The Annex Guardian

Wisely, the Toronto plan has drawn on experience from other cities. It was drafted with advice from a panel of experts, and there is the intent for real public consultation prior to implementation. The detailed staff report shows an effort to co-ordinate activities from many stakeholders. The report acknowledges that the plan will not be successful unless the program is supported by residents. Overall, the basics are there to serve as a solid foundation on which we can begin reducing greenhouse gas emissions.

At the same time there are many areas that need work. To begin, the boring but necessary information on targets and measurements is either missing or difficult to understand. In some places the baseline is 1990; in others it is 2004. Reduction targets are a confusing mix of dates, types of emissions and percentages, in most cases without precision on what is to be measured. If we are to save the planet, we must understand our goal and be able to measure success.

Progress must be measured in ways that are more meaningful to Torontonians. In addition to targets in terms of metric tonnes of pollutants, the report could also speak of more understandable goals such as reduced smog alert days. Instead of citywide objectives in which individuals cannot see their contribution, it might be better to establish waste diversion targets by community. Maybe Council can even rename the City for a day after the community with the highest waste diversion rate. Let neighbourhoods compete to have the greatest increase in their tree canopy. Creativity in establishing targets and measures can be motivational. The result might even be fun.

The City's plan will only be achievable if residents willingly make routine decisions in favour of greenhouse gas reduction. A recent poll purports to show that Canadians are environmentalists only when someone else pays, so there is a challenge to change behaviour. One way to offset this shortsightedness is for City publicity to illustrate the many significant environmental decisions that Torontonians have made. For example, the Toronto Atmospheric Fund provided seed money that encouraged condominium builders to offer buildings that far exceed current environmental standards in construction and operation. Better yet, builders have found that offering cost savings, cleaner living and a smaller environmental footprint sells.

As the clean air plan moves toward implementation, effort will need to be made to prioritize and establish directions. Many of the other municipal plans looked for early significant successes to encourage further action. Although the report is so far without details, I suspect that the deepwater cooling of Toronto's central business district will not only provide measurable environmental benefit, but can also showcase innovation. In highlighting this example, City Hall would be prudent to send the message that being on the leading edge of environmental change can be good for innovative businesses.

Unfortunately the report includes a number of suggestions that would have better been left out. One is to 'require all large food retailers to indicate the...shipping distance for ten commonly used types of produce...'

I still don't know why knowing the mileage that bananas travel from India, Brazil or China is helpful. Another idea presented without quantification or prioritization is to replace 'brooms over...electric leaf blowers.' This idea is more likely to cause friction between downtowner and suburbanite than to promote environmental awareness. Low priority recommendations such as these are best left out of the final report.

On the main issues the clean air plan deserves more than passive support. It needs our active involvement during the consultation period to make it better. It then needs our commitment to make sure Toronto is part of the global effort to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.