Community Energy and Emissions Plan (CEEP)

Share Community Energy and Emissions Plan (CEEP) on Facebook Share Community Energy and Emissions Plan (CEEP) on Twitter Share Community Energy and Emissions Plan (CEEP) on Linkedin Email Community Energy and Emissions Plan (CEEP) link

Consultation has concluded


In April 2019, the City of Moncton joined cities around the world in declaring a climate emergency. Key components of Moncton's Climate Emergency Declaration include committing to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions as well as understanding and identifying the resources necessary to achieve this goal.

The City of Moncton’s Climate Action Report outlined that the City must make it a priority to complete a strategic Community Energy and Emissions Plan (CEEP) that will guide Moncton's energy future and ensure that its GHG emissions are sufficiently reduced.


Feedback report now available

Thank you to the hundreds of citizens who shared their input for the development of the Community Energy and Emissions Plan.

Check out the 'More Info' section to the right to find the full report, which includes all comments (verbatim, i.e. as submitted) by respondents.



In April 2019, the City of Moncton joined cities around the world in declaring a climate emergency. Key components of Moncton's Climate Emergency Declaration include committing to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions as well as understanding and identifying the resources necessary to achieve this goal.

The City of Moncton’s Climate Action Report outlined that the City must make it a priority to complete a strategic Community Energy and Emissions Plan (CEEP) that will guide Moncton's energy future and ensure that its GHG emissions are sufficiently reduced.


Feedback report now available

Thank you to the hundreds of citizens who shared their input for the development of the Community Energy and Emissions Plan.

Check out the 'More Info' section to the right to find the full report, which includes all comments (verbatim, i.e. as submitted) by respondents.


Consultation has concluded

Thanks for your interest in the Community Energy and Emissions Plan project!

Feel free to submit your question(s)/comment(s) here; a response will be provided either publicly or privately.

sk a question *Require
  • Share Are we going to prioritize reducing car dependance or focus on building infrastructure for electric vehicles? For a little bit of context on how to answer this question, here is how I see the difference between the two solutions. There are advantages to both, however EVs still require massive amounts of space for parking for example. Massive parkings increases distances between destinations, which in turn increases car dependancy. on Facebook Share Are we going to prioritize reducing car dependance or focus on building infrastructure for electric vehicles? For a little bit of context on how to answer this question, here is how I see the difference between the two solutions. There are advantages to both, however EVs still require massive amounts of space for parking for example. Massive parkings increases distances between destinations, which in turn increases car dependancy. on Twitter Share Are we going to prioritize reducing car dependance or focus on building infrastructure for electric vehicles? For a little bit of context on how to answer this question, here is how I see the difference between the two solutions. There are advantages to both, however EVs still require massive amounts of space for parking for example. Massive parkings increases distances between destinations, which in turn increases car dependancy. on Linkedin Email Are we going to prioritize reducing car dependance or focus on building infrastructure for electric vehicles? For a little bit of context on how to answer this question, here is how I see the difference between the two solutions. There are advantages to both, however EVs still require massive amounts of space for parking for example. Massive parkings increases distances between destinations, which in turn increases car dependancy. link

    Are we going to prioritize reducing car dependance or focus on building infrastructure for electric vehicles? For a little bit of context on how to answer this question, here is how I see the difference between the two solutions. There are advantages to both, however EVs still require massive amounts of space for parking for example. Massive parkings increases distances between destinations, which in turn increases car dependancy.

    ShayneD asked about 3 years ago

    Good morning, 

    Thank you for your question!

    The Community Energy and Emissions Plan will consider both reducing car dependency and electrification.

    Let us know if you have any other questions or concerns in the meantime. 

