Ice patterns are seen in Baffin Bay above the Arctic Circle. Budget cuts at ECCC raise concerns about how governments will develop effective polices and laws that rely upon scientific research. THE CANADIAN PRESS/Jonathan Hayward

The Arctic has been in the news a lot lately. Between the increased geopolitical interest in Greenland, claims over sovereignty, resource exploitation and the devastating impacts of climate change, the region has become a sentinel for global change.

But away from these headlines, a quieter crisis is unfolding that threatens Canada’s role in global environmental science, law and policy: the dismantling of research teams at the department responsible for Canada’s environmental policies and programs. The federal government’s plan to reduce the public service by 15 per cent over three years means that more than 800 positions at Environment and Climate Change Canada (ECCC) will be cut.

As an environmental scientist who has been involved in the Arctic Monitoring and Assessment Program (AMAP) since 2016 and an interdisciplinary legal scholar focused on water governance in Canada, we have seen how science can shape policy. For decades, ECCC research scientists have been integral to the work of AMAP, a working group that provides advice and assessments to the Arctic Council.

This intergovernmental group comprised of Indigenous Peoples, Arctic states and non-Arctic states with observer status is the major platform for protecting the environment and co-ordinating sustainable development initiatives in the Arctic.

Scientists at ECCC have played a leading role in more than 20 international reports on persistent organic pollutants and mercury. In fact, ECCC researchers have acted as the largest group of chapter leads in these global assessments since the 1990s.

Budget cuts at ECCC raise concerns about how governments will develop effective polices and laws that rely upon scientific research.

The risks from budget cuts

Many of the scientists who lead projects on the long-term trends of toxins in Arctic wildlife face cuts or might lose their jobs entirely. Scientists at ECCC are often the ones to identify and assess “chemicals of emerging Arctic concern” — newly discovered chemical threats to human and environmental health that scientists are only just beginning to understand.

Losing the scientists who lead and interpret contaminant data in Arctic wildlife will take much more from Canada than scientific expertise; we risk losing our ability to understand and effectively react to chemical threats and their potential environmental and health impacts.

Data collection for unique monitoring datasets spanning up to 50 years is at risk of being discontinued. Even more concerning is the potential loss of national tissue archives if monitoring and research projects are cut. Contaminant data in Canadian wildlife have been instrumental to the listing of toxins under the Stockholm Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants, an international treaty to control the global production and use of particularly hazardous chemicals.

Similarly, monitoring for mercury in Arctic air and biota is an important part of the rationale for the Minamata Convention, a global treaty designed to protect human and environmental health from mercury contamination.

In many ways, these global agreements exist because Canadian data, produced by ECCC scientists, proved that chemicals used thousands of miles away end up in the bodies of Arctic wildlife and Indigenous Peoples who rely on healthy wildlife for food security, cultural identity and practices.

These international treaties set out the norms, legal principles and regulatory schemes that have been incorporated into Canadian law. They support the risk assessment and management of many toxic chemicals under the Canadian Environmental Protection Act.

Losing these samples and monitoring programs would set back Canadian and global contaminant research and reinforce criticisms that Canada is a laggard in environmental law and policy.

Risk for Indigenous communities

Budget cuts could also intimately impact the daily lives of those living in the Arctic and raise questions of environmental justice. Indigenous communities in the Arctic face higher exposure to many toxins than other Canadians due to their reliance on foods like fish, belugas and seals.

Despite global efforts, blood mercury levels in many Inuit communities remain higher than the general Canadian population. Furthermore, concentrations of per- and polyfluorinated alkyl substances, also known as “forever chemicals,” are consistently higher in these communities than in the south.

Without ongoing research, we risk creating a vacuum in environmental governance and law. Current legislation, like the Canadian Environmental Protection Act, aims to protect vulnerable populations and uphold the right to a healthy environment and environmental justice. But we cannot uphold these rights if we stop measuring how contaminants are impacting the health of the environment, food and water of the populations most affected by these chemicals.

Across Canada, the cuts undermine effective chemical management. Canada’s chemical management plan depends heavily on the expert assessment of government scientists. This expert-based risk assessment has enabled the discovery and monitoring of new chemical risks with comparatively few bureaucratic hurdles. However, it also means that the proposed cuts are particularly devastating to this program.

If we remove the scientists the regulatory system depends on, the system breaks. This means that these proposed cuts could not only cost jobs and reduce scientific excellence in Canada, but also leave the health of Canadians and our environment less protected.

The post Budget cuts at Environment and Climate Change Canada threaten Arctic science appeared first on TMU Research & Innovation Blog.

The recently launched Build Canada Homes (BCH) initiative marks the federal government’s most ambitious effort to build affordable homes since the Second World War.

The $13 billion initiative promises a building surge to emulate Canada’s post-war national housing program by doubling the national output of housing.

This effort to aggressively stimulate growth in Canadian affordable housing construction includes the creation of the BCH new national agency working as a developer, rapid construction on public land, innovative modular construction methods and partnerships with private capital to push the pace.

For many Canadians, this may seem like a decisive response to the country’s housing crisis while also promoting Canadian sovereignty during tumultuous relations with the United States and other geopolitical developments.

But for the North, the parallels between the role of housing policy now and in the post-war era should give us pause. The building boom following the Second World War established many of the chronic housing, health and economic challenges northerners face today.

Lessons from the post-war era

Amid Cold War tensions and fears of Soviet encroachment following the Second World War, Canada and the United States moved to militarize and secure the Arctic.

Both countries established weather stations, the Distant Early Warning Line, airbases and other strategic infrastructure to assert sovereignty over the region. This geopolitical anxiety also fuelled Canadian efforts to create or expand permanent northern settlements.

