Forgetting the past means we are likely to make the same mistakes again, or so goes the old adage. So, what can we learn from our GHG target setting in both the Kyoto and Copenhagen eras? Lots actually, but then again nothing -- its all about the PM. Alignment has been part of the negotiated settlement since Kyoto. In the past UNFCCC target setting was driven strongly by peer pressure among leaders of the G7. For Kyoto, alignment with the US -7% target lead to Canada’s -6%,

Canada has failed miserably at aligning GHG policy with our stated ambition, whether Kyoto or Copenhagen. Given our track record can we expect anything different from our forthcoming iNDC? In this post I explore key certainties and opportunities relevant to developing Canada’s post-2020 Intended Nationally Determined Contribution (INDC), which will be tabled by the Government of Canada prior to the UNFCCC’s COP 21 in Paris 2015. Three key certainties influence contribution

With March 31 fast approaching, and Canada likely to miss a soft UNFCCC deadline to submit its Intended Nationally Determined Contribution (iNDC), it seems a good time to explore issues related to setting Canada’s iNDC. This is the first in a number of posts on iNDC setting and Canada. As a bit a context, the iNDC is our new Copenhagen target that will essentially set Canada’s post-2020 GHG mitigation ambition under the emerging post-2020 UNFCCC global climate change architec