Canada and global warming: a state of denial 2

796 posts / 0 new
Last post

I had this nightmare that I was in a bizarro world where in the face of this climate chaos our NDP and Liberal governments are spending money building and facilitating pipelines and LNG infrastructure. I hope I can make my way to an inter-dimensional portal somewhere because this cannot be the only reality, there must be a saner one out there somewhere.


NDPP wrote:

US heatwave: Could US and Canada see the worst wildfires yet?

"If you do a 10-year running average, the annual area burned is about one million or just over in the late 60s and 70s and today it is about 2.6 million hectares. A study by climate researchers said the heat that scorched western Canada and the US at the end of June was 'virtually impossible' without climate change..."


As forest fires rage in Russia's remote Yakutia region...

"...The region's Ministry of Ecology believes that the catastrophe has been caused by extremely abnormal heat, with a government report stating that this is the first time in 150 years of observation that such temperatures have been recorded in a period of little precipitation..."

Russia has dispatched military aircraft to help deal with the unprecedented 300+ wildfires  currently ravaging Siberia.

"US heatwave: Could US and Canada see the worst wildfires yet?" It looks like we are as we see a recording number of wildfires from BC to northwestern Ontario and we haven't even hit peak wildfire season, which is in August-early September. 

CBC is reporting that there are currently 307 wildfires in BC with 28 being wildfires of note that threaten communities or vast areas.  There have been 1,081 wildfires so far this including the one that destroyed 90% of the village of Lytton, more than three times the normal number for this point in the summer. 

A look at downtown Lytton, B.C., before and after a fire swept through the village on June 30, 2021.View image in full screen

A look at downtown Lytton, B.C., before and after a fire swept through the village on June 30, 2021. Left: Tourism Lytton Instagram; Right: Submitted to Global News

A look at downtown Lytton, B.C., before and after a fire swept through the village on June 30, 2021. Left: Tourism Lytton Instagram; Right: Submitted to Global News

Also in BC, as global warming increases the wildfire risk,

More than 1,500 properties in B.C.'s Cariboo region are under an evacuation order issued Wednesday because of wildfires in the area, while other fires are threatening the communities of Ashcroft and Cache Creek.

The Cariboo Regional District issued an order Wednesday for 1,074 properties in the area from Flat Lake to Green Lake, south of 100 Mile House. Another order covers 482 properties to the east, from Canim Lake to Mahood Lake.

"Due to immediate danger to life safety due to fire, members of the RCMP or other groups will be expediting this action," the district said.

The entire community of 100 Mile House and people in the nearby Horse Lake area are now under evacuation alerts. There are roughly 2,000 people living in 100 Mile. The Horse Lake bulletin covers 3,086 properties. 

People in those areas are asked to be prepared to leave their homes at a moment's notice. Interior Health says it has begun moving a small number of patients with complex needs from 100 Mile District General Hospital while the wildfire threat continues, but the hospital is otherwise operating normally.


Ontario has issued an emergency order because of the wildfire situation in the northwest of the province. The desperation, as numerous wildfires burn across BC, the prairies and northwestern Ontario, can be heard in Chief Dean Owen of the Pikangikum First Nation in northwestern Ontario said in a written statement: "With so many communities being evacuated due to the fires, we are all competing for limited resources and space." Global warming is stressing Canada's ability to fight wildfires to the limit and beyond as our boreal forests burn and threaten lives. 

A forest fire burns Friday, July 15, 2011 about 270 kilometres north northeast of Sioux Lookout, Ont.

Forest fires rage across northern Ontario (Toronto Star)

The province issued an emergency order early Wednesday due to forest fires in northwestern Ontario, allowing the government to "take special measures to ensure the safety of people and the protection of critical property."

As of Wednesday morning, more than 70 forest fires were burning in the region, a day after 18 new ones were reported.

Some of the forest fires are close to communities, and have led to evacuations, including in the First Nation communities of Deer Lake, Pikangikum and Poplar Hill. ...

A restricted fire zone remains in place for the Kenora, Fort Frances, Dryden and Thunder Bay districts, and portions of the Sioux Lookout, Red Lake, and Nipigon districts. No outdoor burning is currently allowed in those areas.



Saskatchewan  is entering the "second week of record-breaking, raging wildfires" as wildfires flame up from northern Ontario to BC in the new normal created by global warming.

A forest fire burns late into the evening northeast of Prince Albert, Sask., on Monday, May 17, 2021. The Saskatchewan Public Safety Agency says the number of wildfires continues to increase as the province enters its second week of battling various blazes.

Saskatchewan wildfire

The Saskatchewan Public Safety Agency says the number of wildfires raging in the province continues to increase as it enters its second week of battling various blazes. ...

He said there were 137 active wildfires in the province Friday, which was eight more than Thursday. A total of 382 wildfires have hit Saskatchewan so far this year — 170 more than the province’s five-year average. ...

The public agency said it is supporting 63 people who were evacuated from the city of North Battleford in Saskatchewan. Roberts said there are nine communities and their surroundings affected by the fires, but rain in the forecast over the weekend could reduce some wildfires.


Because of flooding brought on by torrential rains induced by the rising temperatures created by global warming,  the atmosphere absorbs more moisture before letting it go in a sudden outburst. As a reuslt of such torrential rains, there are 125 confirmed dead and more than a thousand people missing in western Europe. The url below includes a video of the damage done as buildings collapse, houses collapse and helicopter rescues occur. When will people start taking global warming seriously?

This aerial photo shows flooding in Erftstadt, Germany, on Friday.

Rhein-Erft District/@BezRegKoeln/Twitter

More than 1,000 people are still missing after record rainfall caused devastating floods in Germany and neighbouring Belgium. Helicopter rescue teams have been sent in to assist residents stuck in cities and villages inundated by floodwaters. Rivers and reservoirs burst their banks across the region, triggering flash floods when the saturated soil couldn’t absorb any more moisture. In parts of western Germany, more than 150 litres of rainwater per square metre fell over 24 hours.

More than 100 people are known to have died in that country. Ross Hull takes a closer look on the damage, and reports on what’s ahead in the forecast.


Lethal Heat Hits The Planet

"The news does not get much worse than a recent scientific report that the planet is trapping twice as much heat as it did 14 years ago. If this one report does not turn heads and create a sense of panic to get off fossil fuels, as soon as yesterday, then nothing will ever move the needle to fix the planet's broken climate system.

Meanwhile, making matters doubly bad and emphasizing that the planet is absorbing twice the heat, NASA reported 2020 as the 'hottest year ever.' And by all appearances, 2021 is shaping up to break the records again, as abnormally high temperatures throughout the planet, exceed all-time records.

The planet is literally in a burn mode like humanity has never experienced, and nobody is doing anything about this burning dilemma with any sense of global reach.

Meanwhile, talk of holding back temperature by curbing emissions at the nation/state level remains, like always, very cheap and ineffective. As well as totally remiss of the big picture of a global mess that requires global unity, or the lights go out fairly soon, here and there all across the land..."

'Something is taking its course...' Endgame: S Beckett

Edzell Edzell's picture

NDPP wrote:

If this one report does not turn heads and create a sense of panic to get off fossil fuels, as soon as yesterday, then nothing will ever move the needle to fix the planet's broken climate system.

Nothing will ever move the needle to fix the planet's broken climate system.

Edzell Edzell's picture

kropotkin1951 wrote:

I had this nightmare that I was in a bizarro world where in the face of this climate chaos our NDP and Liberal governments are spending money building and facilitating pipelines and LNG infrastructure.

The climate chaos nightmare IS reality and has little or nothing to do with party politics, it's with mass  human behaviour. As your town burns around you or you are swept away in the flood, you won't likely be thinking "Darn, I knew I should have voted for *****"          I believe worldwide disaster is now unavoidable and  in that respect party politics is irrelevant.

Edzell Edzell's picture

It is pretty obvious that earth's climate is now in the grip of 'positive feedback' loops that are unstoppable in the foreseeable future, and perhaps forever. The situation arises from the fact that there are too many people in the world, far too many of whom have become wedded to a lifestyle of unending over-consumption. Even if they could be convinved to accept the chaos that would result from voluntarily making drastic changes (which they will not) I thnk it is too late to avert the disaster that we now see beginning.

Edzell Edzell's picture

Duplicate post removed


Edzell wrote:

The climate chaos nightmare IS reality and has little or nothing to do with party politics, it's with mass  human behaviour.

To say that party politics has nothing to do with the situation we are is to ignore the evidence to the contrary. While no government anywhere has done enough to combat climate change, some governments have been worse than others. In the US Jimmy Carter started an alternative energy program that Reagan terminated and then helped accelerate fossil fuel development. 

As my 20 year old son says, if we had started as late as 1980 decreasing greenhouse gas emissions by a mere 2% a year we would already be more than 80% of the way towards eliminating fossil fuel emissions. Instead, mainstream economists, like the politicians they advised, ignored the problem.

Western Europe hasn't done enough, but it's done far more than Canada to reduce emissions. While China has done more to develop solar energy than any other country, they also chose to continue exponentially growing its coal production, thereby becoming the world's number one emitter. Russia is showing no signs of cutting back on its emissions. 