These efforts imposed fixed communities on Indigenous peoples who previously moved seasonally through vast territories in patterns shaped by ecological knowledge and deep relationships with the land. This was often pursued through forced or incentivized relocations, reshaping Indigenous mobility and ways of life.

This push to secure the North was accompanied by a rapid expansion of federal housing initiatives in the 1950s and ‘60s to meet national housing strategies. Southern-style houses were imported into the North, detached from northern cultures, landscapes and climates, and administered through colonial governance structures.

Construction of these homes relied on southern labour and materials, leaving communities with buildings but not the authority, tools or training needed to construct or maintain them. Rather than recognize and learn from the approaches to housing construction and sustainability that northern, Indigenous peoples had been practising for generations, the government sought to impose control and authority through northern housing.

This era laid the groundwork for the housing precarity that northerners continue to feel today. Yet BCH uses the same language and approach — framing housing issues as a crisis, advocating rapid deployment, standardized technologies, reliance on southern supply chains and a short-term time frame. This undermines northerners’ abilities to self-determine and direct their own sustainable housing systems.

A different approach required

The North of 2026 is not the North of 1950. Climate change is accelerating permafrost thaw, reshaping ecosystems and exposing structural vulnerabilities in buildings and infrastructure caused by southern construction methods.

Dependence on imported materials and southern labour is even more unsustainable. Simultaneously, Indigenous Peoples across the North have developed community-led housing strategies, design innovations and governance models that offer powerful alternatives.

A Northern Housing Ecosystem (NHE) approach re-imagines northern housing not as a one-off construction campaign but as an interconnected system involving governance, economy, design, training, maintenance and social well-being.

It aligns with Indigenous-led housing innovations already underway — from the work of the K’asho Got’ine Housing Society and Yellowknives Dene First Nation, to regional training and design initiatives across the North.

The NHE asserts that housing is tied to health, education, economic development, energy use and cultural vitality. Housing cannot be governed within silos; it must be part of a living system.

To support northern housing autonomy and sustainability, BCH must adopt principles rooted in this ecosystem approach.

Principles include promotion of a northern housing economy where housing is collective infrastructure that focuses on community well-being and a sense of home for all northerners, prioritized over a market-based logic.

This fosters housing autonomy via northern and Indigenous control over governance, design, construction, repair and maintenance — the opposite of the dependency system of the post-war era.

A sustainable northern housing future

The foundational question should no longer be: How many houses can we deliver quickly? Instead, it must be: How can we build a sustainable northern housing future?

This requires structural change in housing delivery. Short-term federal funding cycles and crisis-framing create pressure to spend and build quickly. That results in prioritizing communities with more administrative capacity, risks reinforcing inequities and rushes decisions that compromise sustainability.

Without concrete efforts to right the wrongs of the past, BCH will reproduce a housing system that never adequately or sustainably served the North. While BCH represents a major federal investment, the North needs more than housing units. It needs autonomy, climate-appropriate design, skilled local labour and local business development.

A sustainable northern housing future is possible, but only if programs like BCH evolve from a fast unit-counting exercise into an ecosystem-based strategy rooted in Indigenous leadership and northern expertise. That way a northern housing system can be built that will sustain communities for generations — by the North, with the North and for the North.

---

The post Northern housing must be built as an integrated ecosystem — by the North, for the North appeared first on TMU Research & Innovation Blog.

On a winter day in Northern Canada, the cold feels absolute. Snow squeaks underfoot and rivers lie silent beneath thick ice. Yet beneath that familiar surface, the ground is quietly accumulating heat.

That hidden warming is destabilizing the frozen foundation on which northern communities depend. Permafrost — the permanently frozen ground that supports homes, roads, airports and fuel tanks across much of Northern Canada — is warming as a result of climate change. The North has warmed roughly three times faster than the global average, a well-documented effect of Arctic amplification — the process causing the Arctic to warm much faster than the global average.

Permafrost does not fail suddenly. Instead, it responds slowly and cumulatively, storing the heat of warm summers year after year. Over time, that heat resurfaces in visible ways: tilted buildings, cracked foundations, slumping roads and buckling runways. Long-term borehole measurements across Northern Canada confirm that permafrost temperatures continue to rise even in places where the ground surface still refreezes each winter.

Communities in the Northwest Territories, Nunavut and the Yukon are already living with these consequences. As permafrost degrades, it undermines housing and transportation corridors and disrupts mobility and land-based activities. The impacts are uneven, with Indigenous communities often facing the greatest exposure and paying the highest costs.

A damaged access road or unstable fuel tank is not just an engineering inconvenience; it can interrupt supply chains, emergency access and daily life. What these patterns reveal is that permafrost thaw is not simply a surface problem. It’s the result of long-term, uneven warming below ground that reshapes soils, water, ice and infrastructure together, often accelerating damage well after climate warming begins.

Permafrost failure

Monitoring and numerical modelling point to a consistent conclusion: permafrost degradation is controlled less by individual warm years than by the long-term balance of heat entering and leaving the ground. Accumulated energy, combined with the large amount of heat required to thaw ice-rich soils, explains why damage often accelerates long after warming begins.

Summer warmth penetrates deeper into the ground than winter cold can fully remove. Snow further reshapes this balance by insulating the ground, especially as a warmer, more moisture-laden atmosphere delivers heavier snow in cold regions, earlier autumn cover, longer spring persistence and uneven accumulation around infrastructure, all of which limit winter heat loss.

Buildings, foundations and buried infrastructure add their own steady sources of warmth. Each input may seem modest on its own. Over decades, their combined effect becomes decisive.

