The marked progress on climate change in Kyoto has slowed as the US and Canada resist the need to reduce emissions at home.

The sense of progress at last December's climate change conference in Kyoto, Japan, has been replaced by frustration as both Canada and the US resist calls from western European and developing nations to ensure that the "flexibility mechanisms" in the Kyoto Protocol do not undermine the protocol's effectiveness.

The Kyoto Protocol contains several flexibility mechanisms:

• emissions trading, which allows developed nations to trade their emissions allocations so that emission reductions can occur where they are least expensive or have the greatest benefits;

• the clean development mechanism, which allows developed nations to get credit for projects in the developing world which reduce emissions; and,

• joint implementation, which allows developed nations to get credit for emission reducing projects in other developed nations.

While the Protocol adopts these mechanisms in principle, the details have yet to be determined. And, if flexibility mechanisms are to be something other than massive loopholes, these details are important.

Crucial issues unaddressed

Recent negotiations in Bonn, Germany in early June were supposed to make progress in defining the details. On behalf of the so-called "Umbrella Group" of nations that includes the US, Japan, Australia and Russia, Canada introduced a proposal for how the trading regime could work. Unfortunately, the proposal failed to deal with some crucial issues.

Despite the Kyoto Protocol's requirement that trading be supplemental to domestic actions for meeting emission reduction commitments, Canada and other members of the Umbrella Group intransigently resisted any cap on the extent to which nations rely on trading or the clean development mechanism to fulfill their commitments. This sends a message to developing countries that the three highest per capita emitters in the developed world (the US, Canada and Australia) are unwilling to reduce their emissions. That message is hardly helpful in convincing developing countries that they, with per capita emissions only one-tenth of Canada's, should accept commitments.

Umbrella Group backsteps

The Umbrella Group also resisted European Union proposals for rules that would limit "hot air" trading. Under the Kyoto Protocol, Russia and the Ukraine received emission rights far in excess of their likely business as usual emissions in 2010. Canada and others have taken the position that these excess emission rights can be sold from Russia and the Ukraine to the US and Canada. The result is that Canadian companies — rather than investing in projects in Canada or Russia that increase efficiency and reduce greenhouse gas emissions — simply buy hot air from Russia and the Ukraine.

Trading in hot air has the potential to allow a four to seven percent increase in emissions from the developed world.

The Umbrella Group resisted EU proposals that would invalidate emission rights purchased from a nation, which is later found to be out of compliance with its commitments. In the absence of this sort of "buyer beware" provision, emissions trading could allow the environmental effects of one nation's non-compliance to multiply.

None of the parties submitted detailed proposals on how the clean development mechanism should work. Without rigorous methods for setting baselines against which emission reductions are measured and without strong and independent institutions to verify reductions, this mechanism could be the Protocol's biggest loophole.

On the bright side, in an informal workshop, Canadian representatives admitted the need for controls against a nation rapidly selling all its emission rights if it is obvious such rights will be needed for compliance. Also on the bright side, the issue of how to count atmospheric removals of carbon dioxide by soils and trees was referred to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change — the international panel that represents scientific consensus. This referral was important, as it should help ensure that inclusion of forest and soil carbon sinks has scientific validity. The IPCC special report will hopefully elaborate on the risks that carbon stored in soils and trees will be released into the atmosphere as a result of climate change. Scientists have warned that trees and soils, which now generally remove carbon dioxide from the atmosphere, could become major sourcesof emissions over the next few decades as a result of climate change.

Progress on climate change will require Canada and its friends in the Umbrella Group to shift from a focus on ensuring maximum flexibility and freedom of the marketplace to developing proposals that allow flexibility but do not harm the environment.

West Coast Environmental Law and ONE/Northwest have just completed an extensive upgrade of the West Coast office communications and computer systems. Thanks to a generous gift from ONE/Northwest, we were able to replace our aging (ten years plus) network system, and upgrade seven workstations to Internet capabilities. We are particularly grateful to Dean Ericksen and Jon Stahl for all their onsite time setting up our new systems, and then teaching us how to use them. Our own staff member Christopher Heald played a key role in the upgrade. Now all West Coast staff have the Internet at their fingertips.

