Climate change in Canada

From Infogalactic: the planetary knowledge core
Jump to: navigation, search
Map of Canada showing the increases in GHG emissions by province/territory in 2008, compared to the 1990 base year.
  50%+ increase
  30%-50% increase
  20%-30% increase
  10%-20% increase
  0%-10% increase
  0%-10% decrease
  Each square represents 2 tonnes CO2 eq. per capita

In Canada mitigation of anthropogenic climate change is being addressed more seriously by the provinces than by the federal government.


In 2000 Canada ranked ninth out of 186 countries in terms of per capita greenhouse gas emissions without taking into account land use changes. In 2005 it ranked eighth.[1] In 2009, Canada was ranked seventh in total greenhouse gas emissions behind Germany and Japan.[2]

Canada is a large country with a low population density, so transportation – often in cold weather when fuel efficiency drops – is a big part of the economy. About 25 per cent of Canada's greenhouse gases (GHG)s come from trucks, trains, airplanes and, especially, cars. Commerce, residential fuel consumption and industry (excluding oil and gas) account for 24 per cent of the total, but much of those emissions come from equipment (mining trucks, front-end loaders) that do not get recorded in the transportation ledger. Another 14 per cent come from non-energy sources. The rest come from the production and manufacture of energy and power. The following table summarizes forecast changes to annual emissions by sector in megatonnes.

Sector 2004 total 2004-2010 increase 2010-2020 increase 2020 total
Upstream oil and gas 127 7 -10 124
Upgrading and refining heavier oil 29 34 25 87
Power generation 130 1 -4 126
Industrial 106 4 8 118
Commercial and residential 83 1 13 97
Transportation 193 16 25 235
Non-energy (mostly agriculture) 108 8 11 127

As Canada creates targets for GHG reductions, policymakers will likely zero in on the three areas – transportation, electricity generation and fossil fuel production – in which the greatest reductions are possible. Together, these activities account for nearly two-thirds of Canada's greenhouse gases. Efficiencies can be found there.

According to Canada's Energy Outlook, the Natural Resources Canada (NRCan) report,[3] NRCan estimates that Canada's GHG emissions will increase by 139 million tonnes between 2004 and 2020, with more than a third of the total coming from petroleum production and refining. Upstream emissions will decline slightly, primarily from gas field depletion and from increasing production of coalbed methane, which requires less processing than conventional natural gas. Meanwhile, emissions from unconventional resources and refining will soar.[4] However, the estimates for carbon emissions differ amongst Environment Canada, World Resources Institute and the International Energy Agency by nearly 50%. The reasons for the differences have not been determined.

Public policy

Kyoto Protocol

Canada is a signatory to the Kyoto Protocol. However, the Liberal government that later signed the accord took little action towards meeting Canada's greenhouse gas emission targets. Although Canada committed itself to a 6% reduction below the 1990 levels for the 2008-2012 as a signatory to the Kyoto Protocol, the country did not implement a plan to reduce greenhouse gases emissions. Soon after the 2006 federal election, the new minority government of Conservative Prime Minister Stephen Harper announced that Canada could and would not meet Canada's commitments. The House of Commons passed several opposition-sponsored bills calling for government plans for the implementation of emission reduction measures.

Canadian and North American environmental groups feel that Canada lacks credibility on environmental policy and regularly criticizes Canada in international venues. In the last few months of 2009, Canada's attitude was criticized at the Asia-Pacific Economic Co-operation (APEC) conference,[5] at the Commonwealth summit,[6] and the Copenhagen conference.[7]

In 2011, Canada, Japan and Russia stated that they would not take on further Kyoto targets.[8] The Canadian government invoked Canada's legal right to formally withdraw from the Kyoto Protocol on 12 December 2011.[9] Canada was committed to cutting its greenhouse emissions to 6% below 1990 levels by 2012, but in 2009 emissions were 17% higher than in 1990. Environment minister Peter Kent cited Canada's liability to "enormous financial penalties" under the treaty unless it withdrew.[8][10] He also suggested that the recently signed Durban agreement may provide an alternative way forward.[11] Canada's decision was strongly criticized by representatives of other ratifying countries, including France and China.