For much of the past century, northern engineering has been designed to keep heat out of frozen ground. Practices such as elevating structures on piles, minimizing ground disturbance and installing passive cooling systems like thermosyphons have proven effective under historically cold conditions. But these approaches depend on long, reliably cold winters. As winters shorten and insulating snow arrives earlier, the benefits of those practices are becoming harder to sustain.

From blocking heat to managing it

Engineers in Canada have already demonstrated ways to deliberately influence subsurface temperatures. Along northern highways and embankments, ventilated shoulders and air-convection systems have been used to increase winter heat loss from permafrost foundations, measurably cooling the ground beneath key infrastructure. These projects show that underground temperatures can be deliberately managed, not just endured.

More recently, work in the Yukon has shown that sloped thermosyphons installed beneath highway embankments can lower permafrost temperatures and raise the permafrost table, stabilizing ice-rich ground that would otherwise continue to settle. These systems are effective but only as long as winters remain cold enough to drive heat extraction.

Geothermal engineering offers a more adaptable approach. In southern Canada and elsewhere, some buildings already use foundation piles that serve two purposes: structural support and heat exchange. Rather than allowing waste heat to leak passively into surrounding soil, these systems circulate fluid to move heat in or out of the ground as conditions require.

In northern permafrost regions, the same principle could be applied differently. Instead of allowing heat from buildings, pipelines or power systems to migrate downward into thaw-sensitive soils, foundation piles could intercept some of that energy and return it to buildings during winter, when heat demand is highest. In summer, operation would focus on limiting new heat input, preserving seasonal cooling gains.

This is not about turning permafrost into an energy resource. It is about preventing uncontrolled heat leakage, sustaining the very foundations that hold northern infrastructure in place.

Protecting what holds communities together

The implications extend far beyond individual buildings. Roads, airstrips, fuel storage facilities, water treatment plants, power lines and communication systems across Northern Canada all depend on stable ground. Many also introduce persistent sources of warmth through traffic, buried utilities and electrical infrastructure.

As thaw progresses, roads deform, fuel tanks shift and runways become unsafe. A settling airport runway, for example, can ground flights that deliver food, fuel and medical supplies for weeks at a time.

For infrastructure expected to remain in service for 50 years or more, managing subsurface temperature may matter as much as structural design itself. When these systems fail, the effects ripple outward, increasing isolation, raising costs and limiting access to essential services.

Indigenous partnership is essential

The impacts of permafrost thaw are not shared equally. Indigenous communities are often the most exposed, facing disproportionate damage to housing and infrastructure that underpins mobility, food security and access to health and education services.

Many northern communities also remain heavily dependent on diesel for heat and electricity, locking in energy systems that add persistent heat to the ground and raise the long-term cost of maintaining infrastructure.

Any approach to geothermal or ground-temperature management must therefore be developed in genuine partnership with Indigenous governments and residents. Engineering solutions that stabilize the ground while reducing fuel dependence will only succeed if they align with local priorities and support long-term community self-determination.

None of this replaces the need to rapidly reduce greenhouse-gas emissions. No technology can preserve all permafrost under unchecked warming. But in Northern Canada, adaptation is no longer optional.

Research shows that long before damage becomes visible, heat accumulates underground, weakening soils and reshaping landscapes. This is where infrastructure can play a central role, by influencing how heat enters, moves throughout and leaves the ground.

Canada now faces a choice: it can continue building as if frozen ground were static, or it can design for permafrost as what it is: a sensitive thermal system with a long memory. The heat accumulated below ground over decades reflects past decisions. But how much heat we add next, and how carefully we manage it, is a choice.

The post Canada’s North is warming from the ground up, and our infrastructure isn’t ready appeared first on TMU Research & Innovation Blog.

A Thai official shows a sample of illegally imported electronic waste from the United States during a press conference in Bangkok, Thailand, May 14, 2025. A sharp increase in e-waste has accompanied the surge in electronic equipment. (AP Photo/Sakchai Lalit)

The world is undergoing rapid electronification and digital transformation, reshaping how we live. Many of us have numerous electronic devices around us at all times, from smartphones and watches to our home appliances and cars.

A sharp increase in e-waste has accompanied the surge in electronic equipment. In 2022, 62 million tons of e-waste was produced globally.

Canada’s e-waste tripled between 2000 and 2019 and is expected to reach 1.2 billion kilograms by 2030. These statistics demonstrate an urgent environmental crisis that demands new ways of thinking and educating future generations.

A key part of tackling the problem is educating people about it. As educators, we need to expand school education to include resource recovery, sustainability and pro-environmental behaviours to inform students on what to do with their old gadgets.

The language and techniques we use to communicate this issue in classrooms play a significant role in helping children understand and engage with safe e-waste management.

Schools and educators must equip youth of all ages with the values, attitudes, knowledge and skills necessary to manage e-waste responsibly.

Gaps and limitations

My research uses machine learning tools to develop effective circular economy policies focused on e-waste management in Canada, with insights reflecting Ontario’s evolving practices.

In Ontario, schools are failing to provide comprehensive and consistent e-waste education, leaving a dangerous gap in our students’ environmental literacy.

Environmental education in Ontario introduces students to the concept of environmental stewardship and the provincially mandated curriculum does include it in a cross-disciplinary manner. However, due to decreased priority and budget cuts, attention on e-waste and resource conservation is absent.

According to a 2024 report by EcoSchools Canada, a number of obstacles exist to successful school e-waste management such as COVID-19, provincial inconsistencies, curriculum disconnect, custodian participation, poor school engagement and a lack of key infrastructure and information.

