.
Keeps it simple.
Just my 2c. I've got no insight here, but I'm generally hoping GPC can veer towards simplest policies as possible.
Loading comments ...