ONE/Northwest identified us as a good candidate for a communication upgrade. We are a vital legal resource for the BC environmental community, but our effectiveness depends on our ability to communicate quickly, efficiently and effectively with our clients. Inadequate computer equipment has hampered our ability to fully harness the potential of electronic communications in our work. Outdated desktop workstations were making it difficult to produce online legal materials, and an aging network server was providing limited, slow and unreliable email access, making it difficult for us to communicate effectively with our clients.

With ONE/Northwest's assistance, we will be able to take far greater advantage of electronic communication in our day-to-day work, and more effectively fulfill our role as a source of legal information in a province which often fails to provide an adequate legal framework for environmental protection.

The upgrades to the West Coast systems took place in the last two weeks, and all staff now have immediate desktop access to the Internet. We are planning to use these upgrades to improve our ability to spread action alerts about emerging issues to our members and supporters. In the past, we have relied on the mail and fax to build support for an environmental campaign. For example, West Coast was heavily involved in the grassroots opposition to the Multilateral Agreement on Investment (MAI) this spring, but was unable to use broadcast e-mail to distribute breaking news to campaign members.

ONE/Northwest is a Seattle-based environmental organization that helps groups in the Pacific Northwest use electronic net working tools to protect the environment. ONE/Northwest's generous grant is part of its Electronic Networking Projects (ENP) program. Each year, ONE/Northwest selects several ENPs, and provides project participants with the resources they need to make powerful use of online communications in their work. Since 1996, ONE/Northwest has provided over $350,000 worth of computer equipment, hands-on training and services to hundreds of activists in over one hundred conservation organizations. ONE/Northwest can be reached by email at info@onenw.org, or at their web site at http://www.onenw.org/

Library Update

The library at West Coast Environmental Law is a valuable information resource for environmentalists, students and lawyers. Over the past year the library has been reorganized and we have continued to add to our collection in a wide range of subject areas. We have titles in areas ranging from first nations treaty negotiation issues to world trade. Here are some of our recent acquisitions:

• Dismantling Democracy: The Multilateral Agreement on Investment (MAI) and its Impact; edited by Andrew Jackson and Matthew Sanger (Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives). This book looks at investors' rights vs. people's rights under the MAI as well as the impact of the MAI in various sectors including environment, culture, public and social services, municipalities, and telecommunications.

• Citizen's Guide to Pollution Prevention, by Karen Clark (Canadian Institute for Environmental Law and Policy). This guide provides an introduction to pollution prevention (P2), how it is achieved, and how it can be practiced at home and in the community.

• New Directions for Public Land Law, by Steven Kennett (Canadian Institute of Resources Law). This report is an examination of the role and character istics of public land law as the basis of public land management in Canada.

• Cancer Causing Substances: A worker's guide to understanding and eliminating them from the work environment. This document was prepared by the Occupational Health Clinics for Ontario Workers in cooperation with and for the Canadian Auto Workers.

For additional holdings, visit our web site and search the library catalogue online. You can also feel free to call Sandra in our library (601-2511) to find out if we have material related to your particular area of research. Our library is open to public Monday to Friday, 8:30 am to 5:00 pm.

Agricultural Land Loses Out to Development

Despite the best efforts of environmental group Farm Folk/City Folk, the provincial government approved the removal of 136 hectares (335 acres) of farmland near Kamloops from the provincial Agricultural Land Reserve. This political decision was made to facilitate a development known as Six-Mile Ranch.

The Agricultural Land Commission (ALC) ruled in July 1997 that the farmland should not be removed from the Agricultural Land Reserve, but the provincial Cabinet subsequently overturned this ruling. Cabinet exercised its discretion to declare the proposal to be in the "provincial interest," thereby removing the decision from the jurisdiction of the ALC. What the provincial interest is isn't defined in the legislation.