The Ontario government and municipalities have made efforts in revising the school curriculum, with non-profits stepping in to help bridge the knowledge gap.

For example, in municipalities like Peel Region, teachers’ resources include a plethora of interactive, online activities and lesson plans that focus on the 3Rs and proper sorting, as well as additional workshops, events, games and other resources for students in grades K to 8.

Likewise, Durham Region offers a specific presentation, including one for grades 7 and 8 entitled “Electronic Waste: The Hidden Impact of Our Gadgets,” allowing students to discover the possible environmental, social and economic consequences of devices.

Several schools are also active participants of the EcoSchools program, a certification initiative originally developed by the Toronto District School Board to promote environmental education and action.

The program offers opportunities for student-led projects such as e-waste collection drives and awareness campaigns, providing meaningful experiential learning.

Although these are valuable and necessary, the focus and depth of these initiatives are often at the discretion of individual teachers and schools, leading to an uneven and often limited understanding of the e-waste problem. While commendable, these programs represent a patchwork rather than a cohesive, province-wide strategy.

Furthermore, a lot of education on waste tends to place much emphasis on recycling. While recycling is an important part of the solution, comprehensive e-waste education should also emphasize reducing consumption, repairing and reusing electronics and understanding the principles of a circular economy. Educational institutions and educators need to equip students to be able to critically question our throw-away culture.

The path forward

Educational institutions can play a substantial role in devising initiatives that will help future generations build foundational knowledge about sustainable e-waste management.

At the Montgomery School in Saskatoon, students have taken part in a project that allows them to disassemble old electronics to learn about e-waste, its materials and proper disposal. As part of an initiative, students look through the school’s garbage bins to see what could be reused.

The project links classroom learning with Saskatchewan’s grade 6/7 curriculum of understanding the social effects of sustainability issues, such as waste management, and encouraging students to think critically about technology use and environmental responsibility. The students have been successful in making keychains from old circuit boards that they sold at a school event to raise money for upcoming projects.

Provincial education ministries must take the lead by embedding clear learning expectations into their provincial curriculum in subjects like science, technology, geography, social studies and civics. This will ensure that all students, regardless of their school or location, receive an introductory understanding of this growing issue.

Cross-sectoral collaboration among provincial governments, school boards, municipalities and environmental organizations will be key in developing high-quality curriculum-linked educational materials.

Other initiatives can include organizing field trips to recycling facilities or setting up e-waste collection campaigns to allow students to see the impact of sustainable activities.

Schools can also invite guest speakers to give students an opportunity to learn from front-line environmental experts who have first-hand knowledge of sorting through e-waste.

Integrating e-waste literacy into the curriculum is a crucial step toward creating a more sustainable future. It will involve much more than just teaching students where the recycling bin is. It is about providing the know-how that will help them challenge our throw-away culture and empowering them to become responsible consumers.

The post To tackle e-waste, teach kids to be responsible consumers appeared first on TMU Research & Innovation Blog.

Simple things like avoiding chemical pesticides and leaving leaves where they fall can help make your garden a more welcoming environment for wildlife and support biodiversity. (Jeffrey Hamilton/Unsplash)

Biodiversity is essential to mitigating and adapting to climate change, enhancing the resilience of ecosystems and safeguarding the ecological functions that all living beings depend on for survival.

There is little doubt that we are at a critical point in the loss of biodiversity in Canada with thousands of species currently in danger of disappearing, while global experts continue to warn about Earth’s ongoing sixth mass extinction.

As a response to the cascading climate crisis, wildlife habitat gardens have grown in popularity. These are spaces designed to attract and sustain local wildlife, and include efforts such as rewilded meadows, pollinator patches, rain gardens, naturalized lawns and others.

Cultivating a garden for biodiversity is not an all-in or nothing task. In fact, there is a wide range of simple actions anyone can take to regenerate and conserve biodiversity right at home.

We are currently organizing a biodiversity public literacy campaign at the National Environmental Treasure, a people’s trust fund devoted to funding Canadian environmental organizations.

Last year, we partnered with Prof. Nina-Marie Lister and the Ecological Design Lab at Toronto Metropolitan University on their Bylaws for Biodiversity research, along with Nature Canada and FLAP Canada, to develop Gardening for Biodiversity resources.

Supporting biodiversity in your garden

Together, we’ve created a series of free, fact-based guides to help people learn how to cultivate biodiversity and support for wildlife habitat in private gardens.

This series currently includes four comprehensive booklets, each focusing on key aspects of biodiversity gardening:

• Yard Naturalization: A How-to Guide
• Myths & Misconceptions: Naturalized Gardens, Ticks, Mice, Rats & Other Pests
• Bird-Friendly Gardens: Supporting Bird Habitat in Every Season
• Good Garden Practices: Underrated Practices & Top Plant Picks.

While there are plenty of great garden practices out there, these are five easy and impactful ways to boost biodiversity and cultivate a garden safe for urban wildlife, taken directly from our booklets.

Use alternatives to pesticides

Pesticides in your garden can harm beneficial insects and can be detrimental to the environment, wildlife and human health. Instead of using chemical-based pesticides, try natural alternatives like biopesticides, horticultural oils and insecticidal soaps that can be just as effective.

Likewise, attracting predatory insects and wildlife into your garden who will actively feed on the harmful pest is also an effective starting point as this is a process of pest-control that occurs naturally in healthy ecosystems.

There are also DIY pesticides, such as sea salt spray, water-vinegar mixtures and coffee grounds.

Leave the leaves

Decomposing plant litter, like fallen dead leaves, tree bark, needles and twigs, is an important component of maintaining soil health, nutrient cycling and biodiversity.