However, Canada is the world's number one emitter on a per capita basis among the top ten greenhouse gas emitters. The oil producing provinces and their political parties have been significant contributors to the emissions. And the track record of the Liberal and Conservatives governments has been atrocious. But the Conservatives, until 2019 didn't even pretend they were trying to deal with global warming. The Liberal record has been of promising to reduce emissions and doing the exact opposite for 24 years as the following outline of their history shows.

(1) “Canada has missed two separate emission reduction targets (the 1992 Rio target and the 2005 Kyoto target) and is likely to miss the 2020 Copenhagen target as well. In fact, emissions in 2020 are expected to be nearly 20 per cent above the target.” (

The Chretien Liberals were deeply involved in negotiating the 1997 Kyoto Accord agreeing that "Canada's Kyoto target was a 6% total reduction by 2012 compared to 1990 levels of 461 Megatonnes (Mt)". Instead the 1997 emissions of 671 Mt during the year of the signing of the Kyoto Accord had risen to 747 Mt in 2005, the last full year of a Liberal government before the Conservatives took over. This was 33% above the 1997 Liberal Kyoto target. Martin did little in office to fulfill the Liberals Kyoto promises.  The Liberals have failed previously failed to meet their greenhouse gas reduction goals of 1992, 1997, and 2005. (

(2) The Trudeau Liberals declared a climate emergency in June 2019 as he prepared for an election and then announced the next day the tripling of the Trans Mountain pipeline to carry bitumen to the coast bringing about a massive expansion of the fossil fuel production. Trudeau won the understatement of the year award today when he said "Not everyone will agree with this".  

(3) In March 2018 the auditor general concluded  the Trudeau Liberal government "is likely to miss the 2020 Copenhagen target as well". (

(4) In April 2019 Environment Commissioner Julie Gelfand concluded "Canada is not on track to hit its 2030 target,". These targets were actually those of the Conservative Harper government. (

(5) the Trans Mountain pipeline to the BC coast to triple tarsands oil transportation that Trudeau purchased and is building it with "the total cost of taxpayers' investment in the Trans Mountain expansion to more than $17 billion" ( that will further increase emissions, money that could have been used to shift to green renewable energy;

(6) Trudeau looked at approving the Frontier Mine in Alberta, which "would  cover 24,000-hectares (roughly double the size of the City of Vancouver) and would produce 260,000 barrels of bitumen each day at its peak ( making it one of the largest oilsands mines until the company pulled out of the plan;

 (7) Trudeau pushed the completion of Enbridge's Line 3 to Manitoba in December 2019 that " will have oil export capacity of 760,000 barrels per day (bpd)" when the US portion is finished this year ( The final approval and start of construction of the American portion began at the beginning of December 2020 over the legal objections of two American First Nations, thereby contributing to more Canadian greenhouse gas emssions in the future.

(8) Trudeau supported a $14 billion LNG pipeline from Ontario to Saguenay Quebec for export to Europe, Asia and Brazil that only failed to come to fruition when Warren Buffet concluded it was not going to work financially (

(9) Trudeau also supported Energy East to build a pipeline to the Maritimes until he realized its lack of support in Quebec threatened his 40 Quebec Liberal MPs. "The reason Prime Minister Justin Trudeau spent billions of taxpayer dollars to keep the Trans Mountain pipeline expansion alive while letting the Energy East pipeline proposal die is simple.“Just do the seat count,” Black, an elected member of the Canadian Senate representing Alberta, told BNN Bloomberg in a telephone interview from Calgary. “Quebec was opposed to Energy East and at that point in time it just became insurmountable.” (

(10) The Trudeau government "treated Donald Trump’s election as “positive news” for Canada’s energy industry and welcomed the help of Canada’s main corporate oil group in lobbying the US administration, documents show." ( Therefore, there is no doubt the Trudeau Liberals are celebrated the announcement that work on the US portion of the XL pipeline would resume in February. Again this fell through, this time because of US court action, not because of the Trudeau government. 

(11) Once again the Trudeau government is speaking out of both sides of its mouth as it changes offshore drilling rules in Newfoundland in order to make it easier for the fossil fuel industry to meet them and then proclaiming that the industry must live up to those standards while environmental organizations complain about the changes.  The Liberal government has also excluded new drilling from environmental assessment there. This has become even more important with the announcement of the discovery of oil in two new places in the Newfoundland offshore. 

(12) The Trudeau Liberals are redefining emissions to make them look lower. 

Canada's vast managed forest lands used to be critical allies in our climate fight and efforts to build a sustainable, carbon neutral forestry economy. That's because these forests used to be healthy enough to absorb the huge amounts of CO2 created by the logging industry's harvests — plus lots more. ...

Unfortunately for all of us, our forests' deep and valuable carbon sink has nearly dried up. Decades of human abuses — from climate disruption to clearcutting — have left them too battered and weakened to even keep up with business-as-usual logging. Put simply: Our continent-spanning managed forests are now being cut down faster than they are growing back. The result has been a rising flood of CO2 pouring out of our managed forests and accumulating in our atmosphere — worsening both the climate and ocean acidification crises. (

(13) In December 2020 , the Trudeau Liberals gave $41.5 to Husky Oil in Newfoundland to keep the "idled West White Rose offshore oil project going, particularly to "protect the option of restarting" in the next year — although there is no guarantee that will happen." Meanwhile Trudeau continues to proclaim his devotion to stopping greenhouse gas emissions. I guess he is just following his strategy before the last election of proclaiming a climate change emergency one day and literally the next day buying the Trans Mountain pipeline.  The $41.5 million, which is half the project cost, is in addition to the $325 million the Trudeau government handed the Liberal Newfoundland government to support the Newfoundland oil industry, after Husky stopped construction on the project in April due to the low price of oil. More subsidies poured into a sunsetting industry. (

(14) The Trudeau Liberals are following the same delay, delay, delay climate plan they have since Chretien in 1993 by refusing to have a target for greenhouse emissions reduction target for 2025 and instead setting the target date as 2030, when they would have been in power for 15 years, which given history is unlikely to happen. In other words, they don't want any target that could hold them accountability for failure in the forseeable future, depsite demands from environmentalists that early target dates are critical to dealing with global warming. 

     A prominent French-Canadian scientist who chairs France’s High Council on Climatesays Canada needs to commit to a 2025 carbon pollution reduction target and strengthen its net-zero advisory body. Le Quéré has led a new scientific analysis of global emissions, published March 3 in the peer-reviewed journal Nature Climate Change, that found global pollution cuts need to increase tenfold to meet the goals of the Paris Agreement. ... The analysis, “Fossil CO​2​ emissions in the post-COVID era,” points out that Canada is one of 150 countries where emissions increased between 2016, after the Paris Agreement was adopted, and 2019, the year before the pandemic.(


Edzell, here's more on the choices the Trudeau government has made that has helped ensure we are the world's number emitter on a per capita basis. Even the Trump administration, which is as pro fossil fuel as it gets, had only a 0.6% increase in fossil fuel emissions thanks to some state and local efforts, while Canada under Trudeau had 3.3% growth in fossil fuels and every other G7 country cut emissions during this period (see below). " Among the top 10 total greenhouse gas emitters, Canada and the United States have the highest per capita greenhouse gas emissions at 22 tCO2e per person and 18 tCO2e per person." (

Governments are not doing enough, but to say that who is power makes no difference is simply not true when it comes to cutting emissions and in that respect the Canadian governments, federal and provincial are some of the worst in deal with global warming.

Canada’s now official 2030 greenhouse gas emission reduction target is a far cry from what’s needed to avoid climate breakdown, say critics panning the goal for its inadequacy.

Prime Minister Justin Trudeau previously announced Canada’s intention of setting its 2030 target at 40 to 45 per cent below 2005 levels. ...

“A range of 40 to 45 per cent (is) not in line with what the world's top climate scientists are saying is needed to avoid catastrophic warming,” she said, adding “it's far short of Canada's fair share.”

Canada’s estimated fair share is in the neighbourhood of 60 per cent below 2005 levels by 2030, according to a study from EnviroEconomics and Navius, commissioned by a handful of environmental groups.

From 2016 to 2019, Canada’s emissions jumped 3.3 per cent, according to a reportfrom the Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives, the Corporate Mapping Project, the Parkland Institute,, West Coast Environmental Law, and That’s far more than the United States’ 0.6 per cent growth over that same period, and is a significant failing compared to the other five G7 countries, which managed to curb GHG emissions by 4.4 per cent to 10.8 per cent. ...

Environmental Defence national program manager Dale Marshall said Canada’s lack of action and ambition amount to climate change denial. “It's not denying the science, it's denying what needs to be done to deal with it, which is phasing out fossil fuels,” ...

Canada is also far behind its commitments to other countries, Marshall says, pointing to a goal under the Paris Agreement for wealthier countries to put up about US$100 billion annually for developing countries to meet climate goals. “Canada's fair share of that has been assessed at about four per cent, so that's $4 billion US per year, and we're delivering less than $1 billion,” he said.

Marshall said despite the new targets, he didn’t see any new measures to achieve them outlined in the NDC.