To quell the public fury arising from this decision, Cabinet took a tried and true method of distracting attention by appointing a Commission of Inquiry. Public hearings were held in Kamloops and Vancouver, but key information relating to the proposal was not available in time for those making submissions to the Commission. Commissioner David Perry noted in his final report that the timeframe provided was not sufficient for the public to fully participate in the hearings.

With funding assistance from the our Environmental Dispute Resolution Fund, Farm Folk/City Folk went to court to challenge Cabinet's right to use the provincial interest clause and to carry out the Commission of Inquiry. Unfortunately, the BC Supreme Court ruled against Farm Folk/City Folk. The Court decided that the Commission had met all necessary legal requirements and complied with rules of procedural fairness.

Although the agricultural land was not protected in this case, the efforts of Farm Folk/City Folk have played a significant role in the government's decision to strengthen the Agricultural Land Reserve.

The province has now promised to establish standards which, in the future, must be met before Cabinet can declare a project to be in the provincial interest. We hope the provincial government will adopt strict criteria that will make it very difficult to remove land from the Agriculture Land Reserve for political reasons. We will be pushing the government to pass a regulation setting out the standards for invoking the provincial interest clause; if set out in a regulation, the standards will be legally binding. If the province ignores our advice, and simply chooses to set standards as part of a policy, there may be another case similar to Six Mile in the near future.

Reaching Out to Spread the Green Word

We are delighted to announce a new initiative of West Coast Environmental Law. With the support of the province through the Youth Strategies Program, administered by BC Hydro, we have hired a youth intern for a summer project designed to reach out to the Chinese-language communities.

Ellen Hui, a commerce student at UBC and native Cantonese speaker, has been hired for the three-month project to investigate what environmental issues might be of concern to this large community. With over twenty percent of recent immigrants to BC speaking Chinese as their first language and no identifiable services offered in Chinese by environmental groups, it seems clear that there is a large hole in our environmental network.

As a starting point for this project, Ellen is trying to make contacts with others who either are connected to a segment of the Chinese community, or who are active in environmental issues and have some thoughts about reaching out to this language group. She is hoping to set up a series of meetings with Chinese language cultural and community groups, to:

• identify environmental issues of interest or concern (ie, the tree bylaw in Vancouver, fisheries closures along the coast, urban waste management),

• discover what environmental values are important to the Chinese language community, and for the subgroup of recent immigrants of that community, what environmental values might have influenced their immigration,

• develop ideas for environmental education among different language communities, tailored to meet unique cultural needs and qualities; and,

• discuss the relationship between the environment and the economy, and what a sustainable economy in British Columbia might look like.

While we are very excited about this project, it remains unclear what the specific outcomes might be. Our goal is to find ways to talk about environmental issues that other cultural groups feel are important, and to begin to understand any concerns the Chinese-language group may have about environmental protection initiatives.

We hope, over time, to build a network of environmental allies in various language communities who will liaise with us about environmental issues and help us meet the environmental education demands of those communities. If any of our readers have suggestions or ideas for this project, please contact Ellen at ehui@wcel.org or toll free throughout BC at 1 800 330 WCEL.

Welcome Aboard! Notes from the WCEL AGM

Jessica Clogg. Jessica is currently completing her articles for her law degree, and holds a combined law and masters of environmental science degree from York. She is a past summer student and volunteer with West Coast, and was the first coordinator of our Endangered Species Coalition. She has recently finished her thesis in community forest planning.

Tanner Elton. Tanner brings a long background in public sector experience and consulting and holds a Masters of Law. He has taught as a sessional lecturer, and currently acts for a number of companies, government agencies and ministries in the development of policies and procedures. He has also been involved in the development of environmental policy nationally and within provinces.