By choosing to leave the leaves in your garden, you will support the variety of species who overwinter in them, from bees and caterpillars, to butterflies, spiders and more.

Prioritize pollinator-attractive plants

In addition to pollination, insects are beneficial for a variety of other reasons including for pest control, seed dispersal and decomposition.

The best way to attract insects largely depends on which insect you are trying to attract. But as a general rule, it is always a good practice to source plants locally and prioritize native species.

Next best to native plants are benign ornamentals and non-natives. Cultivating a diverse range of flowers, especially native plants and herbs, promotes a resilient ecosystem. It also helps natives out-compete invasive species and to reverse the downward trends of mass species decline.

Make your garden safe for birds

Birds contribute to healthy ecosystems: they pollinate plants, disperse seeds and prey on insects. Unfortunately, North American bird populations are experiencing a rapid decline due to habitat loss, degradation and other global pressures.

Aadopting bird-safe gardening practices offers a powerful way to combat these threats and support biodiversity conservation on a local scale. Beyond core habitat elements, additional practices can enhance the garden’s appeal to birds.

Organic gardening without pesticides or herbicides, keeping cats indoors, removing potential entanglement hazards and using bird-collision prevention markers on reflective surfaces can not only attract birds, but also ensure their safety as well.

Advocate for biodiversity

Although there’s been a growing movement toward more biodiversity-supporting practices, outdated municipal bylaws and enforcement policies continue to limit the potential of habitat gardens.

These disputes over the scope and application of bylaws have brought attention to various legal contradictions and outcomes that negatively impact progress on biodiversity recovery, all the while undermining and negating related environmental objectives on private land.

By advocating and encouraging your municipal leaders to adopt science-based biodiversity-supportive bylaws, you help to establish the legal frameworks and political agendas that directly impact long-term ecological health and promote sustainable development and the regeneration of biodiversity.

The post Here’s how you can make your garden a safe and biodiverse space for urban wildlife appeared first on TMU Research & Innovation Blog.

Artificial intelligence (AI) is quietly transforming how cities generate, store and distribute energy, acting as the invisible conductor that orchestrates cleaner, smarter and more resilient cities.

By integrating renewables — from solar panels and wind turbines to geothermal grids, hydrogen plants, electric vehicles and batteries — AI can enable cities to manage diverse energy sources as a single, intelligent system.

One striking example is the Oya Hybrid Power Station in South Africa. Here, AI-driven controls seamlessly co-ordinate solar, wind and battery storage to deliver reliable power to up to 320,000 households. Using AI makes this kind of integration not only possible, but dramatically more efficient.

Recent research shows AI can also optimize how batteries, solar and the grid interact in buildings. A 2023 study found that deep learning and real-time data helped a boarding school in Turin, Italy increase low-cost energy purchases and cut its electricity bill by more than half.

Cleaner, smarter energy grids

AI models are increasingly able to predict weather with greater precision. These predictions allow electric grid operators to plan hours ahead, storing excess energy in batteries or adjusting supply to meet demand before a storm or heatwave hits.

Using AI to respond strategically to weather is a game-changer. In Cambridge, England, a system called Aardvark uses satellite and sensor data to generate rapid, accurate forecasts of sun and wind patterns.

Unlike traditional supercomputer-driven weather models, Aardvark’s AI can deliver precise local forecasts in minutes on an ordinary computer. This makes advanced weather prediction more accessible and affordable for cities, utilities and even smaller organizations — potentially transforming how communities everywhere plan for and respond to changing weather.

AI for smarter district heating and cooling

In Munich, Germany, AI is improving geothermal district heating by using underground sensors to monitor temperature and moisture levels in the ground.

The collected data feeds into a digital simulation model that helps optimize network operations. In more advanced versions, during winter cold snaps, such systems can suggest lowering flow to underused spaces like half-empty offices and boosting heat where demand is higher, such as in crowded apartments.

This intelligent, self-optimizing approach extends the life of equipment and delivers more warmth with the same energy input.

This is a breakthrough with enormous potential for cities in cold climates with established geothermal networks, such as Winnipeg in Canada and Iceland’s Reykjavik.

Although these cities have not yet adopted AI-driven monitoring systems, they could benefit from AI’s real-time improvements in efficiency, comfort and energy savings during harsh winters — a principle that holds true wherever geothermal district heating and cooling exists.

Smart buildings

Inside the home, AI-managed smart climate systems can factor in how many people are in each room, which appliances are in use, how much natural sunlight each space receives and how much electricity or heat a home’s solar panels generate throughout the day.

Based on this, AI determines how to heat or cool rooms efficiently, and can transfer energy from one space to another, balancing comfort with minimal energy use.

Coastal cities and those in wind-heavy regions are using AI in other creative ways. In Orkney, Scotland, excess wind and tidal energy are converted into green hydrogen. Instead of letting that surplus power go to waste, an AI system called HyAI controls when to generate hydrogen based on wind forecasts, electricity prices and how full the hydrogen storage tanks are.

When winds are strong at night and electricity is cheap, the AI can divert surplus power to produce hydrogen and store it for later use. On calmer days, that stored hydrogen can power fuel cells or buses.

Energy storage

AI is transforming energy storage into a smart, revenue-generating force. In Finland, a startup called Capalo AI has developed Zeus VPP, an AI-powered virtual power plant that aggregates distributed batteries from homes, businesses and other sites.

Zeus VPP uses advanced forecasting and AI algorithms to decide when batteries should charge or discharge, factoring in energy prices, local consumption and weather forecasts. This enables battery owners to earn revenue by participating in electricity markets, while also supporting grid stability and making better use of renewable energy.