Harper administration

Under the tenure of Stephen Harper, who was Prime Minister from 2006 to 2015, the Kyoto Accord was abandoned and the Clean Air Act was unveiled on October 19, 2006.[12]

By 2014 award-winning American/Canadian limnologist, David Schindler, argued that Harper's administration had put "economic development ahead of all other policy objectives", in particular the environment.[13]

"It’s like they don’t want to hear about science anymore. They want politics to reflect economics 100 per cent - economics being only what you can sell, not what you can save."

— David Schindler 2014

In 2010 Graham Saul, who represented the Climate Action Network Canada (CAN) — a coalition of 60 non-governmental organisations — commented on the 40-page CAN report "Troubling Evidence"[14] which claimed that,[15]

"Canada's climate researchers are being muzzled, their funding slashed, research stations closed, findings ignored and advice on the critical issue of the century unsought by Prime Minister Stephen Harper's government."

— Leahy The Guardian 2010



The Canadian Wildlife Federation (CWF), one of the largest conservation organisations in the country, takes an active stance in lobbying on mitigation of global warming. According to CWF the organisation recognised the need for action in 1977.[16] It had published Checkerspot, a now discontinued biannual climate change magazine.

Fossil fuel divestment

Fossil fuel divestment is a social movement which urges everyone from individual investors to large institutions to remove their investments (to divest) from publicly listed oil, gas and coal companies, with the intention of combating climate change by reducing the amount of Green-house gases released into the atmosphere, and holding the oil, gas and coal companies responsible for their role in climate change.

Founder of the movement Bill McKibben, a researcher and academic from university of Victoria, and creator of the webpage stated: "If it is wrong to wreck the climate, then it is wrong to profit from the wreckage. We believe […] organizations that serve the public good should divest from fossil fuels"

Movement intentions

  • 1. Protect the investor from exposure to the financial risks of ‘unburnable carbon’ whereby fossil fuel reserves become uneconomic or are no longer viable to process due to future climate policy or market conditions
  • 2. Divesting from these companies can keep a substantial portion of fossil fuels in the ground
  • 3. Large institutions can substitute high-carbon investments with low-carbon transition investments

Limits of divestment

Although the impact of divestment is likely to have limited quantitative success in reducing carbon emissions, the movement can gain momentum as a symbolic gesture that has the potential to shift social expectations of investment practices within businesses. Divestment has the potential to be effective if the divested funds are re-invested into the infrastructure of a low-carbon economy The impact of divestment is believed to be minimal as the continual purchase of oil and gas (and oil and gas derived products such as plastics) will still sustain the oil and gas companies.

Climate change by province

While the federal government was slow to develop a monitoring and credible reduction regime, several provincial governments have established substantial programs to reduce emissions on their respective territories. British Columbia, Manitoba, Ontario and Quebec have joined the Western Climate Initiative,[17] a group of 7 states of the Western United States whose aim is to establish a common framework to establish a carbon credit market. These provinces have also made commitments regarding the reduction and announced concrete steps to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.

Alberta has an established "Climate Change Action Plan",[18] released in 2008. The Specified Gas Emitters Regulation in Alberta made it the first jurisdiction in North America to have a price on carbon.[18] Reduction programs in other provinces are much less developed.

Canada's two largest provinces, Ontario and Quebec, are wary of federal policies shifting the burden of greenhouse reductions on them in order to give Alberta and Saskatchewan more room to further develop their tar sands reserves, therefore chilling relations between the 13 provinces and territories.[19]


The Specified Gas Emitters Regulation has placed a price on carbon dioxide emissions in Alberta since 2007[20] and was renewed to 2017 with increased stringency. It requires "large final emitters", defined as facilities emitting more than 100,000tCO2e per year, to comply with an emission intensity reduction which increases over time and caps at 12% in 2015, 15% in 2016 and 20% in 2017. Facilities have several options for compliance. They may actually make reductions, pay into the Climate Change and Emission Management Fund (CCEMF), purchase credits from other large final emitters or purchase credits from non large final emitters in the form of offset credits.[21] Criticisms against the intensity based approach to pricing carbon include the fact that there is no hard cap on emissions and actual emissions may always continue to rise despite the fact that carbon has a price. Benefits of an intensity based system include the fact that during economic recessions, the carbon intensity reduction will remain equally as stringent and challenging, while hard caps tend to become easily met, irrelevant and do not work to reduce emissions. Alberta has also been criticized that its goals are too weak, and that the measures enacted are not likely to achieve the goals. In 2015, the newly elected government committed to revising the climate change strategy.[22][23]