Edzell Edzell's picture

Edzell wrote:

It is pretty obvious that earth's climate is now in the grip of 'positive feedback' loops that are unstoppable in the foreseeable future, and perhaps forever. The situation arises from the fact that there are too many people in the world, far too many of whom have become wedded to a lifestyle of unending over-consumption. Even if they could be convinved to accept the chaos that would result from voluntarily making drastic changes (which they will not) I thnk it is too late to avert the disaster that we now see beginning.

(Apologies for quoting myself) :). I see nothing there I would retract but perhaps it would somewhat clarify my ideas to say: The majority of voters has always been more concerned with loyalty to a party and the effect of its ideology on personal wealth, than in distant/complex concepts like the health of the planet; and: Political parties recognize this and pander to it in order to gain or retain power. None of  them would ever have taken the steps needed, or risked the grim consequneces, to significantly affect climate change. And they still won't - but it probably no longer matters.


The extreme weather disasters across Europe and North America have driven home two essential facts of science and history: The world as a whole is neither prepared to slow down climate change, nor live with it. The week’s events have now ravaged some of the world’s wealthiest nations, whose affluence has been enabled by more than a century of burning coal, oil and gas — activities that pumped the greenhouse gases into the atmosphere that are warming the world.


NDPP wrote:

Greenland Bans All Oil Exploration

"The government of Greenland has decided to suspend all oil exploration off the world's largest island, calling it 'a natural step' because the Arctic government 'takes the climate crisis seriously.'

'The future does not lie in oil. The future belongs to renewable energy, and in that respect we have much more to gain,' the Greenland government said in a statement. The government said it 'wants to take responsibility for curbing the global climate crisis..."

Canada should do the same.

Some governments are responding in a major way to moving away from fossil fuels, such as Greenland which is stopping exploration for oil, but not Canada, which, under Trudeau, is trying to increase our oil reserves. As a result, he has opened up offshore Newfoundland for further oil exploration that has already had two test wells find oil and is even excluding this exploratory drilling from having to undergo a federal impact assessment. 

Canada’s environment minister defended government regulations Wednesday related to the impacts of oil drilling off the coast of Newfoundland and Labrador.

Environment and Climate Change Minister Jonathan Wilkinson told the House of Commons environment committee that “all drilling projects must respect high environmental standards” after a Bloc Québécois MP raised questions about a government rule change meant to help industry.

Monique Pauzé asked Wilkinson about the Liberal government’s announcement in June that it was excluding individual exploratory offshore drilling projects from having to undergo a federal impact assessment. 

That change was touted by the government at the time as lending a helping hand to Newfoundland and Labrador's offshore oil industry, which has been battered by the pandemic’s economic toll as well as low global oil prices. Natural Resources Minister Seamus O'Regan said it was the “number 1” request that “business and investors” had been asking for. ...

Last week, energy company Equinor said it had discovered oil in two locations east of St. John’sfollowing an exploration drilling campaign. Newfoundland and Labrador's oil and gas industry group called the discoveries, which Equinor made with partner BP Canada, an “encouraging” sign for business “at a time when encouraging news is needed.”

Environmental groups have raised concerns about the government’s exploratory drilling exemption. WWF-Canada, Sierra Club Canada Foundation and Ecology Action Centre have said a larger regional assessment of the impacts of exploratory oil drilling off the province’s coast was “flawed” and so cannot be used as a basis for allowing individual exemptions.

One of Canada’s marine refuges, the Northeast Newfoundland Slope is also east of St. John’s. The 55,000-square-kilometre section of the ocean is important for biodiversity since it contains fragile corals and sponges that help out other marine life by acting as spawning grounds or nurseries, according to the Department of Fisheries and Oceans.

“In your documents, you talk about biodiversity of oceans,” Pauzé asked Wilkinson in French. “You excluded important offshore drilling projects from environmental assessments ... is there not a contradiction in terms of what the government’s saying?” ...

Equinor's two discoveries appear to have been made to the southeast of the marine refuge's southern tip based on location data sourced from the Canada-Newfoundland and Labrador Offshore Petroleum Board and the fisheries department.




One sign of how truly far we have to go in Canada in transforming our fossil fuel culture, is that Saskatchewan still gets 40% of its electricity from coal, the worst of all fossil fuels when it comes to carbon dioxide emissions. 


Source: SaskPower

Canada has made a phase-out of traditional coal-fired electricity generation a centrepiece of its GHG emissions reductions strategy, and for good reason – although coal produces approximately 10% of the country’s electricity, it produces more than 75% of the country’s electricity-related emissions. ...

Saskatchewan and Alberta accounting for more than 85% of all coal burned in the country. While Alberta has developed its own plan to phase-out coal generation by 2030 (thanks to the NDP Notley government), Saskatchewan currently has no serious plans when it comes to coal, which is a serious problem. ...

In 2016 coal accounted for over 40% of SK’s power generation. Alarmingly, in the province’s 2017 climate change strategy, Prairie Resilience, coal is barely mentioned and only in relation to exploring the viability of further Carbon Capture and Storage implementation, despite the fact that SaskPower has cast doubt on the future of CCS.


BC has become "Canada's first province to introduce a business and environmental strategy on how renewable and low-carbon hydrogen can reduce emissions and create jobs in the clean technology sector." It propses using hydrogen hubs to provide energy for transportation and industry. While hydrogen itself does not emit greenhouse gases, it can be produced from sources that do or do not produce these emissions. The minister said the government is open to exploring both options. But if it chooses the latter this shift in energy source defeats a large part of the reason for shifting energy sources. 

Funding will support additional hydrogen fuelling stations and the development of a hydrogen and fuel cell partnership organization in British Columbia

Bruce Ralston, minister of energy, mines and low carbon innovation, said Tuesday the strategy uses actions involving government, industry and innovators to help achieve net-zero carbon emissions by 2050.

He said the short-term goals include establishing regional hydrogen hubs to supply fuel to industries and consumers, while increasing the numbers of medium and heavy-duty vehicles powered by hydrogen on highways and at industrial sites. Ralston said hydrogen produces no carbon emissions when burned or used in a fuel cell and is considered a climate-friendly solution to industrial activities where the use of electricity is not practical.

Hydrogen can be produced from many sources, including both fossil fuels and renewable resources, although the B.C. plan would support the so-called green pathway, using hydro electricity to create the fuel. 

The Pembina Institute, an organization that focuses on energy policies, said in a statement Tuesday it welcomed the hydrogen strategy but was concerned the province would still allow development of so-called blue pathway uses of hydrogen from fossil fuels, including natural gas. "While B.C.'s new strategy proposes to ramp up production of green hydrogen, made from the province's abundant renewable energy resources, it also encourages continued development of natural gas for the production of blue hydrogen, which still has significant greenhouse gas emissions," said regional director Karen Tam Wu. B.C.'s gas sector produces the highest amount of carbon pollution in the province at 20 per cent of total emissions, she said.

Ralston said the green hydrogen pathway has the potential for development because of the province's electricity grid, but blue hydrogen initiatives could also be explored. The minister acknowledged B.C.'s previous attempts to embrace the technology more than a decade ago that included development of a hydrogen highway from B.C. to California, were ahead of their time and are now better positioned to succeed. Ralston said B.C. is a global leader in the area, with more than 50 per cent of Canada's hydrogen and fuel-cell companies located in the province and where about 60 per cent of research investment is conducted.


Climate Proof Canada (CPC) is urging the government to complete a National Adaptation Strategy (NAS), extend national flooding risk mitigation, and appoint a natural disaster resilience adviser. While climate change adaptation needs to be done because globally we have delayed and delayed action on global warming CPC also argues that climate change has "“taken up most of the oxygen in the room”, I am concerned that not also emphasizing reducing emissions could leave us in a terrible position. 


Climate Proof Canada Research - Canadians want government action on severe weather (CNW Group/Insurance Bureau of Canada)

Climate Proof Canada Research - Canadians want government action on severe weather (CNW Group/Insurance Bureau of Canada)

 Climate Proof Canada, a broad coalition of insurance industry representatives, municipalities, Indigenous organizations, environmental non-government organizations (NGOs) and research organizations. The coalition is encouraging the federal government to take action now to create a culture of preparedness and build a more disaster-resilient country. 

To address this growing challenge across a massive country, governments need to develop the capacity to better coordinate strategy and implement actions that keep our homes and communities safe from the increasing impacts of severe weather.

That is why the Climate Proof Canada coalition is calling on the federal government to better defend Canadians by:

  • Prioritizing the completion of the National Climate Adaptation Strategy, ensuring it protects people and infrastructure from the threat of increased flooding, wildfire, heat, drought and extreme weather events, with specific recognition of and attention to the disproportionate impacts of these events on Indigenous peoples and vulnerable communities. This strategy should incorporate measurable targets, leverage private-sector capacity and promote nature-based solutions; 
  • Appointing an advisor on national disaster resilience to inform and advise Cabinet and the Prime Minister's Office on the rapidly changing landscape of climate-based and other risks; 
  • Extending and enhancing its recent work to reduce the risk and impact of flooding across Canada; and 
  • Ensuring that sustainable finance initiatives help public and private sector organizations assess, disclose and manage escalating physical risks.

Like many countries, Canada is taking steps to reduce emissions as part of its commitment to fighting climate change. This is a crucial undertaking. But Canadians are already seeing and feeling the effects of our changing climate – including more frequent and intense floods, wildfires and hailstorms.