Utility companies are also using AI to monitor everything from high-voltage transmission lines to neighbourhood transformers, dramatically increasing reliability.

AI-powered dynamic line rating adjusts how much electricity a line can carry in real time, boosting capacity by 15 to 30 per cent when conditions allow. This helps utilities maximize the use of existing infrastructure instead of relying on costly upgrades.

At the local level, AI analyzes smart metre data to predict which transformers are overheating due to rising EV and heat pump use.

By forecasting these stress points, utilities can proactively upgrade equipment before failures happen — a shift from reactive to predictive maintenance that makes the grid stronger and cities more resilient.

AI-powered public transit and mobility

Transportation innovation is becoming part of the energy solution, with AI at the centre of this transformation. In New York City, energy company Con Edison has installed major battery storage systems to help manage peak electricity demand and reduce reliance on polluting peaker plants, which supply energy only during high-demand periods.

More broadly, Con Edison is deploying advanced AI-powered analytics software across its electric grid — optimizing voltage, enhancing reliability and enabling predictive maintenance. Together, these efforts show how combining energy storage and AI-driven analytics can make even the world’s busiest cities more resilient and efficient.

AI is also powering “vehicle-to-grid” innovations in California, where an AI-driven platform manages electric school buses that can supply stored energy back to the grid during periods of high demand.

By carefully managing when buses charge and discharge, these systems help keep the grid reliable and ensure vehicles are ready for their daily routes. As this technology expands, parked electric vehicles could serve as valuable backup resources for the electricity system.

AI for clean energy initiatives

AI is rapidly transforming cities by revolutionizing how energy is used and managed. Google, for example, has slashed cooling energy at its data centres by up to 40 per cent using AI that fine-tunes fans, pumps and windows more efficiently than any human operator.

Organizations like the Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI), in collaboration with NVIDIA, Microsoft and others, have launched the Open Power AI Consortium, which is creating open-source AI tools for utilities worldwide.

These tools will enable even the most resource-constrained cities to deploy advanced AI capabilities, without having to start from scratch, helping to level the playing field and accelerate the global energy transition.

The result is not just cleaner air and lower energy bills, but a path to fewer blackouts and more resilient homes.

The post AI applications are producing cleaner cities, smarter homes and more efficient transit appeared first on TMU Research & Innovation Blog.

The G7 summit in Alberta, hosted by Prime Minister Mark Carney, has ended with only passing mention of fighting climate change, including a statement on wildfires that is silent on the pressing need to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.

This is puzzling. Canadians didn’t opt for Conservative Pierre Poilievre, considered by some to be an oil and gas industry mouthpiece, in the last federal election. Instead, voters gave Carney’s Liberals a minority government.

Carney was the United Nations Special Envoy on Climate Action and Finance and was behind the UN-backed Net-Zero Banking Alliance, so some Canadians might have assumed he’d prioritize climate action if he won the election. Instead, Carney has described developing fossil fuel infrastructure as “pragmatic.”

But it’s unclear how a country grappling with abysmal air quality due to wildfires fuelled by global warming will benefit from further global fossil fuel development and its related emissions.

Warming rapidly

Canada is warming faster than most of the globe. Its leaders should be laser-focused on mitigating climate change by reducing fossil fuel use to the greatest extent possible, as soon as possible.

This decades-long understanding of how to approach climate action has been repeatedly explained by experts and is well known to governments globally. Canada’s prime minister was once one of those experts.

Carney now has a tremendous opportunity to lead by steering Canada in a clean direction.

Canada is at the forefront of clean technology, with numerous business opportunities emerging, particularly in areas like circular economy international trade. These opportunities not only support Canada’s commitment to meeting its Paris Agreement targets but also help expand and diversify its global trade.

Eco-industrial parks

Canada already has exemplar eco-industrial parks — co-operative businesses located on a common property that focus on reducing environmental impact through resource efficiency, waste reduction and sharing resources. Such industrial communities are in Halifax and in Delta, B.C. They represent significant investment opportunities.

Vacant urban land could be revitalized and existing industrial parks could boost their economic output and circular trade by building stronger partnerships to share resources, reduce waste and cut emissions.

Canada would benefit economically and environmentally by building on existing expertise and expanding successful sustainability strategies to achieve economic, environmental and social goals.

But by continuing to invest in fossil fuels, Canada misses out on opportunities to diversify trade and boost economic competitiveness.

The secret to China’s success

Real diversification makes Canada less vulnerable to economic shocks, like the ones caused by the tariffs imposed by United States President Donald Trump.

Fossil fuel reliance increases exposure to global economic risks, but shifting to cleaner products and services reduces climate risks and expands Canada’s global trade options. China’s economic rise is partly a result of this strategy.

That’s seemingly why Trump is so fixated on China. China today is a serious competitor to the U.S. after making smart trade and economic decisions and forging its own path, disregarding American pressure to remain a mere follower.

Investing in its huge Belt and Road Initiative, China also aligned itself with the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals. It’s building diplomatic bridges with many Belt and Road countries in southeast Asia as Trump’s America alienates its partners, pulling out of the Paris Agreement and cutting foreign aid.

As another one of America’s mistreated partners, Canada was poised to forge its own path under Carney. Instead, Carney is supporting American oil and gas by encouraging Canadian pipeline projects.

Clean innovation is the path forward

Canadian oil and gas is a concentrated industry controlled by a wealthy few, primarily Americans. More pipelines would therefore mean more sales of fossil fuels to other countries, with the beneficiaries mostly American.

Fossil fuel investments reduce Canada’s diversification because the resources used to further these projects could go elsewhere — toward clean diversification. With almost unlimited clean economy options across many sectors, clean diversification would broaden Canada’s economic and trade portfolios and reduce American control.

