After industry, the next biggest bang for our GHG emission reduction buck is transportation. Local transport emissions contribute 40% of the remaining 31% of community emissions – or 12% of all community emissions (it’s easy to see how significant industry reductions are in the big picture!)

 

The good news is, eliminating emissions from transportation is easy, will pay massive dividends (literally, for the city and for citizens/business too), and will improve everything from health and well-being to municipal taxes.

 

All the city needs to do is nudge people and business in the right direction and, more importantly, provide viable options to access goods and services. Radical technology need not apply, but it may help. All the solutions we need are already in widespread use. Just consider the 15-minute city – a city in which all goods and services can be secured within a 15 minute walk or bike ride.

 

To begin, the city must stop increasing our transportation GHG emissions. With an over bloated transportation budget, where 90% of the funding goes to increase our GHG emissions, year after year after year, the city only needs to re-align its spending practice with existing municipal policies.

 

Instead of new roads - which only increase our emissions, congestion and frustration - invert the funding priority to support the 15-minute city. We could even save millions of tax dollars annually, yet still achieve the necessary infrastructure to eliminate transportation GHG emissions (our recent budget submission identified $15 million in savings annually, which could be re-allocated to $7.5 million for GHG reducing infrastructure PLUS a $7.5 million tax reduction; or any other combination you wish).

 

The city has many options to aggressively reduce transport GHG emissions, most of which generate revenue, creating a virtuous cycle to support citizens and business in the transformation to zero transportation GHG emissions and a healthier life and economy.

 

Consider Pontevedra, Spain, a city of about 83,000 on the Atlantic, just north of the Portuguese border, comparable in size to the Sault. When the mayor was elected in 1999 he inherited a quaint but dying city. The historic centre was plagued by cars, and its narrow streets were filled with fumes, crime and drug dealers. Sound familiar? The street in front of the municipal offices saw 14,000 cars pass by a day, and business viewed the city centre as “dead."

 

By revitalising, the entire historic centre was made a car-free pedestrian area. Surface parking spots were eliminated. Outside of the city centre, speed limits were reduced to 30 kilometres an hour. Footpaths, bike lanes and green space were added.

 

The result? Zero traffic deaths since 2008, a 70-per-cent reduction in carbon dioxide emissions, 12,000 new inhabitants, a drop in crime and a 30-per-cent increase in business revenues. These actions don’t have to be couched in GHG emission reductions to make sense!

 

But a caution: Simply adding more infrastructure (sidewalks, cycling lanes, buses and greenspaces) – the current path we are on – only raises costs, especially if the car remains the dominant mobility mode, and emphasis is placed on mobility rather than access. This is why, as Pontevedra demonstrates, parking bans, lower speed limits, and car-free spaces are vital to successful revitalisation and GHG emission reductions.

 

Pontevedra has won several international awards, including the UN-Habitat award in 2014. “Most children now walk to school alone, and the streets have become alive and filled with people.” We challenge the Sault to aim for that goal.

 

Finally, the city needs to steer clear of any fossil fuel infrastructure. Like money wasted on a fleet of diesel buses soon to be stranded assets, any subsidisation of fossil fuel infrastructure will burden taxpayers long into the future, and well beyond the viability of those assets.

 

Many jurisdictions have now banned new natural gas infrastructure. Any new (or dependence on existing) natural gas infrastructure in our climate plan would fail to reflect genuine ambition required for the climate emergency and undermine the legitimacy of our climate plan.

 

Importantly, aggressive climate action produces a positive impact for the city on ratings assessments by municipal bond ratings agencies and investment firms, even where adaptation and mitigation come at a net cost. The city has yet to grasp the full gravity of this implication, both for taking – and not taking – rapid and aggressive climate action.

 

The climate emergency dictates dramatic action by Sault Ste. Marie. The great news is this is a revenue generating opportunity! It would be dangerous to ignore the present crisis or the immense opportunities available from legitimate and deep climate action.

 

Emission reductions isn’t only about reducing emissions; it’s mostly about preparing the Sault for changes that are already happening. The longer we wait, the more painful those changes will become, and the more disaster recovery and emergency aid will be needed instead of a smooth revenue-generating tax-saving life-improving transition.

 

If anything, COVID has demonstrated that it is better to plan for change than manage disaster. We need to break our addiction to the fossil economy. The resources we need already exist. All that remains is action. That can begin with realistic GHG emission reduction targets and a climate strategy that improves our community with deep and aggressive GHG emission reductions.