Climate

Climate Changing For Global Warming Journalists

The overwhelming consensus on global warming among journalists may be cracking. Last week, the world’s most prestigious newsmagazine – The Economist – backed away from its past alarmist position, saying that “If climate scientists were credit-rating agencies, climate sensitivity would be on negative watch.” The Economist now discounts the high-end estimates of warming coming from the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change as being unlikely if not far-fetched.

Featured News

Alberta Needs Climate Change Criteria: AG

The province made climate change commitments in Albertans and Climate Change: Taking Action, its 2002 climate change plan and in Alberta’s 2008 Climate Change Strategy (which replaced the 2002 plan). To meet these targets, the government now needs to establish criteria for deciding specific actions, develop a master implementation plan, improve the processes for monitoring climate change results and ensure reported data is relevant and reliable, Auditor General Fred Dunn said in the report.

Environmental Policy That Creates A Freeway of Benefits for Manitobans

The benefits of upgrading Winnipeg’s Perimeter Highway to free-flowing conditions by replacing the current signalized intersections with grade-separated interchanges include reducing vehicle emissions and travel times, increasing safety, reducing fuel consumption and increasing Winnipeg’s attractiveness as a potential central transportation hub.

New COMPAS Poll: Immense Public Frustration with Politicians Over the Global Warming and Climate Change Debate

A poll released by COMPAS Research shows two-thirds of Canadians think politicians have done a poor-to-bad job of providing evidence to justify their proposals to fight carbon gases—including spending billions or levying higher taxes on gasoline or heating oil. Fewer than one in five (19%) think Canada’s politicians have done a good-to-excellent job of justifying their plans.

The Trillion Dollar Band-Aid

Likewise, it is negligent to focus on inefficiently cutting CO2 now because of costs in the distant future that in reality will not be avoided. It stops us from focusing on long-term strategies like investment in energy research and development that would actually solve climate change, and at a much lower cost.