In Alberta there has been a trend of high summer temperatures and low summer precipitation. This has led much of Alberta to face drought conditions.[24] Drought conditions are negatively impacting on the agriculture sector of this province, mainly the cattle ranching area.[25] When there is a drought there is a shortage of feed for cattle (hay, grain). With the shortage on crops ranchers are forced to purchase the feed at the increased prices while they can. For those who cannot afford to pay top money for feed are forced to sell their herds.[26][27]

During the drought of 2002, Ontario had a good season and produced enough crops to send a vast amount of hay to those hit the hardest in Alberta. However this is not something that can or will be expected every time there is a drought in the prairie provinces.[28] This causes a great deficit in income for many as they are buying heads of cattle for high prices and selling them for very low prices.[29] By looking at historical forecasts, there is a strong indication that there is no true way to estimate or to know the amount of rain to expect for the upcoming growing season. This does not allow for the agricultural sector to plan accordingly.[30] As of 2008, Alberta's electricity sector was the most carbon-intensive of all Canadian provinces and territories, with total emissions of 55.9 million tonnes of CO
in 2008, accounting for 47% of all Canadian emissions in the electricity and heat generation sector.[31]

British Columbia

The extreme weather events of greatest concern in British Columbia include heavy rain and snow falls, heat waves, and drought. They are linked to flooding and landslides, water shortages, forest fires, reduced air quality, as well as costs related to damage to property and infrastructure, business disruptions, and increased illness and mortality. In recent years, significant extreme events and climate impacts in BC have included:

  • the pine beetle epidemic, which resulted in 18 million hectares of dead forest and economic impacts for forest dependent communities;[32]
  • 330,000 hectares of forest lost to forest fire in the 2010 fire season alone,[33] and the loss of 334 homes in the 2003 forest fire season;
  • flooding in 2010 leading to the destruction of the Bella Coola highway and evacuation of residents from Kingcome Inlet;[34] and
  • heat waves, including the one in the summer of 2009, which are associated with increases in heat stroke and respiratory illness.

BC has implemented many ambitious policies to address climate change mitigation, particularly through its Climate Action Plan,[35] released in 2008. It has set legislated greenhouse gas reduction targets of 33% below 2007 levels by 2020 and 80% by 2050.[36] BC’s revenue neutral carbon tax is the first of its kind in North America. It was introduced at $10/tonne of CO2e in 2008 and has risen by $5/tonne annual increases until it reached $30/tonne in 2012, where the rate has remained. It is required in legislation that all revenues from the carbon tax are returned to British Columbians through tax cuts in other areas.[37]

BC’s public sector became the first in North America to be carbon neutral in 2010.[38] The Clean Energy Vehicles Program provides incentives for the purchase of approved clean energy vehicles and for charging infrastructure installation.[39] There has been action across sectors including financing options and incentives for building retrofits, a Forest Carbon Offset Protocol, a Renewable and Low Carbon Fuel Standard, and Landfill Gas Management Regulation.

BC’s GHG emissions have been going down, and in 2012 (based on 2010 data) BC declared it was within reach of meeting its interim target of a 6% reduction below 2007 levels by 2012. GHG emissions went down by 4.5% between 2007 and 2010, and consumption of all the main fossil fuels are down in BC as well while GDP and population have both been growing.[40]

In 2010, BC launched its Adaptation Strategy which focuses on building knowledge and tools to guide decision making affected by future climate, integrating adaptation into government business, and building adaptation approaches for key sectors such as agriculture and industry.[41]


Ontario is Canada’s most populated province [42] and, in 2010, had the second highest greenhouse gas emissions inventory in the country. In 1990, Ontario’s greenhouse gas emissions were 176 megatonnes (Mt) of CO2 equivalent. According to Canada’s 2012 National Inventory Report [43] Ontario’s emissions were 171 Mt in 2010, an amount that represented 25% of Canada’s total emissions for that year. Over the 20-year period between 1990 and 2010, Ontario’s emissions continued to increase until the mid-2000s. Emissions declined significantly in 2008-2009 due in large part to the economic recession. In 2010, Ontario emitted 12.95 tonnes per person,[44] compared with the Canadian average of 20.3 tonnes per person.[45]