More evidence that Enbridge's Line 5 which carries 540,000 barrels of crude oil each day from Canada through the American Midwest and back into Canada may be shut down relatively soon, not by the actions of Trudeau but by the Americans because of its environmental risks. 

 Line 5 cuts east and then south around Lake Michigan, Line 61 runs south from Superior into Illinois before connecting with smaller lines that cross Indiana and Michigan and ultimately reach Sarnia, Ontario.

A 2017 map illustrates Line 5's route among the network of Enbridge pipelines called the Lakehead System. Leaders of the Bad River Band of Lake Superior Chippewa, whose reservation on the south shore of Lake Superior is crossed by Line 5, say the pipeline should be decommissioned and its contents diverted through other routes. Credit: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

For several years, one of Enbridge’s main arguments for continuing to operate the pipeline, Line 5, was that it would soon build a tunnel to encase the riskiest portion of the pipeline, the part that crosses through the Straits of Mackinac. The Straits of Mackinac is an environmentally sensitive channel connecting Lake Michigan to Lake Huron, and a spill from the aging pipeline would be devastating to the local economy, ecosystem, and drinking water. The risk of such a spill is what pushed Whitmer to revoke Enbridge’s right to operate the pipeline. But Enbridge has said its proposed tunnel, which it said it planned to start building this year, will protect the waters from any potential spill.  

“Placing a pipeline in a new Great Lakes Tunnel will provide extra layers of safety and environmental protection and make what is currently a safe pipeline even safer,” Enbridge said in a statement emailed to Grist. 

Last week, however, federal officials made a decision that casts severe doubt on Enbridge’s optimistic timeline, increasing the likelihood that the Line 5 pipeline will eventually be shut down for forever. 

The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, the federal agency that regulates civil works projects, is now going to require Enbridge to conduct an environmental impact statement for the proposed construction of the tunnel, instead of the more surface level “environmental assessment” that Enbridge initially proposed doing. Under the National Environmental Policy Act, or NEPA, an environmental impact statement is required if a proposed federal project is determined to significantly affect the environment.

“This would be the first federal NEPA analysis that [Line 5] would be subject to, ever,” said Oday Salim, a lawyer for the National Wildlife Federation, a nonprofit conservation organization that works to protect the Great Lakes. “It really does affect everything,” he told Grist. 

Because the pipeline, built in 1953, predates certain environmental laws, it has never before been subject to an environmental impact statement.  Enbridge has acknowledged that this environmental review will delay construction of the tunnel, calling into question the idea of the tunnel as a quick fix.


"16,600 people were affected, 21,708 hectares of farmlands flooded and 22 bridges destroyed after two reservoirs' dams collapsed in Hulun Buir, North China's Inner Mongolia on Sun after heavy rainfall..."


BC First Nation & Partners Propose New $10 B LNG Megaproject

"...The Nisga'a Nation, whose territory is north of Prince Rupert near the Alaska border, is partnering with a group of Western Canadian natural gas producers called Rockies LNG Partners and a Texas-based energy company called Western LNG.

The project is called Ksi Lisims LNG and would include a pipeline to transport natural gas from the northeast corner of the province to the coast. The facility itself is estimated to coast $10 billion. The chilled natural gas would be loaded on to ships and exported to Asia..."


Just what we don't need a 24 hour new Fox weather channel to spread lies about global warming. 

Scientists and watchdog groups are wary of the new venture, anticipating the network’s weather arm will prove just as politicized and detached from reality as its cable news lineup. Photo by Johnny Silvercloud / Flickr (CC BY-SA 2.0)

Rupert Murdoch’s Fox Corporation, a media empire with a long history of peddling climate disinformation, is entering the world of 24-hour weather coverage.

The billionaire media mogul plans to launch Fox Weather later this year, with the intent that it will rival the popular Weather Channel. It has been poaching meteorologists from other networks, The New York Times reported last week. 

Scientists and watchdog groups are understandably wary of the new venture, anticipating that the network’s weather arm will prove just as skewed, politicized and detached from reality as its cable news programming. Fox News commentators and their guests are constantly downplaying and denying the global threat of climate change, even amid historic and deadly heat waves, wildfires, hurricanes and drought. ...

Susan Joy Hassol,  director of the non-profit organization Climate Communication and a co-author of three National Climate Assessments, noted a 2010 University of Maryland survey that found the more a person consumed Fox News, the more likely they were to be misinformed about climate change. A more recent Public Citizen analysis found that 86 per cent of climate segments that aired on Fox News in 2018 included claims dismissing or casting doubt on the global threat.


BC, like other provinces and the federal government, has no emergency plan for the global warming events that are now hitting the country.


As the crisis manifests, it’s time the provincial government gave its climate plan a reboot, writes columnist Seth Klein

British Columbia is having its summer of reckoning with the climate emergency. Like other places before — California, Australia, Honduras, the Philippines — the province in which I reside is now experiencing a shift in the popular zeitgeist. With a jolt to our collective consciousness, most of us now understand the emergency is well and truly upon us.

First it was the extreme heat event that shattered temperature records, killing about 500 people in less than a week (over a third as many as died in B.C. from COVID since the start of the pandemic), and cooking to death as many as a billion coastal sea creatures. This has been followed by hundreds of wildfires, forcing the evacuation of thousands from their homes and, most dramatically, burning the entire town of Lytton to the ground. Already the province has spent over $95 million fighting the fires, and it’s only mid-July. It’s been an unsettling summer, as we emerge from one crisis and stumble into the next — out of the frying pan and into the fire. And no, this is not the new normal. It is but a taste of things to come. ...

We need our governments to approach the climate emergency with the same ambition and urgency with which they confronted the pandemic. Only they aren’t. Not federally (as I’ve written previously), and not here in B.C., the focus of this column. We meet this moment unprepared, without a genuine and robust climate emergency plan, and with a political leadership that seems unwilling or unable to “get it” on climate.

CleanBC, the province’s official climate plan, introduced in late 2018, is frequently touted as the strongest such plan in Canada. And relatively speaking, it likely is. But that’s not saying much. What the plan is decidedly not is an actual climate emergency plan.

Marker 1: Spend what it takes to win The lofty commitments of CleanBC are not yet reflected in the B.C. budget, where one must always see if fine words are backed up with real dollars. Former World Bank chief economist Nicholas Stern, author of the Stern Review on the Economics of Climate Change, has said governments should be spending two per cent of their GDP on climate-mitigation efforts, which in B.C., translates to about $5 billion per year. But total climate spending by the B.C. government amounts to about $1.1 billion a year ($800 million of which isn’t actual climate spending, but rather, represents the carbon tax credit for lower-income households, offsetting the cost of the carbon tax). So the province isn’t spending a little less than it should, it’s underspending by at least a five-fold order of magnitude. ...

Marker 2: Create new economic institutions to get the job done Again, nope. While past NDP governments in the 1970s and ’90s created new Crown corporations to meet strategic needs (public auto insurance, BC Housing, the Agricultural Land Reserve, Columbia Basin Trust, etc.), this NDP government has created no new public enterprises to meet the climate emergency (although last week it announced a new partnership with, wait for it, Shell Canada to build a so-called Centre for Clean Energy and Innovation). The province should establish a new generation of public entities to mass produce and deploy the items we need to electrify our communities — heat pumps, solar arrays, wind farms, electric buses, etc. — and end our reliance on fossil fuels. BC Hydro, with visionary leadership, could be driving much of this....

Marker 3: Move from voluntary and incentive-based policies to mandatory measures Here, for the record, is a chart of B.C.’s greenhouse gas emissions over the last 20 years (up to 2019, the last year for which we have data).

The chart is a deeply disturbing indictment of our failed approach to climate policy. To put this in the language we’ve all come to know in the pandemic, B.C. governments have failed “to bend the curve.” But why? Because almost every climate policy to date is voluntary. ...

Marker 4: Tell the truth In an emergency, we need leaders to be forthright about the severity of the crisis, and rally us to the task at hand. That’s what we’ve all witnessed during the pandemic, with daily briefings on the state of the emergency. But try searching the CleanBC plan for the words “climate emergency” or “climate crisis.” You will seek in vain. Nothing about the plan or how the government talks about it communicates urgency.

Most significantly, the B.C. government continues to propagate a deadly falsehood, namely that we can take meaningful climate action while continuing to double-down on the production of fossil fuels, specifically in B.C.’s case, fracked gas and LNG. That’s the opposite of telling the truth.


The Trudeau Liberal government also needs to treat our current situation like a climate emergency. Obviously, it isn't.

After a year in which the pandemic stalled progress on climate mobilization, momentum seems once again to be picking up. The Supreme Court has said the federal government can and should lead. ...

Yet a harrowing gap remains between what science says is required and the policy and budgetary commitments we’ve seen so far. Some say we should make allowances for the special challenges faced by the Trudeau government. “Canada is a country that produces and exports its energy, and so I understand that this will not be easy,” our prime minister said in his speech to last week’s Leaders Summit on Climate convened by U.S. President Joe Biden.

The Supreme Court of Canada, in its March decision on the federal carbon price, seems to have recognized a moment of similar imperative, with implications well beyond the modest tool of carbon pricing. As the majority decision of the court stated, the climate crisis represents a “threat of the highest order to the country, and indeed the world… The undisputed existence of a threat to the future of humanity cannot be ignored.” ...

