"Vancouver has the vision to be the greenest city in the world by 2020. To get there, we’ve defined 10 long-term goals, each associated with a 2020-target. After talking citizens and stakeholders, we’ve created a draft action plan to meet our proposed targets." That is how begin each short video presenting these 10 targets which are :

1.Green economy

2.Climate leadership

3.Green buildings

4.Green transportation

5.Zero waste

6.Access to nature

7.Lighter footprint

8.Clean water

9.Clean air

10.Local food

During my stay in Vancouver, I write about these targets. If you cannot wait to know more about it, here the official website of the project.

The second long-term goal about climate leadership crosses many other goals. John Robinson, Executive Director of the UBC Sustainability Initiative in Vancouver, helps us to elucidate the different issues of that goal.

Unlike Canada, where the federal government "is not interested in environment" and still wants to "produce some energy, fossil fuels mostly", Vancouver should meet the Kyoto target (see the diagram below). The city seems to be on time to reduce its emissions of GHG by 6% from its level of 1990, by 2012, which is the average goal of the Protocol for industrialized countries. But as you know, the project of Greenest City was built around targets for 2020. Thus, to eliminate dependence on fossil fuels on the long-term, Vancouver set the target of reducing community-based greenhouse gas emissions by 33% from 2007 levels, by 2020.

In 2007, British Clumbia published a plan of reduction of the emissions of GHG with a target of reducing it by 33% from its level of 2007 by 2020 (and by 80% by 2050). John estimates that this provincial effort "provided some support for a strong target by Vancouver", before adding that "some institutions, like UBC, are more ambitious than Vancouver itself" : UBC already met Kyoto targets in 2007.

This long-term goal is also interesting if we consider the provincial context with its carbon tax. It really helps Vancouver to be ambitious. Many people think that the carbon tax exists to influence individual behaviors (gasoline sales, home heating, driving behavior) but the tax is still too low to have a real influence (it represents just a few percents of the price of gasoline). Though, the carbon tax is far more important for large institutions, small businesses... for which energy bills can be very significant. The UBC pays 3 million dollars a year of carbon tax. Thus, the institutions have to invest in reducing their emissions (UBC will spend about 110 million dollars in the next 4 years, "it will change the whole campus"). So we can say that the carbon tax has a real influence.

But it’s different for cities (of BC) : if they sign a certain environmental charter which commits them to reduce their emissions, they don’t have to pay the tax. So every city signs it (even if they don’t really respect it) ! Though, a very few of them have a strong climate agenda. Vancouver is an exception. For example, to reach the climate change targets that the city set for itself, they will have to retrocede almost every commercial building of the city for an average gain of about 20% (which is, I think, a way to cheat, because the operations have no positive effect on the environment). "That is a massive change" still comments John Robinson.

Vancouver identified the main sectors which emit GHG (see above). The building sector is by far the sector which is the most polluting, with 55% of the emissions of the city. Thus, the city makes strong efforts to restaure it as a clean sector (more details here about all the actions). They will develop some "integrated community energy systems", or "smart energy systems" which is to say some buildings connected to some district energy systems, with grids of electricity and heat. And the denser the areas are the easier it is to set up these systems. Such a district already exists in the Oympic Village (south east of downtown), using heat from sewage to feed the district energy system. Another exists in North Vancouver and one in UBC using natural gas, and an old one downtown but using fossil fuels.

The demographic bareer

How to reach the targets of reduction of GHG’s emissions while the city is attracting new inhabitants ? "The growing population will bring some new capital that can be invested in more efficient systems" answers John. So even if the population grows, it can still be managable to reach the targets of reductions of GHG’s emissions by investing in more efficiency. John even says that the growing population and the ambitious targets "have to go together".

However, there are stronger bareers that could prevent Vancouver from meeting climate leadership targets : a political bareer. The project has to show people that it will increase their quality of life and they won’t have to sacrify anything ; a financial bareer. It takes a lot of capital investment to achieve the target, so the city will have to use very well its money ; an institutional bareer. The most dificult is to get rid of the "past dependance", to get the sustainable way be the "normal" way. If sustainable development remains considered as different from what has always be done, as different from the norm, as an exception, then it will be difficult to take this way. Standards, performance evaluation criteria, job descriptions, codes of practice, "all of these institutional rules that determine what people do in their job have to be changed so that the system doesn’t always return to the old way".

So it won’t be easy to reach the climate leadership long-term goal but "whether they will achieve it or not is not very important, the key is to set ambitious targets to take the city to a sustainable path".

See you soon, Be green, Ben