From the Fraser Institute

APPEARED IN THE FINANCIAL POST

By: Bjørn Lomborg

Canada’s chattering classes claim that climate change is one of the country’s pre-eminent threats. This is extraordinary. Canada is experiencing a productivity slowdown, the worst decline in living standards in 40 years, and growth rates that lag most developed economies. Geopolitical threats loom, the healthcare system is under stress and education is faltering. Yet the federal government has spent or committed more than $160 billion on climate initiatives since 2015, and is funneling $5.3 billion to help poor countries respond to climate change.

Like most nations, Canada faces tough decisions in coming decades. Resources spent on climate will not be not available for health, education, security or boosting prosperity.

Global warming is a real problem. Science has shown quite clearly that more CO₂, mostly from fossil fuel use, increases global temperatures. Climate economics has shown how this brings both problems and benefits (for instance, more deaths caused by heat, fewer by cold) but, overall, more problems than benefits. More CO₂ means higher social costs, so reducing CO₂ does have real benefits.

But climate policies also have costs. They force families and businesses to use more expensive energy, which slows economic growth. You might have heard otherwise but if the new ways really were cheaper, no regulations or mandates would be needed.

If climate change were treated like any other political issue, we would openly recognize these trade-offs and try to balance them to get the most climate benefits for the least cost, recognizing that climate policies need to compete against many other worthy policies.

But in two important ways the climate conversation has gone off the rails.

First, people say — wrongly — that global warming is an existential challenge, risking the end of mankind. Of course, if the world is about to end, it follows that any spending is justified. After all, if a world-obliterating meteor is hurtling towards us, we don’t ask about the costs of avoiding it.

Second, it is also often claimed — somewhat contradictorily — that the green transition will make energy cheaper, societies safer and everyone richer. In this “rainbows and unicorns” scenario, there are no trade-offs and we can afford climate policy and everything else.

Both claims are repeated ad nauseam by Canadian politicians and activists and spread by media hooked on selling climate catastrophes and green utopias. But both are quite untrue.

That is why I’m writing this series. I will outline how many of the most sensationalist, scary climate stories are misleading or wrong and ignore the best climate science. Being data-driven, I will show you this with the best peer-reviewed data and numbers.

So: Is climate change the world’s all-encompassing problem today? One way to test this is to look at extreme weather, which we constantly hear is having an ever-larger impact on our societies. But the data paint a very different picture (see chart).

We have good evidence for the number of people killed in climate-related disasters, i.e., floods, storms, droughts, and fires. (We’ll look at temperature deaths next week.) A century ago, such disasters routinely killed hundreds of thousands, even millions of people in a single disaster. On average, about half a million people a year died in such disasters. Since then, the death toll has declined precipitously. The last decade saw an average of fewer than 10,000 deaths per year, a decline of more than 97 per cent.

Of course, over the past century the world’s population has quadrupled, which means the risk per person has dropped even more, and is now down by more than 99 per cent. Why this great success story? Because richer, more resilient societies with better technology and forecasting are much better able to protect their citizens. That doesn’t mean there is no climate signal at all, but rather that technology and adaptation entirely swamp its impact.

In the same way, climate’s impact on overall human welfare is also quite small. In proportion to the total economy, the cost of climate-related disasters has been declining since 1990. Looking to the future, the best estimates of the total economic impact of climate change come from two major meta-studies by two of the most respected climate economists. Each shows that end-of-century GDP, instead of being 350 per cent higher, will only be 335 per cent higher.

“Only” becoming 335 per cent richer is a problem, to be sure, but not an existential threat. Despite that, as this series will show, many of the most draconian climate policy proposals so casually tossed around these days will do little to fix climate but could dramatically lower future growth and the opportunities of future generations.

We need to get smart on climate. This series will map out how.

Bjørn Lomborg

Premier Tim Houston says it’s time for Nova Scotia to develop its energy industry

In late January, Nova Scotia Premier Tim Houston announced that natural resources would become a major focus of his government, stating that it was time to, “We can’t expect Nova Scotia to prosper when we ban industry after industry after industry.”

It was announced that his government would look into fracking for natural gas, uranium mining, and lifting fossil fuel extraction moratoriums along the coast.

Atlantic Canada is poised to become the next major player in Canada’s energy expansion. With growing global demand for clean energy, a shift toward resource independence, and the looming threat of U.S. tariffs, provinces like Newfoundland and Labrador and Nova Scotia are taking bold steps to develop their energy sectors. Recent developments in liquefied natural gas (LNG), offshore oil, green hydrogen, and critical minerals are positioning the region as a crucial pillar of Canada’s energy future.

Donald Trump’s threats to impose tariffs on Canadian energy exports have forced Canada to reassess its reliance on the United States as its primary customer. This shift has already played out in Quebec, where the government is reconsidering its stance on LNG projects. Similarly, Atlantic Canada recognizes the need to diversify its energy exports to Europe and Asia. With vast offshore oil reserves and new LNG projects in the works, the region is set to capitalize on international markets.

Premier Houston has emphasized the importance of local resource development to secure the province’s economy. Though he has walked back on previous comments about revisiting the Georges Bank offshore drilling moratorium, his government is clearly focused on increasing natural resource production. The seafood industry, a vital component of the region’s economy, has expressed concerns about potential energy developments affecting fisheries, but a balance must be struck to ensure both industries thrive.

Newfoundland and Labrador Premier Andrew Furey has made it clear that offshore oil will continue to play a key role in the province’s economy for decades. Addressing industry leaders, Furey positioned Newfoundland as the future “energy capital of North America,” highlighting new offshore projects and hydrogen development. ExxonMobil’s $1.5 billion investment in offshore infrastructure underscores industry confidence in the region’s potential.

Despite dubious global forecasts suggesting oil demand will peak in the coming years, Newfoundland and Labrador believes its high-quality, low-emission crude will remain in demand, particularly in Europe and Asia. Additionally, the province is exploring hydrogen production, backed by federal incentives and private investment. Companies like World Energy GH2 are pushing forward with large-scale green hydrogen projects, despite local opposition from residents concerned about the environmental impact of wind farms.

As British Columbia emerges as an LNG powerhouse, Atlantic Canada is following suit. The region’s proximity to European markets gives it a significant advantage, particularly in light of geopolitical instability affecting global energy supplies. With European nations scrambling to secure reliable energy sources, Atlantic Canada’s LNG potential is more valuable than ever.

Much like British Columbia, where First Nations have played a central role in LNG expansion, Atlantic Canada has an opportunity to develop Indigenous-led energy projects. Federal tax incentives and emissions regulations will shape how LNG projects move forward, ensuring they align with Canada’s climate commitments while driving economic growth.

The combination of Trump’s tariffs, shifting global energy markets, and renewed provincial interest in resource development has created a perfect storm for Atlantic Canada’s energy sector. With strong government backing, significant private investment, and growing international demand, the region is well-positioned to become a major energy player.

As Canada navigates this new era of energy expansion, Atlantic Canada’s strategic location, resource wealth, and commitment to innovation make it a natural frontier for growth. Whether through LNG, offshore oil, hydrogen, or critical minerals, the region’s energy sector is set to thrive in the coming decades.