So, the federal government has the legal right to act in the national interest and the moral duty to forcefully do so. The mobilization we now need cannot be prevented by the foot-dragging of some provincial governments. ...

There is also a compelling economic argument for federal leadership. As this pandemic year has highlighted, it is the feds who, with the Crown-owned Bank of Canada at their disposal, have the fiscal capacity to spend what is needed to confront this crisis.

Sadly, however, this federal government has so far shown no sign of truly understanding the climate emergency. As last week’s budget made clear, the money is simply not yet forthcoming to realize our critical climate goals.

The government’s tendency to announce and then reannounce big spending commitments, and to spread that spending out over many years, can make it hard to isolate exactly what is being promised. Helpfully, Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives researchers Hadrian Mertins-Kirkwood and Clay Duncalfe have done the task for us. After a careful review of all the federal government’s climate spending commitments last year and this year, they conclude the government is proposing to allocate “just $31 billion (over six years) — approximately $5.1 billion per year — to the cause. That’s the equivalent of 0.25 per cent of Canada’s GDP.”

Meaning nowhere near what it should be. As I explained in my last column, the Biden administration is proposing to spend much more as a share of the U.S. economy. If Canada were to take the advice of leading climate economist Nicholas Stern, we would be spending two per cent of GDP on climate action, or about $40 billion a year. ...

The federal government’s approach to the climate crisis, in the main, remains focused on incentivizing — with tax cuts, carbon pricing, rebates and cajoling — households and businesses to take climate action. This strategy is destined to fail.


Despite all global warming crises occurring globally, including across Canada, just 59% of Canadians in a Leger poll agreed that they saw it as due to human actions such as fossil fuels and just 45% believed the federal government should be doing more. With numbers like that we are in deep trouble when it comes to dealing with the multiple crises being created by global warming. 

CAUSE OF THE HEAT WAVE (1/2)CTC693. Is the unprecedented heat wave gripping western North America the result of:

Base: All respondents (n=1,518)

59%                                                                                            41%

Human actions such as burning fossil fuels      Natural phenomena such as ocean currents and the jet stream

Climate breakdown is obliterating heat records, killing people, killing crops, and just burned another Canadian town to ash. Western Europe and Uganda are suffering cataclysmic flooding. Drought is causing famine in Madagascar. All while we are still well below supposedly “safe” levels of overheating. Surely this is a massive wake-up call for the public, and all that’s needed now ispolitical will for governments to act much more urgently? ...

Pollsters asked Canadians across the country what caused the recent heat wave. The folks at Leger wanted to know whether people thought “the unprecedented heat wave gripping western North America” was the result of climate change or natural causes?

Fifty-nine per cent blamed “human actions, such as burning fossil fuels,” while 41 per cent said “natural phenomena, such as ocean currents and the jet stream.”

Fifty-nine per cent is a solid majority, but I think you’ll agree it’s not the five-alarm wake-up call that’s warranted. Nor the kind of public juggernaut that requires politicians to scramble to the front or get crushed underneath.

There’s still a huge gulf between the general public’s understanding and the scientists who determined the heat wave was virtually impossible without humans driving climate change.

Those polling results come from just one question from just one pollster, but they track other findings. The usual patterns emerge when you dig into the results: Quebecers were most likely to attribute the heat wave to human actions, while Albertans were the most dubious. Just 39 per cent of Albertans blamed fossil fuel burning.

Young people understand the situation much better than older generations. Almost three-quarters of Canadians aged 18 to 34 lined up with the scientists.

If all Canadians were as clued-in as younger generations, politicians would be acting with a lot more urgency. But a very large segment of the population is still coming to terms with the severity of climate change.

That’s why you find polls from earlier this year where just 45 per cent of Canadians thought the feds need to be doing more to tackle climate change. And 71 per cent that rated its performance on climate as “acceptable” or “good.” At the provincial level, we still have provincial governments that are actively hostile to climate action, even ones, like the Ford government in Ontario, where the fossil fuel industry doesn’t dominate politics and public debate.


Some good news on global warming: a majority of workers in the fossil fuel industry are willing to transition out of the greatest contributor to global warming. If only the fossil fuel corporations were willing to do this also.


A new poll found a majority of fossil fuel workers recognize the threat of climate change and support Canada pivoting to a net-zero economy.

A majority of Canadians working in fossil fuels are interested in switching to jobs in the net-zero economy, but are worried about being left behind, according to a new poll. The poll, released Wednesday morning, was done by an oilpatch worker-led organization, Iron & Earth, in partnership with Abacus Data, and surveyed 300 fossil fuel workers across Canada from May 24 to June 11. Ninety per cent of workers surveyed believe they could transition to at least one type of net-zero technology with 12 months or less of training, according to the poll results.

Edmonton-based machinist Stephen Buhler has worked in oil and gas for over 12 years and says we can’t afford to delay the transition away from fossil fuels any longer. “Not making the transition means that a lot of workers like myself are going to be stuck with jobs that aren't in demand the way that they were before,” he said.

The poll also showed 61 per cent of workers worried about having to invest money into retraining, and 64 per cent were concerned with the time commitment involved. Nearly 85 per cent of workers said they would participate in a paid training program of 10 days or less, with that number dropping to 70 per cent if they had to pay out of pocket.

“For the vast majority of other workers, taking on the financial burden of a year's training, or even four years’ training … that's a pretty tough pill to swallow,” said Buhler, adding the government should step up to help alleviate the financial burden of retraining.

Luisa Da Silva, executive director of Iron & Earth, agrees. “The key here, really, is paid, rapid upskilling training for fossil fuel workers,” she said. ...

According to Iron & Earth’s calculations, Da Silva said, it would cost approximately $10,000 on average to rapidly upskill one worker, and to do the entire fossil fuel industry workforce would cost upwards of $5.5 billion. ...

Despite an overall high desire to switch to net zero and broad recognition of the threat of climate change, the poll found 60 per cent of workers worry they’ll be left behind in this transition without further training or career support.

“Until there is action by the government, which includes a just transition plan with paid training for fossil fuel workers, it's understandable that a lot of workers may be hesitant,” said Da Silva.

Ultimately, it all boils down to jobs, said Ed Brost, who worked for Shell for 30 years before retiring to start his own consulting company.

“People need jobs, they need income, they have to take care of their families and their needs, and people are talking about changing your job … of course, it's going to be apprehensive. I would be,” said Brost.


The Floods in Europe and the Bankruptcy of Capitalism

"...The flood disaster exposes in numerous ways the bankruptcy of capitalism and its political representatives. First, it is the direct product of the climate crisis produced by the capitalist profit system, which is leading to ever more extreme weather events. The consequences of climate change fuel events like the current flood destruction and ultimately threaten the very survival of the planet and all humanity. These consequences have been understood for a long time..."


Smoky Skies Stretch Across Canada as Wildfires Burn (thread)

"Smoke from nearly 800 active wildfires has been transported all over Canada this week, making its way as far east as Newfoundland..."


NDPP wrote:

Smoky Skies Stretch Across Canada as Wildfires Burn (thread)

"Smoke from nearly 800 active wildfires has been transported all over Canada this week, making its way as far east as Newfoundland..."

Smoke from the western fires raging from Baja California to BC are also reaching Greenland (see photo of Greenland smoke in the first url below) and the East Coast of the US and is leaving the thick haze covering Toronto in the picture below, with air quality alerts being issued in a number of places. 

Satellite images show that smoke has traveled thousands of miles from fires burning in the Pacific Northwest and California to reach the skies of Greenland. It’s expected to keep moving east, and impacts from the West’s raging wildfire season may soon be felt across the pond.

Hazy Sunrise Above the CN Tower in Toronto, Canada

The sun rises above the CN Tower through a thick haze caused by smoke from forest fires burning in western Canada moving through the upper atmosphere July 19, 2021, in Toronto.

Satellite images show that smoke has traveled thousands of miles from fires burning in the Pacific Northwest and California to reach the skies of Greenland. It’s expected to keep moving east, and impacts from the West’s raging wildfire season may soon be felt across the pond.


A 50 sq. km fire is burning near Ashcroft BC while there have also been a couple of more evacuations because of wildfires on the weekend.

Tremont Creek wildfire

The Tremont Creek wildfire burning southeast of Ashcroft, B.C., is seen in an image provided by the B.C. Wildfire Service.

More than 300 fires were burning across British Columbia as of Sunday morning, with wildfire crews particularly focused on controlling a 50-square-kilometre blaze near Ashcroft in the province's central Interior.

The blaze near Ashcroft, raging just 8.5 kilometres south of the town, saw firefighters struggling all night to contain an "out of control" wildfire, which has put the municipality of Ashcroft and Ashcroft Indian Band land under evacuation alert.

"Crews worked throughout the night to establish control lines with heavy equipment and Structure Protection personnel are on site today," the B.C. Wildfire Service said on its website Sunday morning. "The overnight crews reinforced the heavy machine guard on the west side of the fire and it was held throughout the day. However, the east flank of the fire is being significantly challenged by winds." ...