Sarah Groves. Sarah returns to our board after a brief absence. She holds a doctorate degree in ecology and has been an instructor in environmental sciences at Capilano College and UBC. She brings a wealth of experience in environmental policy, planning and management, as well as environmental and socio-economic impact assessment. Her past association with West Coast included serving as treasurer, editing Chris Rolfe's work on climate change, and helping redesign our newsletter.

Sandra Isaac. Sandra brings a background of more than twenty years of experience in archival, legal and anthropological research in support of aboriginal land claims. She works as an independent consultant to a number of First Nations clients, and is an editor of the Assembly of First Nations Bulletins. Recently Sandra worked with "HEAL" — the health, environment, aboriginal life committee.

Jef Keighley. Jef brings a background in labour and development issues to West Coast. He is currently the national representative for the CAW, as well as the vice-president of the BC Federation of Labour. He also serves with the Trade Union Group, which works with worker, peasant and community organizations in Latin America. He brings experience in popular and adult education on labour, development, political economy and anti-racism.

Helga Knote. Helga brings nineteen years of experience in the labour movement and has been active in coalition building between labour and environment. She is currently the Vice-President of the BCGEU and is also the Chair the Union's Environment Committee. She also sits on the Canadian Labour Council's Environment Committee. She is co-chair of the BCGEU Women's Committee and sits nationally at the NUPGE committee.

David Russell. David is another long-time volunteer and project worker with West Coast. He holds an undergrad law degree from Carleton, and is currently working as a litigation project manager with Indian and Northern Affairs. He has previously helped West Coast on a variety of research projects on such issues as whistle-blower protection, environmental information costs, fisheries management, and environmental issues in treaty negotiations.

After the AGM, internationally-renowned author, academic and activist Dr Vandana Shiva spoke to a standing-room only crowd about globalization and biodiversity. Dr Shiva leads the Research Foundation for Science, Technology and Ecology and she serves as an adviser to governments and nongovernmental organizations, including the International Forum on Globalization, the Women's Environment and Development Organization, and the Third World Network. She is widely recognized for her contributions to the fields of women and environment, biodiversity, biotechnology, intellectual property rights and ecological issues related to agriculture. Her books include Staying Alive, Ecology and Politics of Survival, Ecofeminism, Violence of the Green Revolution, Monocultures of the Mind, and Biopiracy. It was a great pleasure to have her participate in our Annual General Meeting.

If you missed our AGM this year, we hope to see you next year! Copies of our annual report are available on request, or you can view the report on our web site.

Residents May Breathe Easier Soon!

Four years ago, the residents came to West Coast for help after their own efforts to address the problem had failed. With assistance from our Environmental Dispute Resolution Fund, the residents engaged in a many-faceted campaign. They brought a civil action and an appeal to the Environmental Appeal Board, and they participated in ongoing negotiations as well as levying pressure through the media and on local politicians. This year the group's efforts finally paid off: the Greater Vancouver Regional District successfully prosecuted Money's under the GVRD Air Quality Bylaw. This precedent-setting prosecution netted a fine of $100,000 against Money's.

The decision to move the plant is coupled with a plan to build an enclosed facility. If Money's gets all of the necessary approvals, construction of the new plant should start by the end of this summer, so local residents may have to wait until next year to celebrate the closure of the Surrey plant. Peter Bladt of the residents group said he won't open the champagne yet, but if this really happens, this victory is a great example of what communities can do if they keep pushing government and don't give up!

Sihota's Legacy to Toronto

Former BC Environment Minister's stand may lead to more stringent fuel standards

Four years after Moe Sihota began calling for tighter vehicle and fuel standards, the federal government is mulling over options for regulating sulphur content in fuel. If the federal government adopts the most stringent standards under consideration, they could avoid more than one hundred premature deaths annually across Canada.

Sulphur in fuel directly affects the array of pollutants that contribute to smog: fine particulate, sulphates, volatile organics, ground level ozone, nitrous oxides and hazardous air pollutants. Sulphur in gasoline also interferes with the emission control systems on cars, reducing the effectiveness of catalytic converters and potentially causing the failure of the onboard diagnostic systems of the low emission vehicles that will become the North American standard in 2001.

