climate change

31 petitions

Update posted 2 days ago

Petition to Lawrence MacAulay

End food waste in Canada!

Every year, $31 billion of food ends up in a landfill in Canada alone. This isn't just stale bread and mouldy produce. This is good to eat food of all sorts. Produce, dairy, grain, protein, and everything outside of those. Yet, nearly one million Canadians rely on food banks each month, and about four million Canadians are "food insecure", of which 1.5 million are children. In 2015, the French government passed a law forbidding supermarkets from wasting and deliberately destroying food that can still be eaten. Instead, supermarkets have since been required to donate all unsold food products to charity such as food banks. A similar anti-food waste law can and should be implemented in Canada, nationwide. As it is, Quebec is now requiring that all supermarkets give unused food to foodbanks. Doing the same on a federal scale is not inconceivable. It is doable, and it is already being done in communities worldwide. In addition to the people who would be positively affected, food waste contributes greatly to climate change. Reducing food waste would benefit our environment. This petition urges the Govenment of Canada through the Hon. Lawrence MacAulay, Minister of Agriculture, to create a federal program to combat food waste. The program will: Bar supermarkets from intentionally destroying and wasting unsold, still edible food Require Canadian supermarkets to give unsold, still edible food to Canadian food banks Require Canadian supermarkets to give wrongfully packaged or damaged, still edible food to Canadian food banks The law passed in France began with a simple petition not much different from this, on this very website. That petition received over 200,000 signatures. Our goal is to obtain 100,000 and to gain national attention to this very real issue. With your support, we can make a difference, and we can show our government what matters to us.  We need you. We need your voice. We need your support. Please sign and share this petition to bring change and to bring this law into Canada! Use the #WhyWasteFood and #FoodDeservesBetter when sharing or discussing this campaign on Facebook, Instagram, and Twitter! -- Learn more: A $31B problem: How Canada sucks at reducing food waste Man who forced French supermarkets to donate food wants to take law global Help the environment, reduce food waste

Justin Kulik
87,223 supporters
Update posted 3 days ago

Petition to City of Richmond BC - Mayor and Councillors

Limit House Sizes on Agricultural Land Reserve (ALR) in Richmond, B.C.

It’s time to look beyond the aisles of the local supermarket and recognize that farmers are vital for food security and are the heart of Canadian industry and life. Canadian farmers are the top global producers of flaxseed, durum wheat, lentils, canola, pulses, peas, and mustard seeds. Last year, Canadian fruit and vegetable farmers added $1.8 billion dollars to the economy and employed over 2 million Canadians. Moreover, Canada is the 5th largest exporter of food in the world. Undoubtedly, Canadian farmers are remarkable and contribute in countless ways to Canada’s economy. They ensure that we have access to quality food. We owe a great deal to the hard work of those farmers who toil every day to put food on our tables. It is for this reason that swift action must be taken to prevent people from taking advantage of farming incentives meant for people who are actually contributing to the farming industry. Richmond is facing challenging issues concerning illicit property uses on land reserved for agriculture. Because of a controversial city council decision (with the exception of councillors Carol Day and Harold Steves) it is now possible for buyers – who, if we are honest, are speculators – to build extravagant estates on farmland. In doing so, they are gaining two benefits at the expense of local farmers: bypassing residential lot guidelines and pricing policies, and avoiding British Columbia’s new foreign-buyer 15 percent residential tax. To put the problem into perspective, the City of Richmond allows 10,794 square feet (1,000 square metres) mega-mansions on land designated as farmland. This is twice the maximum size recommended by the B.C. Ministry of Agriculture. To suggest that a nearly 10,794 square foot dwelling, with a ten-car garage, a twenty-five-seat theatre, tennis court, swimming pool, and 15 bedrooms or more is a “farmhouse” is absurd. Based on our respect for local farmers and their outstanding work, we should be advocating that the provincial 5,382 square feet (500 square metres) maximum farmhouse guidelines are upheld and formalized into law.  Special exemptions should be rare, only made for legitimate farmers, and issued on a case-by-case basis. It is time for us to act, now, and preserve our precious farmlands and hold our City Council to account. Richmond has some of the best farmlands in all of British Columbia, and we must do everything in our power to protect the Agricultural Land Reserve (ALR) and ensure our future residents’ food security. ~ Jack Trovato THEREFORE: We, the undersigned, citizens of the City of Richmond, are concerned about the threat to our Agricultural Land Reserve (ALR). The recent decision of Richmond City Council to allow mega-mansions to build up to 10,794 square feet (1,000 square metres) is double the provincial recommended maximum size, and nearly triple the maximum recommended size per City staff recommendations. Provincial guidelines specifically state that house sizes on ALR lots should be sized appropriately to divert development to city lots. As the current bylaws stand, large home development is diverted onto farmland. We petition the City of Richmond to: □   Implement a moratorium on new applications to build on ALR lots until; □   A maximum house size of 5,382 square feet (500 square metres) is expediently adopted as bylaw.

Richmond Citizens' Association (RCA)
4,572 supporters
Started 4 weeks ago

Petition to Pat Toomey, Robert Casey

Pennsylvanians Could Be Paid for Their Excess Energy - But Utilities Standing In The Way

The sharing economy is nothing new. For years now, we have been able to share the extra space in our homes with travelers and earn extra income with Airbnb, or give rides to folks in our cars with Uber or Lyft. So isn’t it about time that we be given the choice to share our energy use with neighbors and get paid to save energy? Turns out in some states, that is already happening. Hundreds of thousands of people in California have their energy usage data available to them through the Green Button Connect program and are being paid for their choice to consume less energy (in addition to the lower energy bills they see) but in Pennsylvania, we still don’t even have access to see how much energy we are using in a given moment! And that needs to change. You have been entitled to payments for saving energy for two years, but utilities are blocking this progress by dragging their feet on the decision to give utility customers the power to choose whether or not they share their energy data. Since 2014, residents of California have been able to register their utility accounts with energy sharing services (like OhmConnect), which sends each user a text message once a week asking them to turn down their electricity consumption during times of peak demand in their neighborhood. If the person chooses to participate, they can get paid simply by turning off their lights and energy-sucking appliances for an hour. They are empowered to share energy energy with their neighbors, which is good for the planet (it produces zero carbon emissions) and puts money back in their pockets. In Pennsylvania, utilities have throttled Pennsylvanians’ opportunity to participate in energy sharing programs by not allowing residential customers to have insight into how much energy they use on a daily basis. Accessing this energy data is key in seeing how much participants save during those times of peak demand by decreasing their electricity consumption. Without access to the data, who knows how much energy customers save? If you were running the grid, wouldn’t you pay someone to save energy instead of paying to build new power plants? The social cost, both economic and environmental, is lower to pay users to reduce their usage instead of paying a dirty power plant to turn on. It’s time for utility companies to appropriately compensate customers willing to reduce their energy usage. Tell Senator Casey and Senator Toomey that Pennsylvania residents should be able to participate in the energy sharing market - supporting climate progress and earning money in the process.  

57 supporters