Later Sunday, the service restricted anyone from entering the area where fire suppression efforts for the Tremont Creek wildfire was taking place. The restricted area stretches from Highway 1 south of Ashcroft to west of Kamloops Lake and as far south as Forge Mountain. ...

Meanwhile, authorities pleaded Sunday with residents fleeing smoky skies to stay with friends or family, in order to leave hotel rooms free for actual wildfire evacuees with "no other option." ...

Almost a third of the current 306 active fires are in the Kamloops region, according to provincial data. There are also significant wildfires burning in the Prince George fire region and in the province's southeast.

At least two new evacuation orders have been issued since Saturday evening, including orders to leave 60 properties just west of Kamloops Lake in the Walhachin area, and another order to evacuate properties near Gustafsen and Neilson lakes near 100 Mile House. There are also new area restrictions on people visiting areas in the Cranbrook area.



BC Public Safety Minister has just issued a provincial state of emergency due to the wildfires that comes into effect at midnight due to worsening wind and weather conditions that are expected to last several more weeks. He said the resources to deal with conditions are stretched thin. He noted that all evacuation spaces available in Kamloops are now occupied. 

A new evacuation order has been issued for the Osoyoos First Nation in the southern Okanagan and parts of Oliver.

ETA: There are 6,000 people already evacuated in BC, 30,000  on evacuation alert. The federal government is sending 350 soldiers to shut down hot spots for fires that are under control but not out. 

Smoke billows out of a mountainous region just north of Osoyoos on Monday, July 19, 2021, as a 300 hectare forest fire burns. (Twitter/@craig_mc_b)

A provincial state of emergency has been declared in B.C. as wildfires continue to grow, forcing hundreds from their homes and putting thousands more on evacuation alert. 

The Nk'Mip Creek fire continues to burn on Osoyoos Indian Band land between the towns of Oliver and Osoyoos, about 40 kilometres south of Penticton. The BC Wildfire Service had previously referred to the fire as the Inkaneep Creek wildfire, but changed the name on Tuesday.

As of 10 a.m. PT, the fire was estimated to cover 11 square kilometres — almost three times the size of Vancouver's Stanley Park and an increase from seven square kilometres on Monday night. ...

Hundreds of people were ordered to evacuate properties Monday after the wildfire exploded in size. ...

The wildfire quickly grew from 0.03 square kilometres to more than three over the course of a few hours Monday afternoon. It was seven square kilometres as of 9 p.m. PT.

Evacuations happened so frantically that officials haven't been able to confirm exactly how many people are out of their homes. ...

The first evacuation order, covering almost 200 properties, was issued by the Osoyoos Indian Band on Monday evening.  Chief Clarence Louie with the Osoyoos Indian Band said the Oliver Fire Department did an "outstanding job" to save houses closest to the fire. Members of the band who evacuated are staying in hotels in the Oliver-Osoyoos area for the time being, he said. Some have elected to stay behind.


In Saskatchewan there are 160 wildfires. "Hundreds of wildfire evacuees from Shoal Lake and Red Earth Cree Nations are currently being housed at the University of Regina according to the Canadian Red Cross,... We have just under 500 members of the Red Earth and Shoal Lake communities,” said Canadian Red Cross Saskatchewan vice-president Luc Mullinder." (

CBC National News is reporting that 1600 First Nations people in four Manitoba communities have been evacuated due to wildfires. In Northern Ontario another 500 First Nations people have been evacuated as the boreal forests where many First Nations live continue to burn in wildfires fostered by global warming. Winnipeg has an air quality warning. Travel between Lake Winnipeg and the Ontario border is banned.

Because of all of the fires across North America, there is a shortage of firefighters and the fires are triaged to determine which ones are tackled. As in BC, soldiers have been drafted into the fight to deal with hot spots in fires that are under control as they are not experienced fire fighters and so do not fight fires on the frontline. 

What is happening now is a taste of future that climatologists say will get worse.


Natural Resource Officer Mike Sitko took this photo last week while working the Ilford fire between Ilford and York landing in Manitoba. Photograph By NICKEL BELT NEWS PHOTO COURTESY OF MIKE SITKO

The number of wildfires that Manitoba has experienced since the beginning of the year is well above the seasonal average and has resulted in over 500,000 hectares burned. This has placed a considerable strain on local and provincial firefighting resources.

The Government of Canada is responding to this request by sending personnel from the Canadian Armed Forces to assist with extinguishing hot spots on contained fires and building fire lines to contain priority fires, which will help relieve the pressure on firefighters already on the ground. ...

  • So far this season, 4,447 wildfires have burned over 2 million hectares of land across Canada, well-above the 10-year average of 3,452 fires burning approximately 1.5 million hectares. 
  • Canadian Armed Forces personnel will provide assistance with the following tasks: 
  • Assisting Manitoba Wildfire Service (MWS) personnel with holding existing fire lines 
  • Suppressing hot spots to ensure fires are fully extinguished 
  • Working with MWS fire crews to build new fire lines on priority fires


The following article from NASA (National Aeronautics and Space Administration) shows the link between global warming and the exponentially increasing number of wildfires. 

air temperature map + smoke from lightening-triggered wildfires

In June and early July 2019, a heat wave in Alaska broke temperature records, as seen in this July 8 air temperature map (left). The corresponding image from the Moderate Resolution Imaging Spectroradiometer (MODIS) instrument on the Aqua satellite on the right shows smoke from lightening-triggered wildfires. Credit: NASA Earth Observatory


Since 1880, the world has warmed by 1.9 degrees Fahrenheit (1.09 degrees Celsius), with the five warmest years on record occurring in the last five years. Since the 1980s, the wildfire season has lengthened across a quarter of the world's vegetated surface, and in some places like California, fire has become nearly a year-round risk. The year 2018 was California's worst wildfire season on record, on the heels of a devasting 2017 fire season. In 2019, wildfires have already burned 2.5 million acres in Alaska in an extreme fire season driven by high temperatures, which have also led to massive fires in Siberia. ...

Combined with data collected and analyzed by scientists and forest managers on the ground, researchers at NASA, other U.S. agencies and universities are beginning to draw into focus the interplay between fires, climate and humans.

"Our ability to track fires in a concerted way over the last 20 years with satellite data has captured large-scale trends, such as increased fire activity, consistent with a warming climate in places like the western U.S., Canada and other parts of Northern Hemisphere forests where fuels are abundant," said Doug Morton, chief of the Biospheric Sciences Laboratory at NASA's Goddard Space Flight Center in Greenbelt, Maryland. "Where warming and drying climate has increased the risk of fires, we’ve seen an increase in burning." ...

Even before a fire starts, they set the stage, said Jim Randerson, an Earth system scientist at the University of California, Irvine who studies fires both in the field and with satellite data.

He and his colleagues studied the abundance of lightning strikes in the 2015 Alaskan fire season that burned a record 5.1 million acres. Lightning strikes are the main natural cause of fires. The researchers found an unusually high number of lightning strikes occurred, generated by the warmer temperatures that cause the atmosphere to create more convective systems — thunderstorms — which ultimately contributed to more burned area that year. ...

A warming world also has another consequence that may be contributing to fire conditions persisting over multiple days where they otherwise might not have in the past: higher nighttime temperatures.

"Warmer nighttime temperature allow fires to burn through the night and burn more intensely, and that allows fires to spread over multiple days where previously, cooler nighttime temperatures might have weakened or extinguished the fire after only one day," Morton said.


In Siberia 4,000,000 acres have already burnt as global warming changes the climate of the entire Arctic region. These wildfires release even more carbon dioxide than other forests because underneath the  ground is a thick layer of carbon rich peat that further accelerates global warming. We are also seeing a lot more zombie fires that reignite in the spring after overwintering underground in the warmer conditions. 

Wildfires near Oymyakon, Sakha Republic, Russia

Wildfires burn in northern Russia in early May, 2021. When fires burn this early in the season, scientists try to figure out whether they were sparked by "zombie fires'" that started the previous year.

Like all forests, the wooded stretches of the Arctic sometimes catch on fire. But unlike many forests in the mid-latitudes, which thrive on or even require fire to preserve their health, Arctic forests have evolved to burn only infrequently.

Climate change is reshaping that regime. In the first decade of the new millennium, fires burned 50 percent more acreage each year in the Arctic, on average, than any decade in the 1900s. Between 2010 and 2020, burned acreage continued to creep up, particularly in Alaska, which had its second worst fire year ever in 2015 and another bad one in 2019. Scientists have found that fire frequency today is higher than at any time since the formation of boreal forests some 3,000 years ago, and potentially higher than at any point in the last 10,000 years. ...

Fires in boreal forests can release even more carbon than similar fires in places like California or Europe, because the soils underlying the high-latitude forests are often made of old, carbon-rich peat. In 2020, Arctic fires released almost 250 megatons of carbon dioxide, about half as much as Australia emits in a year from human activities and about 2.5 times as much as the record-breaking 2020 California wildfire season. ...

The existence of zombie fires—called “overwintering” or “holdover” fires by most experts—has been known for a while. ... “We definitely seem to be seeing them more, in my 30 years of observation and asking people up there about before that,” says Randi Jandt, a fire ecologist with the University of Alaska, Fairbanks.