Three options

In April 1998, Environment Canada released its long awaited report on setting a level for sulphur in fuel. For sulphur in gasoline the report lays out three options:

• Adopt a uniform national average sulphur content standard of 30 parts per million (ppm) by 2002. This is similar to the standards in effect in California. As a variant on this approach, the report suggests either delaying this standard until 2005 in those parts of Canada outside of the Windsor-Quebec Corridor, or exempting gas sold outside of the Windsor-Quebec corridor and the Lower Fraser Valley.

• Adopt a 150 ppm average standard to all of Canada in 2002 (roughly equivalent to the BC standard for gas sold in the lower mainland after 1999).

• Defer action until gasoline requirements for US "Tier 2" vehicles are determined. Under the US Clean Air Act the US cannot adopt the Tier 2 standard until 2004. This option (preferred by gasoline refiners) means no action until at least 2004.

Both of the first two options mean significant improvements for the environment and human health. Currently, average sulphur content in gasoline is around 350 ppm for Canada and 260 ppm for BC. In seven cities alone, the California standard was estimated to avoid, in each year it was in place, 82 premature deaths, 261 hospital visits and some 60,400 days in which people needed to restrict their activity due to pollution levels. Benefits would not be limited to the seven cities which were studied.

The benefits of a rigorous standard far outweigh the costs. Adopting the California standard would add less than one cent to the cost per litre of gasoline, although it could hasten the closure of several refineries across Canada.

Low sulphur, better health

Several recent events have increased pressure on Environment Canada to adopt the most stringent standard. First, the International Joint Commission has officially asked the governments of Canada and the US to adopt the uniform 30 ppm national standard. Second, a major study published in the May 1998 issue of the Canadian Journal of Public Health showed a strong relation between negative human health effects and the mix of sulphur dioxide, nitrogen dioxide and carbon monoxide to which Canadians are exposed in most urban areas. These effects have not been considered in analysing the pros and cons of more stringent sulphur standards, and suggest that the benefits of lowering sulphur were likely significantly underestimated.

The report also discusses sulphur levels for off-road diesel uses such as ferries and railways. Currently, a 500 ppm standard already exists for on-road diesel, and a significant portion of diesel sold for off-road uses meets the low sulphur standard; however, the average sulphur content of diesel does not meet the low sulphur standard. In fact, it is very high — 4,130 ppm in BC. The report estimates that a low sulphur standard for off-road diesel would avoid, each year, 46 premature deaths, 145 hospital visits and some 33,700 days in which people would need to restrict their activity due to pollution levels. Despite this, the report avoids specific recommendations on sulphur content of off-road diesel, recommending instead that Environment Canada study the issue further and determine an appropriate sulphur standard by 1999.

The failure to recommend standards for low sulphur diesel is disappointing. Possibly because crown corporations are the largest consumers of off-road diesel, the provincial government appears reluctant to regulate on this front. Information obtained by West Coast from BC ferries shows that 67 percent of the fuel used by BC ferries had an average sulphur content of 3,200 ppm. Only 23 percent of our ferries meet the 500 ppm standard applicable to on-road diesel users.

Credit to Sihota is due

If federal standards for gasoline are set, former BC Environment Minister Moe Sihota can take credit for getting the regulatory ball rolling. His support for more stringent emission standards led to the establishment of a Task Force on Clean Vehicles and Fuel by the Canadian Council of Ministers of Environment. Within the Task Force, Sihota's ministry aggressively pushed for strong recommendations on gas and vehicle standards. The CCME subsequently adopted a Task Force recommendation that Environment Canada adopt a 200 ppm or lower gasoline standard by January 1997, to come into effect by 2000.

West Coast's letter to Environment Canada supporting promulgation of stringent sulphur standards is available on our web site.

— Chris Rolfe