In August 2007, the Ontario government released Go Green: Ontario’s Action Plan on Climate Change. The plan established three targets: a 6% reduction in emissions by 2014, 15% by 2020 and 80% by 2050. The government has committed to report annually on the actions it is taking to reduce emissions and adapt to climate change.[46] With the initiatives currently in place, the government projects it will achieve 90% of the reductions needed to meet its 2014 target, and only 60% of those needed to meet the 2020 target.[47]

The largest emissions reductions to date have come from the phase out of coal-fired power generation by Ontario Power Generation. In August 2007, the government issued a regulation that required the end of coal burning at Ontario’s four remaining coal-fired power plants by the end of 2014.[48] Since 2003, emissions from these plants have dropped from 36.5 Mt to 4.2 Mt.[49] In January 2013, the government announced that coal will be completely phased out one year early, by the end of 2013.[50]

Through the Green Energy and Green Economy Act, 2009[51] Ontario implemented a feed-in tariff to promote the development of renewable energy generation. Ontario is also a member of the Western Climate Initiative. In January 2013, a discussion paper was posted on the Environmental Registry seeking input on the development of a greenhouse gas emissions reduction program for industry.

Over the years, transportation emissions have continued to increase. Growing from 44.8 Mt in 1990 to 59.5 Mt in 2010, transportation is responsible for the largest amount of greenhouse gas emissions in the province. Efforts to reduce these emissions include investing in public transit and providing incentives for the purchase of electric vehicles.

The government also recognizes the need for climate change adaptation and, in April 2011, released Climate Ready: Ontario’s Adaptation Strategy and Action Plan 2011-2014.[52]

As required by the Environmental Bill of Rights, 1993, the Environmental Commissioner of Ontario does an independent review and reports annually to the Legislative Assembly of Ontario on the progress of activities in the province to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.


Greenhouse gas emissions increased by 3.8% in Quebec between 1990 and 2007, to 85.7 megatonnes of CO2 equivalent. At 11.1 tonnes per capita, Quebec's emissions are well below the Canadian average (22.1 tonnes) and accounted for 11.6% of Canada's total in 2007.[53]

The latest data confirm a strong trend towards declining emissions in the industrial and residential sectors, which decreased by 23.6% and 27.9% respectively and a sharp rise in transportation (+29.5%) and in the tertiary sector (+53.2%). Emissions in the electricity sector have also spiked in 2007, due to the operation of the TransCanada Energy combined cycle gas turbine in Becancour. The generating station, Quebec's largest source of greenhouse gas emissions that year, released 1,687,314 tonnes of CO2 equivalent in 2007[54] or 72.1% of all emissions from the sector and 2% of total emissions. The plant was closed in 2008[55] in 2009[56] and in 2010.[57]

Between 1990 — the reference year of the Kyoto Protocol — and 2006, Quebec's population grew by 9.2% and Quebec's GDP of 41.3%. The emission intensity relative to GDP declined from 28.1% during this period, dropping from 4,500 to 3,300 tonnes of CO2 equivalent per million dollars of gross domestic product (GDP).[58]

In May 2009, Quebec became the first juridsiction in the Americas to impose an emissions cap after the Quebec National Assembly passed a bill capping emissions from certain sectors. The move was coordinated with a similar policy in the neighboring province of Ontario and reflects the commitment of both provinces as members of the Western Climate Initiative.[59]

On November 23, 2009, the Quebec government pledged to reduce its greenhouse gas emissions by 20% below the 1990 base year level by 2020, a goal similar to that adopted by the European Union. The government intends to achieve its target by promoting public transit, electric vehicles and intermodal freight transport. The plan also calls for the increased use of wood as a building material, energy recovery from biomass, and a land use planning reform.[60] According to simulations conducted with Quebec's Ministry of Finance econometric model, the reduction goal should impact the province's real GDP by 0.16% in 2020.[61]

Impacts on forestry

According to Environment Canada’s 2011 annual report, there is evidence that some regional areas within the western Canadian boreal forest have increased by 2 °C since 1948.[62] The rate of the changing climate is leading to drier conditions in the boreal forest, which leads to a whole host of subsequent issues.[63] This leads to a challenge for the forestry industry to sustainably manage and conserve trees within boreal forest. Climate change will have a direct impact on the productivity of the boreal forest, as well as health and regeneration.[63] As a result of the rapidly changing climate, trees are migrating to higher latitudes and altitudes (northward), but some species may not be migrating fast enough to follow their climatic habitat.[64][65][66] Moreover, trees within the southern limit of their range may begin to show declines in growth.[67] Drier conditions are also leading to a shift from conifers to aspen in more fire and drought-prone areas.[63]