But her opinion has changed. “We definitely seem to be seeing them more, in my 30 years of observation and asking people up there about before that,” says Jandt. The penny really dropped for her in 2019, when enormous fires scorched over 2.5 million acres in Alaska. Fire teams worked around the clock to contain burn after burn, and by the end of the season, they thought they’d gotten all the blazes put out safely. But following spring, as the snow melted, plumes of smoke began popping up in early May, well before the burn season was supposed to start.


The vidco at the url below discusses the wildfire situation in BC and why Canada as a whole will be one of the most affected nations in the world with regards to wildfires. Scientists therefore emphasize new strategies to deal with the effects of climate change because "We are a flammable country built to burn". 

According to CBC News Network, in BC 4,300 properties are under evaction orders. Already 3,400 sq km have burnt in BC (three times the usual amount for this time of the year), which is 60% of the size of PEI (5660 sq km), and we aren't even in the worst part of the wildfire season yet.  In Northwestern Ontario and Manitoba 5,000 people, nearly all indigenous, are under evacuation orders and seven communities in Manitoba have lost their power due to the wildfires. 

  • Nk’Mip Creek fire

    Nk’Mip Creek fire at the RCMP perimeter at approximately 5 p.m. on Monday, July 19, 2021. (Kyle Murray photo)

The Nk'Mip Creek wildfire burning in British Columbia's wine country has forced hundreds of residents and vacationers to flee to safety. Paul Johnson reports from Osoyoos, B.C. on the struggle to get the blaze under control and how people are coping. Meanwhile, wildfires continue to rage in Manitoba and Ontario, serving as a graphic reminder of the consequences of climate change. Scientists warn things are likely to get worse.

Eric Sorensen looks at the risks and costs Canada will face if immediate climate action isn't taken.


Data released this year show that once again the Trudeau Liberals, as has been the same every year they have been in power since 1993, has failed to reach its climate change targets. Conveniently, the 2020 emissions data won't be released until 2022, after the election, but the 2019 data realeased in April shows that once again the Trudeauc emissions targets were not released. 

                        Is Justin Trudeau’s charm beginning to wear thin?

After he won the 2015 election, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau said his climate change plan would reduce Canada’s annual greenhouse gas emissions that year of 723 million tonnes to 613 million tonnes annually in 2020. ...

This is another example of the fantasy world in which Trudeau and his government live when it comes to actually reducing emissions as opposed to raising carbon taxes/prices, which increased by 33% to $40 per tonne of emissions on April 1, on their way to $170 per tonne in 2030.

To meet Trudeau’s 2020 target, Canada’s emissions for 2020, which won’t be released until 2022, will have to show a drop of 117 million tonnes in one year.

That would be the equivalent of shutting down all of Canada’s agricultural sector (69 million tonnes of emissions annually) and over 80% of its electricity sector (48 million tonnes annually). ...

Even with the 2020 global recession caused by the COVID-19 pandemic — recessions being the only things that have ever significantly and rapidly reduced global emissions — Trudeau is not going to meet his 2020 target. ...

In fact, global emissions were already rising again in the latter half of 2020 as the global economy began to recover from the pandemic recession.

The reality is Canadian governments, Liberal and Conservative, have never met any emission target they’ve set since 1988. Not even close.

What Trudeau has done is what governments of both political stripes have been doing for 33 years — after failing to meet their current target, they kick the target further down the road. ...

Trudeau, poised to miss his target to reduce Canada’s emissions to 17% below 2005 levels by 2020, now promises to reduce them by at least 30% compared to 2005 levels by 2030, and to net zero by 2050.

In the real world, by failing to meet his 2020 target, Trudeau sets himself up for failing to meet his 2030 and 2050 targets, when he’ll be long gone as PM.

According to the federal government’s latest data, Canada’s emissions were 739 million tonnes in 2005, down a mere 9 million tonnes in 2019 to 730 million tonnes. But even that insignificant decline is a case of the Trudeau government retroactively moving the goalposts. Last year, it said Canada’s emissions in 2005 were 730 million tonnes. If that figure is accurate, there has been no decrease in Canada’s annual emissions when comparing 2019 to 2005. ...

Meanwhile, Trudeau’s environment minister, Jonathan Wilkinson, babbles away about achieving Canada’s future emission targets in the same delusional way his predecessor, Catherine McKenna, used to do about achieving the 2020 target. 

Wilkinson said on Monday that this year’s emissions report for 2019 “tells us … we actually are very much on track to exceeding this current (2030) target” and that 2019 will be the last year in Canada that emissions go up.

If that’s true, Canada’s emissions in 2019 should have been in sight of Trudeau’s 2020 target of 613 million tonnes of emissions, not at 730 million tonnes, which is where they actually are.


Part of the reason climate change has not been central to people lives until what is the greatest crisis of the 21st century blew up this summer is media coverage For example, Media Matters for America found in a study that the NBC, CBS and ABC morning shows spent a total of 267 minutes on climate change in the entire year of 2020. They spent 212 minutes in one week covering Jeff Bezos' suborbital flight and ohing and awing over the 'success' of the world's richest man. Canadian media have not done much better in this regard.

Of course, now that there is 'disaster porn' related to global warming, the media are all in on widespread disaster coverage, if not so much on detailing where global warming is taking us. 

Firefighters battle a blaze in Sylmar, California, in 2019. Overall, the acreage burned by wildfires in the continental United States declined in 2019 compared to prior years.DAVID SWANSON/AP


Sidebyside images of Jeffrey Bezos from the chest up in a suit and tie looking surprised and frame right and the Blue...

Jeff Bezos and his phallic symbol. 

On Tuesday, Jeff Bezos visited the edge of space. Upon returning, he said a bunch of inane things, from wanting to send all polluting industry off-planet to thanking “every Amazon employee and every Amazon customer because you guys paid for all of this.”

It was a cringey and painful reminder that what we witnessed was not some grand human endeavor but a joyride that was basically the equivalent of “area man takes Tesla out for a spin” at a billionaire scale. And yet, the TV media lapped it up and dutifully vomited it back out, even as the world literally burned. 

An analysis by Media Matters found that the NBC, ABC, and CBS morning shows devoted 212 minutes to Bezos’ little jaunt. In comparison, those same shows spent 267 minutes covering climate all of last year. 

“The corporate TV news business model relies on capturing and holding viewers’ attention through entertainment and outrage,” Evlondo Cooper, senior researcher for Media Matters for America’s climate and energy program, wrote in an email. “This is a big problem as the news that should be driving daily coverage, such as climate change and its impacts, is often deemphasized or ignored as a result. The heavy coverage of Bezos’ vanity space flight launch is a clear illustration of this trend.”


There is a growing evidence of a link between wildfire smoke, which has greatly increased with climate change and an increased risk of getting Covid. 

A wildfire burning alongside the top of a forest land

Plumes of smoke rise off the Warm Fire, which burned in the Boise National Forest in July 2020. A new study suggests a causal link between wildfire smoke and a rise in COVID-19 cases.

Cases of COVID-19 rose sharply last year in Reno, Nevada, when heavy layer of wildfire smoke settled over the city, according to scientists at the Desert Research Institute, and they and other scientists are postulating that there is a link between air pollution and increased susceptibility to the new coronavirus.

“Our results showed a substantial increase in the COVID-19 positivity rate in Reno during a time when we were affected by heavy wildfire smoke from California wildfires,” said Daniel Kiser, a co-lead author of the study published in the Journal of Exposure Science and Environmental Epidemiology“This is important to be aware of as we are already confronting heavy wildfire smoke ... with COVID-19 cases again rising in Nevada and other parts of the western U.S.”

Kiser, an assistant research scientist of data science at the institute, said he became interested in studying the impact of the microscopic particulate matter from wildfires after reading a Canadian scientist’s article on the dual impact of confronting both issues at the same time. 

In the preface to her work, senior scientist Sarah Henderson of the British Columbia Centre for Disease Control, wrote: “As we enter the wildfire season in the northern hemisphere, the potential for a dangerous interaction between SARS-CoV-2 and smoke pollution should be recognized and acknowledged. This is challenging because the public health threat of COVID-19 is immediate and clear, whereas the public health threat of wildfire smoke seems distant and uncertain in comparison. ...

To analyze the relationship between this fine wildfire ash and COVID-19 positivity rates, Kiser and his team collected data from both the Washoe County Health District and the region’s big hospital system, Renown Health. 

He said they discovered that the PM 2.5 was responsible for a 17.7 percent increase in the number of COVID-19 cases that occurred during a period of prolonged smoke that took place between Aug. 16, 2020, and Oct. 10, 2020. 

Washoe County’s 450,000 residents, many of whom live in Reno, experienced 43 days of elevated PM 2.5 during that period, researchers said, compared with 26 days for residents of the San Francisco Bay Area.

Kent Pinkerton, an expert on air pollution on the faculty at the University of California, Davis, said there’s concern among physicians and scientists about the impact of climate change on cardiopulmonary health, a topic he’s currently addressing in an article he’s submitting to a medical journal.

“Hotter temperatures, climate change, wildfires, air pollution, all seem to have some association with a greater risk of COVID-19 cases,” Pinkerton said. “If you’re susceptible to air pollution, such as particulate matter, it could be that you just have a situation where you’ll be also much more susceptible to viral particles that might be in the air that you’re breathing. ...