This is International Business 101, and would make the Canadian economy more competitive through innovation, while reducing the country’s climate risk.

California, often targeted by Trump for its policies, has been a leader in clean innovation, making its economy the envy of the world.

My recent research shows that clear, decisive choices like those made in California will be key to Canada’s future success. Canada must make choices aligned with goals — a core principle of strategic management.

My research also suggests Canada must restructure its energy industry to focus on renewable energy innovation while reducing fossil fuel reliance. Increased renewable energy innovation, as seen in patent numbers, leads to higher GDP.

Contrary to common beliefs, pollution taxes boost the economy in combination with clean innovation. But when the government supports both the fossil fuel industry and clean industries, it hinders Canada’s transition to a cleaner future.

Trapped by the fossil fuel industry?

Do Canadian taxpayers truly want to keep funding an outdated, polluting industry that benefits a wealthy few, or invest in clean industries that boost Canada’s economy, create better jobs and protect the environment? To differentiate Canada from the United States, it would make sense to choose the latter.

Carney should consider refraining from pushing for the fast-tracking of polluting projects. If he doesn’t, Canada will become more uncompetitive and vulnerable, trapped by the fossil fuel industry.

Carney’s support for pipelines may have stemmed from Alberta Premier Danielle Smith’s implicit support for Alberta sovereignty. She made veiled threats to Canada at a critical juncture, when Trump was making repeated assertions about annexing Canada.

Missed opportunities

Alberta didn’t vote for Carney. But Canadians who care about mitigating climate change did.

Banks that felt pressure to at least recognize sustainable finance during the Joe Biden administration joined Carney’s Net-Zero Banking Alliance.

But as soon as Trump came to power a second time and walked away from the Paris Agreement, many American banks abandoned the alliance. Canadian banks followed suit, and Carney remarkably missed another moment to show Canadian leadership by stopping their exit.

In fact, Carney seems to have abandoned his own organization to appease Trump as the president made multiple 51st state threats. The prime minister had the chance to differentiate Canada and demonstrate his own leadership. Instead, he seems to have easily turned his back on his principles under pressure from Trump.

The post Is Mark Carney turning his back on climate action? appeared first on TMU Research & Innovation Blog.

As wildfire season begins, the destructive impacts of climate change are being felt across Canada. Several communities in northern Saskatchewan have been issued evacuation orders due to wildfires. In Manitoba, Pimicikamak Cree Nation worked to evacuate hundreds of people as wildfires closed in, while smoke from those fires caused air-quality issues across the country.

It isn’t just wildfires threatening people’s homes and livelihoods. In May, 1,600 residents from the Kashechewan Cree First Nation in Northern Ontario evacuated again due to flooding of the Albany River, which happens almost every year.

The 2018 United Nations Climate Conference called on all states to adopt “laws, policies and strategies” meant “to avert, minimize and address displacement related to the adverse impacts of climate change.”

The figures are disquieting. By 2050, more than 140 million people could become internal climate migrants in sub-Saharan Africa, South Asia and Latin America alone, especially if action towards reaching net-zero carbon emissions continues to be insufficient.

Canada is not spared: 192,000 people were evacuated in 2023 due to disasters made more severe by climate change, including floods and wildfires. As climate change leads to more extreme weather, temporary climate displacement could become permanent migration.

Climate migration

The World Bank defines internal climate migration as having to relocate for at least a decade to a location 14 kilometres or more away from your community because of climate impacts.

Research I presented at the 2025 Canadian Association for Refugee and Forced Migration Studies Conference at Toronto Metropolitan University analyzed how Canada addresses the climate migration challenge in its submissions under the Paris Agreement, which requires parties to adapt to climate change.

The Canadian government understated the reality of internal climate migration in its submissions under the 2015 Paris Agreement, which obscure the gravity of this phenomenon.

One of those submissions is the Nationally Determined Contribution (NDC), the cornerstone report each state party must present every five years. Canada’s NDC from 2021 recognizes that climate change harms certain populations more than others, but does not address temporary displacement, let alone internal climate migration.

The Fort McMurray wildfires displaced more than 80,000 people in 2016, with its population declining 11 per cent between 2015 and 2018. Similarly, the 2019 Québec spring floods displaced more than 10,000 people and, in Sainte-Marie, hundreds of low-income families abandoned the city because they could not afford the reconstructed homes.

A clear definition of internal climate migrants in Canada, robust data and better co-ordination among Indigenous, municipal, provincial and federal governments is needed.

This is something a National Adaptation Act could deliver, as a part of a comprehensive framework to bolster adaptation action across the country.

Transparency lacking

Canada submitted an adaptation communication in 2024. The communication discusses climate impacts but mentions internal displacement only once. It contains no data or discussion of when displacement becomes permanent, nor does it focus on the disproportionate impact on equity-deserving groups.

The government submitted an updated NDC earlier this year. It noted “the devastating impact of wildfires, floods, drought and melting permafrost on communities across the country” but only briefly discusses adaptation, referring instead to the 2023 National Adaptation Strategy. The only mentions of displacement come in appended submissions by Indigenous Peoples, including Trʼondëk Hwëchʼin First Nation and Makivvik.

Indigenous Peoples suffer from flawed adaptation policies and institutional barriers that prevent them from effectively responding to emergencies. As a result, First Nations evacuate 328 times more frequently than settler communities during climate disasters.

In 2011, for example, officials in Manitoba diverted flood waters to Lake St. Martin to protect urban, cottage and agricultural properties. In the process, they flooded 17 First Nations and displaced 4,525 people. Return of the 1,400 residents of the Lake St. Martin First Nation to a new location only started in 2017, and as recently as 2020 displaced families were protesting on highways for their right to housing.