Assisted migration of tree species within the boreal forest is one tool that has been proposed and is currently under study.[68] It involves deliberately moving tree species to locations that may better climatically suit them in the future.[68][69] For species that may not be able to disperse easily, have long generation times or have small populations, this form of adaptative management and human intervention may help them survive in this rapidly changing climate.[68] Assisted migration may offer a potential option to lessen the risks that climate change poses to towards maintaining a sustainable industry, in terms of productivity and health.[70]

There may be benefits and/or consequences to applying assisted migration on wide scale in Canada.[66][68][70] Assisted migration may prevent the extinction of certain tree species, enable and conserve market-based goods such as wood products, and conserve processes and services of an ecosystem.[68] Unfortunately, assisted migration could result in competition between the already established trees with the introduced trees, breeding of the introduced trees with established trees or the disruption of key ecological processes. Any decision made on assisted migration to be implemented in the forestry industry will need continued and rely on informed research and long-term studies.[66][70]

The Other Side of the Equation -- the Contention That Canada Needs Global Warming to Survive

However it has hitherto remained unrecognised that Canada's position with regard to global warming contrasts very markedly with most of the rest of the world. For the last few million years a regular, rhythmic series of ice ages has occurred, during which the whole of Canada, including the coastal areas, has been buried under one mile of ice for periods of around 90,000 years at a time, before then becoming habitable for a relatively brief warm period of 10,000 years or so (called an interglacial period ), before another long ice age then commences. According to the Milankovitch [71] graphs, which agree very closely with the Vostok ice core graphs from the Antarctic, the present interglacial is about at an end, and the next ice age is extremely imminent.[72] If Canada is to survive, she must stave off this ice age—and can only do so by pumping vast amounts of CO2 into the atmosphere. This will of course mean a complete polar cap melt with sea levels rising by over 200 feet, which will cost Canada her coastal cities --- but the alternative is appalling to contemplate..... the complete loss of the entire country under a mile of ice for the next 90,000 years. This situation has elicited the response that global warming will result in a runaway greenhouse effect, but it should be noted in this respect that during the Cretaceous period there were no polar caps, sea levels were over 200 feet higher than now,[73] and average year-round temperatures on Baffin Island, which was at the same latitude then as now, were +25C with no sign of any runaway effects . Canada's leaders have been expected to go along with the different concerns of warmer countries. And so far, inexplicably, they have actually done so, in complete deference to their country's own fate as a result of their anti-global-warming regimes and despite the fact that these warmer countries have expressed no concern whatsoever at Canada's critical position as the present interglacial draws to an end.