No one has yet found the mechanism that increases the risk, Kiser and Pinkerton said, but there have been some hypotheses. Could the new coronavirus be hitching rides on the PM 2.5 and managing to remain virulent as it is breathed into people’s lungs? Certainly, PM 2.5 has been found in the smallest air sacs of people’s lungs. 

Kiser’s team cites a study out of Northern Italy where researchers found the new coronavirus on particulate matter, and Pinkerton noted that the pathogen has been detected in water supplies and in sewage.  “We know that dust from the Mongolian desert, that comes across the Pacific Ocean, can carry at least biological material, whether it be viral or bacterial,” Pinkerton said. “What people have argued about is that the dust can be a carrier for microorganisms.”


A just released study on world weather attribution used modelling to conclude that extremely high temperature in Oregon Washington and BC that broke records by staggering amounts was "virtually impossible by human-induced climate change" and not due to weather variation. 

Home > Heatwave > Western North American extreme heat virtually impossible without human-caused climate change

Multiple cities in the U.S. states of Oregon and Washington and the western provinces of Canada recorded temperatures far above 40ºC (104 ºF), including setting a new all-time Canadian temperature record of 49.6ºC in the village of Lytton. Shortly after setting the record, Lytton was largely destroyed in a wildfire [1,2]. The exceptionally high temperatures led to spikes in sudden deaths, and sharp increases in hospital visits for heat-related illnesses and emergency calls [3,4,5]....

Scientists from the US, Canada, the UK, the Netherlands, France, Germany and Switzerland collaborated to assess to what extent human-induced climate change made this heatwave hotter and more likely.

Using published peer-reviewed methods, we analysed how human-induced climate change affected the maximum temperatures in the region where most people have been affected by the heat (45–52 ºN, 119–123 ºW) including the cities of Seattle, Portland, and Vancouver (with well over 9 million people in their combined metropolitan areas).

Main findings

  • Based on observations and modeling, the occurrence of a heatwave with maximum daily temperatures (TXx) as observed in the area 45–52 ºN, 119–123 ºW, was virtually impossible without human-caused climate change.
  • The observed temperatures were so extreme that they lie far outside the range of historically observed temperatures. This makes it hard to quantify with confidence how rare the event was. In the most realistic statistical analysis the event is estimated to be about a 1 in 1000 year event in today’s climate.
  • Also, this heatwave was about 2°C  hotter than it would have been if it had occurred at the beginning of the industrial revolution (when global mean temperatures were 1.2°C cooler than today).
  • Looking into the future, in a world with 2°C of global warming (0.8°C warmer than today which at current emission levels would be reached as early as the 2040s), this event would have been another degree hotter. An event like this – currently estimated to occur only once every 1000 years, would occur roughly every 5 to 10 years in that future world with 2°C of global warming.
  • In summary, an event such as the Pacific Northwest 2021 heatwave is still rare or extremely rare in today’s climate, yet would be virtually impossible without human-caused climate change. As warming continues, it will become a lot less rare.


Climatologists warn that "drought, heat and drier fuels is causing larger areas to be burned in British Columbia" as well as many other places due to climate change. 

Smoke particles from wildfires burning in the area enhances the colour of the sunset near Logan Lake, B.C., on Thursday, July 15, 2021.

Smoke particles from wildfires burning in the area enhances the colour of the sunset near Logan Lake, B.C., on Thursday, July 15, 2021. THE CANADIAN PRESS/Darryl Dyck

Kira Hoffman, a post-doctoral researcher with the University of British Columbia's faculty of forestry, said climate change is expected to create longer wildfire seasons because of more drought, which leads to drier trees and grasses.

All of this leads to longer fire seasons and more area burned even though there are fewer blazes, she said.

B.C. Wildfire Service information officer Karley Desrosiers said the area burned is "certainly more'' this year compared with previous years. The province has seen 4,090 square kilometres scorched so far this year, which is about four times the five- and 10-year averages, she said Sunday in an interview.The area burned in 2018 was 13,000 square kilometres compared with 12,000 square kilometres the previous year. ...

There are now 58 evacuation orders in place, affecting about 4,400 properties. Another nearly 17,500 properties are on evacuation alert, meaning residents have been told to be ready to leave on short notice. Desrosiers said the heat wave in late June and early July added to the increase in wildfires by drying out forest fuels. ...

Hoffman said vegetation in forests dried out much earlier this year due to a lack of rainfall and "record setting temperatures'' that added to the increase in wildfires.


World's Food Supplies Get Slammed by Drought, Floods & Frost

"Extreme weather is slamming crops across the globe, bringing with it the threat of further food inflation at a time costs are already hovering near the highest in a decade and hunger is on the rise.

Climate change and its associated weather volatility will make it increasingly harder to produce enough food for the world, with the poorest nations typically feeling the hardest blow..."


Like the US, Trudeau continues to subsidize the fossil fuel industry, by buying and building the Trans Mountain pipeline when the subsidies are not enough to keep the oil industry making humungus profits, at the same time he proclaims he is working to transform our economy away from these gigantic carbon dioxide emitters. As David Suzuki says "The only necessary conversations about the climate crisis now are about solutions. Because industry and governments have been yammering about a gradual transition for decades while doing as little as possible to transition at all, we've missed the opportunity for 'gradual.' "

 Kris Krüg/DeSmogBlog/Flickr

Tar sands in Fort McMurray.

An investigation by Greenpeace project Unearthed has drawn the curtain back on this duplicity. Investigators posing as recruitment consultants contacted two senior Exxon lobbyists who revealed the company's ongoing campaign against efforts to address the climate emergency.

During a May Zoom call, Keith McCoy, a government affairs director in Exxon's Washington, D.C., office, admitted the company's public support for carbon pricing was little more than a talking point.

"Nobody is going to propose a tax on all Americans and the cynical side of me says, yeah, we kind of know that but it gives us a talking point that we can say, well what is ExxonMobil for? Well, we're for a carbon tax," he said.

Dan Easley, who left Exxon in January after working as chief White House lobbyist during the previous U.S. administration, talked about the company's wins under Trump, including a corporate tax rate cut, which was "probably worth billions to Exxon."

Under our current system, money is more valued than life. We share a planet, fuelled by the sun, that provides everything we need to live and live well. But we invented a system based on profit and endless growth, one that encourages rapid exploitation of nature, avaricious accumulation and rampant consumerism. ...

There's money to be made, the bulk of it concentrated in the offshore accounts of a few.

This summer, "heat domes" spread across western North America, coinciding with record low tides to wipe out billions of hardy intertidal plants and animals such as clams and mussels. June heat records broke worldwide, from northern Europe to India, Pakistan and Libya. Devastating European floods shocked even the climate scientists who have been predicting them. Parts of Tokyo were drenched by the heaviest rainfall since measurements began. Last year, another global heat record was broken. If June's record-breaking temperatures are any indication, this year will be among the top 10 hottest, with even hotter years looming.

What the hell are we doing? Why are we letting industry get away with disrupting the climate past the point of survivability? Why are we letting governments subsidize and promote oil, gas and coal with tax and royalty breaks, pipeline purchases and nonsensical "war rooms" and inquiries? Why do we put up with major media outlets and industry continuing to spread dangerous climate misinformation when the science couldn't be clearer? Why do we listen to deniers at all?


While the Trudeau government has done nothing to stop the GNL $14 billion-dollar natural gas project, the Quebec government has now vetoed it after strong opposition within the province, including from indigenous people.  The project  would have moved fracked natural gas interprovincially from northern British Columbia and Alberta to a liquefaction plant and export terminal at the Port of Saguenay and therefore needed federal approval. The company was aiming to export 11 million tonnes per year to Europe and Asia.

Corridor being studied for Gazoduq Ontario-Quebec pipeline


A $14-billion project that would have seen natural gas from Western Canada exported to Europe and Asia through Quebec has been rejected by the Quebec government.

Environment Minister Benoit Charette told reporters in Saguenay — the region where a natural gas plant would have been built — that the provincial government is not convinced the project would lead to a reduction in greenhouse gas emissions.

“The promoter has not succeeded in demonstrating this, on the contrary,” he said, adding that the government is worried it would discourage natural gas buyers in Europe and Asia from moving to cleaner energy sources. This is a project that has more disadvantages than advantages,” Charette said. ...

GNL Quebec had proposed building a plant in Port Saguenay, Que., about 220 kilometres north of Quebec City, to liquefy natural gas from Western Canada. The project would have also required the construction of a 780-kilometre pipeline to connect the plant to existing natural gas pipelines in Ontario.

The project had initially been greeted positively by the Coalition Avenir Québec government. Charette said he was predisposed to support the project, but in the end it didn’t meet the required environmental conditions. ...

A coalition of environmental groups, including Equiterre, the David Suzuki Foundation and Greenpeace, said the decision was a victory for activists who had opposed the project. “The Quebec government’s announcement of the rejection of the GNL Quebec project demonstrates that there is no future for fossil fuel projects,” the groups said in a statement. Several Indigenous communities had also opposed the project.


Climate tipping points are difficult to predict. In Canada and beyond, they might have already arrived.

"Recent extreme weather suggests the climate is no longer changing in a gradual, predictable way..."