Responding to climate change

Re: Recent articles on COP26 and climate change, including How much green pain will Canadians tolerate? Joe Oliver, Nov. 16; Unfettered climate alarmism, Conrad Black, Nov. 13; and Net-zero COP conferences by 2030, Rex Murphy, Nov. 16

Most agree that the Earth is warming, and the culprit is anthropogenic (that is, you and I). And that this is going to be with catastrophic effect. However, the political response to this has been based on cherry-picking the science. The focus of federal policy is the imperative and priority of reducing CO2 emissions. Limit or ban fossil fuels. And it is completely muddled How could we get the science so right and the response so wrong?

The answer seems that our policy-makers have paid attention only to one part of the science. Selective application. The part they are seemingly (and wilfully) blind to is the part where the scientists are also uniformly of the opinion that our actions in reducing CO2 emissions will not have any measurable effect on climate in Canada. And that we are going to experience the worst of climate change, irrespective of our efforts.

If our policy-makers really believe what they are saying about the effects of climate change, the emphasis should be squarely on mitigation. Community resilience. Something almost entirely missing from the endless pronouncements from our federal government. Projections of climate change effects include sea level rise, floods in the spring and drought in the summer. Where is the response to this? Where are the plans for flood protections measures and water storage for irrigation?

Yes, we should reduce our CO2 emissions, but if that is the only response, we have dramatically failed to understand what the scientists are telling us. Our priorities are muddled. And given that water control projects (especially under new permitting legislation) can take 20 or more years, muddled with perhaps disastrous effect.

Harold Westdal, Winnipeg

Joe Oliver seemed totally unaware of the immense climate disaster happening and headlined by the National Post on the same day as his column appeared, and his characterization of the impact of Canada's greenhouse gas emissions totally missed the mark. He commented that Canada is responsible for only 1.53 per cent of global emissions without mentioning that we comprise less than 0.5 per cent of global population. Canada is in the top 10 of countries for global carbon emissions and is the biggest polluter per capita of greenhouse gases among rich countries.

Oliver's disparaging remarks about Quebec joining the Beyond Oil and Gas Alliance (BOGA) did not take away one iota of pride I had in Glasgow witnessing Quebec's Climate Change Ambassador announcing the province's membership in the group. I congratulated him on behalf of Canada. I hadn't been so proud of an international action by a Canadian politician in years.

Canadians want change and if the necessary changes needed to help keep the world to the 1.5C goal do happen, there will not be the economic hit that Oliver alludes to, rather, a readjustment that spurs creativity, employment and continued economic success, and a good feeling about being a responsible global citizen.

We must not compare ourselves to laggards. Our huge wealth is a product of out-of-proportion and often irresponsible exploitation of many types of resources. It's surely time we started acting responsibly, as I believe the vast majority of Canadians want. Maybe some short- to medium-term pain for some, but ultimately lots of longterm gain.

David Zakus, Adjunct

Professor, University of Toronto

I seldom miss reading the columns by Conrad Black and Rex Murphy in the National Post, always impressed with their eloquence. But their similar stances on climate change as expressed recently in their columns referenced above are quite distressing.

A mere modicum of research would reveal that:

NASA studies show massive ice losses in Antarctica, Greenland, the Himalayas; Global sea-levels have risen 80mm over the past three decades; Fishing yields and agriculture in some areas could collapse, Millions could face poverty; and Some 97 per cent of climate scientists agree on warming trends due to human activity.

We must heed climate scientists' dire warnings and take appropriate corrective action at all levels including governmental and global. Respected media influencers like Black and Murphy need to recognize the dawning reality, tone down their dismissive rhetoric, conduct research and champion the facts and perils to save us from ourselves.

M. Vyas, Toronto