    Kind regards,
    Michelle 

  • Share To whom it may concern. I have read the Climate Action Plan Report 2020 and thought it to be a good and broad approach. However, I would like to propose an alternative for the following two statements: Appendix B, where it reads "and have a vegetarian option." Appendix C, where it reads: Consider offering vegetarian or vegan options. I am all for offering vegetarian or vegan options; and that people have choices. However, I find it unacceptable under the guise of impacting the environment. Statistics Canada shows that Canada's TOTAL emissions for agriculture (both crops AND livestock), is less than 10%. https://www.canada.ca/en/environment-climate-change/services/environmental-indicators/greenhouse-gas-emissions.html Going vegetarian/vegan brings its own environmental impacts: https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20200211-why-the-vegan-diet-is-not-always-green Lastly, going vegan would only make a 2.6% impact on GHG emissions: https://clear.ucdavis.edu/blog/what-if-united-states-stopped-eating-meat Ideally, I would like the statements mentioned above to be changed to reflect potentially limiting food waste instead. This could be accomplished by focusing on buying locally grown, produced, packaged foods and choosing those that are in season. Maybe buy in bulk and share? https://ourworldindata.org/food-waste-emissions Regards, Dan Fournier 32 Deerfield Dr. Moncton NB on Facebook Share To whom it may concern. I have read the Climate Action Plan Report 2020 and thought it to be a good and broad approach. However, I would like to propose an alternative for the following two statements: Appendix B, where it reads "and have a vegetarian option." Appendix C, where it reads: Consider offering vegetarian or vegan options. I am all for offering vegetarian or vegan options; and that people have choices. However, I find it unacceptable under the guise of impacting the environment. Statistics Canada shows that Canada's TOTAL emissions for agriculture (both crops AND livestock), is less than 10%. https://www.canada.ca/en/environment-climate-change/services/environmental-indicators/greenhouse-gas-emissions.html Going vegetarian/vegan brings its own environmental impacts: https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20200211-why-the-vegan-diet-is-not-always-green Lastly, going vegan would only make a 2.6% impact on GHG emissions: https://clear.ucdavis.edu/blog/what-if-united-states-stopped-eating-meat Ideally, I would like the statements mentioned above to be changed to reflect potentially limiting food waste instead. This could be accomplished by focusing on buying locally grown, produced, packaged foods and choosing those that are in season. Maybe buy in bulk and share? https://ourworldindata.org/food-waste-emissions Regards, Dan Fournier 32 Deerfield Dr. Moncton NB on Twitter Share To whom it may concern. I have read the Climate Action Plan Report 2020 and thought it to be a good and broad approach. However, I would like to propose an alternative for the following two statements: Appendix B, where it reads "and have a vegetarian option." Appendix C, where it reads: Consider offering vegetarian or vegan options. I am all for offering vegetarian or vegan options; and that people have choices. However, I find it unacceptable under the guise of impacting the environment. Statistics Canada shows that Canada's TOTAL emissions for agriculture (both crops AND livestock), is less than 10%. https://www.canada.ca/en/environment-climate-change/services/environmental-indicators/greenhouse-gas-emissions.html Going vegetarian/vegan brings its own environmental impacts: https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20200211-why-the-vegan-diet-is-not-always-green Lastly, going vegan would only make a 2.6% impact on GHG emissions: https://clear.ucdavis.edu/blog/what-if-united-states-stopped-eating-meat Ideally, I would like the statements mentioned above to be changed to reflect potentially limiting food waste instead. This could be accomplished by focusing on buying locally grown, produced, packaged foods and choosing those that are in season. Maybe buy in bulk and share? https://ourworldindata.org/food-waste-emissions Regards, Dan Fournier 32 Deerfield Dr. Moncton NB on Linkedin Email To whom it may concern. I have read the Climate Action Plan Report 2020 and thought it to be a good and broad approach. However, I would like to propose an alternative for the following two statements: Appendix B, where it reads "and have a vegetarian option." Appendix C, where it reads: Consider offering vegetarian or vegan options. I am all for offering vegetarian or vegan options; and that people have choices. However, I find it unacceptable under the guise of impacting the environment. Statistics Canada shows that Canada's TOTAL emissions for agriculture (both crops AND livestock), is less than 10%. https://www.canada.ca/en/environment-climate-change/services/environmental-indicators/greenhouse-gas-emissions.html Going vegetarian/vegan brings its own environmental impacts: https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20200211-why-the-vegan-diet-is-not-always-green Lastly, going vegan would only make a 2.6% impact on GHG emissions: https://clear.ucdavis.edu/blog/what-if-united-states-stopped-eating-meat Ideally, I would like the statements mentioned above to be changed to reflect potentially limiting food waste instead. This could be accomplished by focusing on buying locally grown, produced, packaged foods and choosing those that are in season. Maybe buy in bulk and share? https://ourworldindata.org/food-waste-emissions Regards, Dan Fournier 32 Deerfield Dr. Moncton NB link

    To whom it may concern. I have read the Climate Action Plan Report 2020 and thought it to be a good and broad approach. However, I would like to propose an alternative for the following two statements: Appendix B, where it reads "and have a vegetarian option." Appendix C, where it reads: Consider offering vegetarian or vegan options. I am all for offering vegetarian or vegan options; and that people have choices. However, I find it unacceptable under the guise of impacting the environment. Statistics Canada shows that Canada's TOTAL emissions for agriculture (both crops AND livestock), is less than 10%. https://www.canada.ca/en/environment-climate-change/services/environmental-indicators/greenhouse-gas-emissions.html Going vegetarian/vegan brings its own environmental impacts: https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20200211-why-the-vegan-diet-is-not-always-green Lastly, going vegan would only make a 2.6% impact on GHG emissions: https://clear.ucdavis.edu/blog/what-if-united-states-stopped-eating-meat Ideally, I would like the statements mentioned above to be changed to reflect potentially limiting food waste instead. This could be accomplished by focusing on buying locally grown, produced, packaged foods and choosing those that are in season. Maybe buy in bulk and share? https://ourworldindata.org/food-waste-emissions Regards, Dan Fournier 32 Deerfield Dr. Moncton NB

    fournierd asked over 3 years ago

    Good afternoon,

    Thank you for taking the time to read our Climate Action Report. We appreciate your valuable feedback. 

    These suggestions have been passed along to our Director of Environmental Planning and Management for consideration. 

    Let us know if you have any other questions or concerns in the meantime. 

    Kind regards,
    Michelle