Greenhouse gases emissions from energy uses in Canada, 1990-2008[31]
in kt CO2 equivalent Change 1990-2008 (%) Share in 2008 (%)
1990 1995 2000 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008
Electricity and Heat Generation 95,500 101,000 132,000 127,000 125,000 117,000 125,000 119,000 Negative increase 24.6% 16.2%
Fossil Fuel Industries 51,000 54,000 66,000 72,000 66,000 66,000 70,000 68,000 Negative increase 33.3% 9.3%
Mining & Oil and Gas Extraction 6,190 7,840 10,400 14,900 15,600 16,800 23,200 23,900 Negative increase 286.1% 3.3%
Industrial Combustion 55,000 53,300 53,400 51,500 47,600 47,000 49,400 43,400 21.1% 5.9%
Residential 43,000 45,000 45,000 43,000 42,000 40,000 44,000 43,000 Steady 0% 5.9%
Commercial & Institutional 25,700 28,900 33,100 37,700 36,700 33,400 34,900 34,900 Negative increase 35.8% 4.8%
Transport 145,000 159,000 178,000 188,000 192,000 191,000 199,000 198,000 Negative increase 36.6% 27.0%
Fugitives Sources 42,700 57,000 64,700 65,600 64,700 65,800 64,700 63,800 Negative increase 49.4% 8.7%
Energy Uses 469,000 510,000 587,000 603,000 593,000 581,000 614,000 597,000 Negative increase 27.3% 81.3%
Non-energy Sources 123,000 131,000 130,000 138,000 138,000 137,000 136,000 137,000 Negative increase 11.4% 18.7%
Total 592,000 641,000 717,000 741,000 731,000 718,000 750,000 734,000 Negative increase 24.0% 100.0%
Greenhouse gases emissions by Canadian province/territory, 1990-2008[31]
in kt CO2 equivalent Change 1990-2008 (%) Share in 2008 (%)
1990 1995 2000 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008
 Newfoundland and Labrador 9,450 8,250 8,720 10,100 10,100 9,530 10,700 10,100 Negative increase 6.9% 1.4%
 Prince Edward Island 1,980 1,880 2,200 2,290 2,230 2,110 2,070 1,970 0.5% 0.3%
 Nova Scotia 19,000 18,600 20,900 22,800 21,800 20,100 20,700 20,900 Negative increase 10.0% 2.9%
 New Brunswick 15,900 16,800 19,900 21,300 21,000 18,700 19,100 18,000 Negative increase 13.2% 2.5%
 Quebec 82,800 79,400 82,300 89,100 85,400 83,800 86,800 82,000 1.0% 11.2%
 Ontario 176,000 174,000 200,000 199,000 200,000 192,000 200,000 190,000 Negative increase 8.0% 26.0%
 Manitoba 18,600 19,800 21,200 21,400 21,000 21,100 21,700 21,900 Negative increase 17.7% 3.0%
 Saskatchewan 43,400 59,100 66,500 71,700 72,300 71,300 74,000 75,000 Negative increase 72.8% 10.3%
 Alberta 171,000 200,000 226,000 234,000 231,000 234,000 246,000 244,000 Negative increase 42.7% 33.4%
 British Columbia 49,300 57,500 61,600 64,600 62,100 61,100 64,500 65,100 Negative increase 32.0% 8.9%
Territories 2,031 2,438 2,054 2,090 1,946 1,784 2,267 2,161 Negative increase 6.4% 0.3%
Canada[note 1] 589,461 635,330 709,320 738,380 728,876 715,524 747,837 731,131 Negative increase 24.0% 100%

