It’s a project that is the equivalent of pressing the accelerator of climate change, when we have to slow it down and we know that the plane is a major problem.
says bluntly Patrick Bonin, head of the Climate Energy campaign at Greenpeace Canada.
He is not the only one to think that the Legault government is going completely against the efforts that should be made to curb climate change, while the IPCC recently called for a radical reduction in the consumption of fossil fuels.
Pascal Bergeron, spokesperson for Environnement Vert plus, an environmental group from the Gaspé, believes that efforts and investments should be directed towards public ground transportation, whether through adequate service by bus or train, for example. . Especially since the plan for air transport remains inaccessible for a large part of the population, he underlines.
” When we make political decisions like that, we act with complete disregard for these issues. It’s completely irresponsible. »
Airplanes, we should, in general, ground them, especially in terms of tourism and those things that are not essential needs.
Pascal Bergeron, spokesperson for Environnement Vert Plus
Photo: Radio-Canada / Martin Toulgoat
The Bas-Saint-Laurent Regional Council for the Environment (CRE), which intervenes with decision-makers and socio-economic players to encourage them to take the environment more into account, agrees.
In the era of the climate emergency, it is quite difficult to imagine how we can subsidize air transport when other types of public transport deserve just as much, and even more, to be subsidized.
” It would be a great aberration for the system announced by Quebec to make air transport more attractive compared to public road transport, which has a better carbon footprint. »
Mr. Morin agrees that it can be commendable to want to open up the regions, to make air transport accessible in an emergency situation, and to allow someone, for example, to go quickly to the bedside of a sick relative. who lives far away.
But to this extent, there is still a trap that could undo the efforts of many in the fight against climate change and the reduction of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions
he says.
Deputy Director of the Bas-Saint-Laurent Regional Council for the Environment, Patrick Morin
Photo: Radio-Canada / Jean-Luc Blanchet
If, for a single traveler and for certain long journeys, the carbon footprint can be lower by plane than by compact car, we cannot limit ourselves to this logic, believe the activists. Falling airfare costs won’t just fill planes, they say already in the air
but will have the effect of increasing the number of flights and therefore the total emission of greenhouse gases. There is a rebound effect
summarizes Pascal Bergeron.
” If it’s possible to go to Montreal in three hours, people will do it, whereas if it’s not possible, if there’s an obstacle because of the distance, well, maybe they will hesitate, and that half the time, they will let things happen. »
For him, the strategy of Minister Bonnardel and the speech of certain elected officials are very clear: They want there to be competition, several planes taxiing simultaneously, so more planes in the air and more routes
.
Ground public transport reduced to a trickle
The problem of mobility as a whole arises. The government must put in place incentives to make public transit more accessible, practical and attractive, say environmental groups.
Mobility should, according to them, be coherent from a climatic and economic point of view, so that people change their behavior about the way they move.
Travel by plane and car should be the most expensive options, and the least polluting means of transport should be the most affordable, says Patrick Morin. That’s where it’s going to make sense and where it’s going to lead people to make the right choices.
” I want to believe that a full plane is better than an empty plane, but a full bus, a full train, a full ferry is much better than a full plane. »
He regrets that train and bus transportation services have declined so much, even on roads that have the potential to be busy. We let the crowds drop, we let the divestment take place, and the drop in frequency of trips take place. We have not even ensured the maintenance of the quality of these strong links, especially when we talk about the corridor that runs along the 132 and the 20.
Ground public transport should be more attractive, say environmental groups.
Photo: Radio-Canada / Isabelle Larose
Pascal Bergeron also believes in turning the tide. The fact that the service offer is so poor means that there is no traffic.
The regions of Quebec have a territorial reality that involves immense challenges, recalls the deputy director of the CRE of Bas-Saint-Laurent. But you also have to see that collectively, year after year, we spend more than $14 billion on oil purchases in Quebec. These are individual expenses, but if we put all this private money together, we can afford better public transit. But to drop the car or the second car, the offer must come first
adds Mr. Morin.
” We have Bombardier in La Pocatière, which manufactures trains and tramways for the rest of the planet, and we are not even capable of having an electric train to do La Pocatière–Montréal, it’s absurd. »
The provincial elections in October will be an opportunity for activists to demand clear initiatives from the parties in the face of the climate crisis.
It is the entire scientific community that says there is a climate emergency. We must now have governments that are consistent with what science tells us we must do, and offer alternatives to the population.
pleads the spokesperson for Greenpeace Canada, Patrick Bonin.
In its most recent budget, the Legault government announced investments of $20 million this year to continue supporting intercity bus transportation
while 196.5 million were granted for public transport services.
Reference-ici.radio-canada.ca