See also

Notes and references


  1. Some emissions are only reported at the national level.


  1. "WRI Climate Analysis Indicators Tool (registration required to access data)". 
  2. Rogers, Simon; Evans, Lisa (31 January 2011). "World carbon dioxide emissions data by country: China speeds ahead of the rest". The Guardian. London. Retrieved 28 October 2015. 
  3. Canada's Energy Outlook: The Reference Case 2006
  4. Beyond Bali
  5. Cheadle, Bruce (November 14, 2009). "Harper Criticized On Climate Change At APEC Summit". Canadian Press. Toronto: CITY-TV. Retrieved 2009-12-18. 
  6. Carrington, Damian (November 26, 2009). "Scientists target Canada over climate change". The Guardian. London. Retrieved 2009-12-18. 
  7. Cryderman, Kelly (December 6, 2009). "Canada has target on its back headed into Copenhagen summit". Canwest News Service. Global TV. Retrieved 2009-12-18. 
  8. 8.0 8.1 "Canada pulls out of Kyoto protocol". The Guardian. London. 13 December 2011. Retrieved 13 December 2011. 
  9. "Canada withdrawing from Kyoto". The Toronto Star. 12 December 2011. Retrieved 12 December 2011. 
  10. David Ljunggren; Randall Palmer (13 December 2011), "Canada to pull out of Kyoto protocol", Reuters, Financial Post, retrieved 9 January 2012 
  11. "Canada under fire over Kyoto protocol exit". BBC News. 13 December 2011. 
  12. McMillan Binch Mendelsohn (May 2007). "Made-in-Canada Clean Air Act – Stepping back from Kyoto?" (PDF). Emissions Trading and Climate Change Bulletin. Retrieved 28 October 2015. 
  13. "Research Cutbacks By Government Alarm Scientists". CBC via Huffington Post. 1 October 2014. Retrieved 28 October 2015. 
  14. Cuddy, Andrew (March 2010). "Troubling Evidence: The Harper Government’s Approach to Climate Science Research in Canada" (PDF). Climate Action Network Canada (CAN). p. 38. Retrieved 28 October 2015. 
  15. Leahy, Stephen (18 March 2010). "Canadian government 'hiding truth about climate change', report claims". London: Guardian. Retrieved 28 October 2015. 
  16. Climate Change Policy 
  17. Government of Canada (2015). "Canada's Action on Climate Change" (PDF). Retrieved 2015-09-14. 
  18. 18.0 18.1 Government of Alberta (2008). "Climate Change Action Plan" (PDF). Retrieved 2015-09-08. 
  19. Woods, Allan (December 15, 2009). "Ontario and Quebec fear chill over climate pact". Toronto Star. Toronto. Retrieved 2010-01-01. 
  20. "Climate Change and Emissions Management Act: Specified Gas Emitters Regulation", Alberta Queen’s Printer, Edmonton, Alberta, p. 27, 2007, retrieved 28 October 2015 
  21. "Specified Gas Emitters Regulation", Alberta Environment and Parks (AEP), 2007, retrieved 28 October 2015 
  22. "Climate Leadership", Government of Alberta, 2015, retrieved 28 October 2015 
  23. "Climate Leadership Discussion Document" (PDF), Government of Alberta, p. 57, August 2015, retrieved 28 October 2015 
  24. "Alberta Environment: Alberta River Basins Precipitation Maps". Retrieved 2009-11-21. 
  25. "Agriculture Drought Risk Management Plan for Alberta - Strategic Plan". Retrieved 2009-11-21. 
  26. "Alberta ranchers forced to sell herds". CBC. 18 August 2009. Retrieved 21 November 2009. 
  27. "Drought forcing Alberta ranchers to sell off cattle". 9 July 2002. Retrieved 2009-11-21. 
  28. "CBC News - Canada - Ontario hay arrives in drought-stricken Alberta". 2002-08-07. Retrieved 2009-11-21. [dead link]
  29. "CBC News - Edmonton - Alberta county declares 'state of agricultural disaster' over drought". 2009-06-17. Retrieved 2009-11-21. [dead link]
  30. "The Atlas of Canada - Precipitation". 2004-07-27. Retrieved 2009-11-21. 
  31. 31.0 31.1 31.2 Environment Canada (15 April 2010). National Inventory Report Greenhouse Gas Sources and Sinks in Canada 1990–2008 (3 volumes). UNFCCC. 
  32. "Mountain Pine Beetle". Ministry of Forestry. Retrieved 2013-04-04. 
  33. "Summary of Previous Fire Seasons". Wildfire Management Branch. Retrieved 2013-04-04. 
  34. "Flooding Cuts Off B.C. Communities". CBC News. 2010-09-26. Retrieved 2013-04-04. 
  35. "Climate Action Plan". Climate Action Secretariat. Retrieved 2013-04-04. 
  36. "Greenhouse Gas Reduction Targets Act". BC Laws. Retrieved 2013-04-04. 
  37. "Carbon Tax". Ministry of Finance. Retrieved 2013-04-04. 
  38. "Carbon Neutral BC Public Sector". Province of BC. Retrieved 2013-04-04. 
  39. "Clean Energy Vehicle Incentives". Province of BC. Retrieved 2013-04-04. 
  40. "Making Progress on B.C.’s Climate Action Plan" (PDF). Province of BC. Retrieved 2013-04-04. 
  41. "Climate Change Adaptation in B.C.". Climate Action Secretariat. Retrieved 2013-04-04. 
  42. Statistics Canada. Table 051-0005 - Estimates of population, Canada, provinces and territories, quarterly (persons), CANSIM (database).
  43. National Inventory Report 1990-2010: Greenhouse Gas Sources and Sinks in Canada
  44. Climate Vision: Climate Change Progress Report. Technical Appendix
  45. National Inventory Report 1990-2010: Greenhouse Gas Sources and Sinks in Canada, Part I.
  47. Climate Vision: Climate Change Progress Report. Technical Appendix.
  48. Ontario Regulation 496/07 – Cessation of Coal Use – Atikokan, Lambton, Nanticoke and Thunder Bay Generating Stations, issued under the Environmental Protection Act.
  49. Ontario Power Generation , 2011 Annual Report
  50. Cleaner Air and More Green Space for Ontarians to Enjoy: McGuinty Government Closing Coal Plants Earlier, Growing Greenbelt. January 20, 2013
  51. An Act to enact the Green Energy Act, 2009 and to build a green economy, to repeal the Energy Conservation Leadership Act, 2006 and the Energy Efficiency Act and to amend other statutes.
  52. Climate Ready: Ontario’s Adaptation Strategy and Action Plan 2011 – 2014
  53. Environment Canada (April 17, 2009). National Inventory Report Greenhouse Gas Sources and Sinks in Canada 1990–2007. UNFCCC. p. 519. 
  54. Environnement Canada. "Search Facility Data - Results". Monitoring, Accounting and Reporting on Greenhouse Gases. Retrieved 2010-01-01. 
  55. Baril, Hélène (December 4, 2007). "Ratés dans la stratégie énergétique du Québec". La Presse (in French). Retrieved 2009-05-13. [dead link]
  56. Couture, Pierre (July 25, 2008). "Bécancour : Hydro-Québec devra verser près de 200 M$". Le Soleil (in French). Retrieved 2009-05-13. [dead link]
  57. Couture, Pierre (July 10, 2009). "Hydro-Québec versera 250 millions $ à TransCanada Energy". Le Soleil (in French). Retrieved 2009-12-19. 
  58. Government of Quebec (November 2008). "Inventaire québécois des émissions de gaz à effet de serre en 2006 et évolution depuis 1990" (pdf) (in French). Ministère du Développement durable, de l'Environnement et des Parcs. p. 5. Retrieved 2009-05-15. 
  59. Francoeur, Louis-Gilles (May 12, 2009). "Le Québec et l'Ontario tiendront un registre conjoint des émissions de GES". Le Devoir (in French). Montreal. p. 1. Retrieved 2009-05-12. 
  60. Francoeur, Louis-Gilles (November 24, 2009). "Climat: le Québec vise haut". Le Devoir (in French). Montreal. p. 1. Retrieved 2009-11-26. .
  61. Government of Quebec (October 2009). Quelle cible de réduction d'émissions de gaz à effet de serre à l'horizon 2020? (pdf) (in French). Quebec City: Ministère du Développement durable, de l'Environnement et des Parcs du Québec. p. 31. ISBN 978-2-550-57204-6. 
  62. "Annual Regional Temperature Departures". Environment Canada. Retrieved April 2, 2012. 
  63. 63.0 63.1 63.2 Hogg, E.H.; P.Y. Bernier (2005). "Climate change impacts on drought-prone forests in western Canada". Forestry Chronicle. 81 (5): 675–682. doi:10.5558/tfc81675-5. 
  64. Jump, A.S.; J. Peñuelas (2005). "Running to stand still: Adaptation and the response of plants to rapid climate change". Ecology Letters. 8 (9): 1010–1020. doi:10.1111/j.1461-0248.2005.00796.x. 
  65. Aiken, S.N.; S. Yeaman; J.A. Holliday; W. TongLi; S. Curtis- McLane (2008). "Adaptation, migration or extirpation: Climate change outcomes for tree populations". Evolutionary Applications. 1: 95–111. doi:10.1111/j.1752-4571.2007.00013.x. 
  66. 66.0 66.1 66.2 McLane, S.C.; S.N. Aiken (2012). "Whiteback pine (Pinus albicaulis) assisted migration potential: testing establishment north of the species range". Ecological Applications. 22 (1): 142–153. doi:10.1890/11-0329.1. 
  67. Reich, P.B.; J. Oleksyn (2008). "Climate warming will reduce growth and survival of Scots pine except in the far north". Ecology Letters. 11 (6): 588–597. doi:10.1111/j.1461-0248.2008.01172.x. 
  68. 68.0 68.1 68.2 68.3 68.4 Aubin, I.; C.M. Garbe; S. Colombo; C.R. Drever; D.W. McKenney; C. Messier; J. Pedlar; M.A. Saner; L. Vernier; A.M. Wellstead; R. Winder; E. Witten; E. Ste-Marie (2011). "Why we disagree about assisted migration: Ethical implications of a key debate regarding the future of Canada’s forests". Forestry Chronicle. 87 (6): 755–765. doi:10.5558/tfc2011-092. 
  69. Vitt, P.; K. Havens; A.T. Kramer; D. Sollenberger; E. Yates (2010). "Assisted migration of plants: Changes in latitudes, changes in attitudes.". Biological Conservation. 143 (1): 18–27. doi:10.1016/j.biocon.2009.08.015. 
  70. 70.0 70.1 70.2 Ste-Marie, C.; E.A. Nelson; A. Dabros; M.E. Bonneau (2011). "Assisted migration: Introduction to a multifaceted concept". Forestry Chronicle. 87 (6): 724–730. doi:10.5558/tfc2011-089. 

External links