A national adaptation act

Canada should adopt a clear definition of internal climate migrants that captures displacement from climate disasters and slow-onset phenomena like sea-level rise, permafrost thaw and biodiversity loss.

UN experts released a Technical Guide on Human Mobility in 2024, calling for “a sound evidence base on the patterns and trends, as well as on the drivers and outcomes” of climate-induced mobility. It also highlighted the need for adaptation efforts “that are informed by stakeholder consultations” and “existing (Indigenous) adaptation practices.”

Defining internal climate migrants would allow Canada to gather robust data at last, and to act decisively on it.

One first step is the federal government’s pledge of a National Recovery Strategy by 2028, which would set out “shorter time frames for displaced individuals to be able to return to their homes or resettle after climate change disaster events.” But a comprehensive approach is needed to go beyond the fragmented landscape of federal and provincial strategies.

The Canadian government should work with all stakeholders toward the adoption of a National Adaptation Act, like Brazil, Germany and Japan.

Such a law could remove barriers to Indigenous adaptation action, co-ordinate efforts across orders of governments to prevent displacements, define internal climate migration, ensure data collection and protect the rights of people temporarily displaced or internally migrating because of climate change.

It should also aim for greater transparency and accountability than what Canada has so far achieved with its Paris Agreement submissions.

The post Canada must take action to prevent climate-related migration appeared first on TMU Research & Innovation Blog.

In recent years, the proliferation of conspiracy theories amid escalating climate disasters and their aftermath has become an alarming trend.

During the 2024 Atlantic hurricane season in the United States, misinformation and disinformation regarding Hurricane Helene and Hurricane Milton proliferated on social media, falsely claiming that they were “geo-engineered” and intentionally targeted at predominantly Republican regions. Such blatant falsehoods not only incited confusion and toxic online discourse but also hindered relief and recovery initiatives.

As wildfires persist in Los Angeles, Americans are once again witnessing a flood of rumours, half-truths and conspiracy theories.

The situation in Canada is equally alarming. There have been conspiracy theories accusing “green terrorists” of causing the intensifying wildfire seasons. During the 2024 Jasper wildfire, some users on X (formerly Twitter) claimed the disaster was part of a plot by Prime Minister Justin Trudeau to control Albertans.

These kinds of conspiracy theories are not only widespread but have also evolved into a mainstream form of climate change denialism. And they underscore an escalating challenge encountered by scholars and practitioners in climate change communication.

As researchers specializing in climate change communication and environmental sociology, we want to provide some analysis of climate change denialism driving climate conspiracy theories online, and propose potential ways to tackle misinformation.

Climate change denialism

Psychologically, theories such as identity-protective cognition and system justification suggest that people tend to accept information that aligns with their pre-existing beliefs, cultural norms and identities, while dismissing contradictory evidence.

Politically, climate mitigation has been vilified by right-wing populism as a political agenda imposed by “elites” (in other words, climate advocates and experts) to undermine the desires of “the people.” This kind of narrative makes climate change a divisive issue that falls along broader ideological rifts.

Elaborate conspiracy theories can make it more difficult to differentiate between credible and unreliable sources of information. They can erode public trust in scientists and scientific evidence, impede the acceptance of climate science and the adoption of climate mitigation strategies. Moreover, conspiratorial beliefs exacerbate distrust in institutions and governments, obstructing the collective action required to effectively mitigate climate change.

There are some similarities and differences between how climate change denialism manifests in Canada and the United States. Recent research has shown that, similar to the U.S., political leanings significantly impact beliefs about climate change and trust in information sources among Canadians.

There are also Canada-specific factors at play, with regional differences in attitudes toward climate change more explicitly intertwined with the economic interests of the fossil fuel industry. A study conducted by sociologist Timothy J. Haney found that, following the 2013 southern Alberta flood, victims still expressed doubt about the scientific consensus on climate change and spoke in defence of the oilsands industry.

Alberta skepticism

Likewise, research conducted by political scientist Louis Massé explains how regionalism in Alberta has contributed to creating a stronghold of skepticism, which in turn suppresses public discussions regarding the utility of extensive climate and sustainability policies.

Another consensus among scholars is that in Canada, the reach of corporate power from the fossil fuel sector has played a key role in maintaining business as usual and denying the imperative for climate action.

Corporate concentration — when a small number of companies control a large portion of a market — is higher in Canada than in the U.S. This means corporate power plays a very active role in blocking and delaying government action on climate change.

Climate change communication

The prevalence of conspiracy theories poses challenges to climate change communication. Developing effective ways to communicate climate science that are simple and understandable is a key way to address climate change denialism. Such communication alone, however, may not be sufficient due to two major factors.

First, online harassment, trolling and even death threats aimed at climate scientists significantly undermines their willingness to participate in public discussions. Second, online platforms like X and Meta have weakened their fact-checking mechanisms. This risks increasingly transforming them into incubators for misinformation and extremism.

Recently, Meta CEO Mark Zukerburg announced the company was ending its collaboration with third-party fact-checkers and would switch to using community notes. However, this tool, already in place on X, may not be effective enough to stop viral misinformation from spreading.

In addition, some platforms’ algorithms may be directing users to misinformation and conspiracy theories. For example, TikTok’s recommendation algorithm has been accused of fuelling conspiracy theories during the L.A. wildfires.

In light of these challenges, policy intervention is essential. Governments need to adopt a more proactive stance in combating climate change denialism, particularly by implementing strategies that alleviate political division and rebuild public trust in experts and institutions.

Public support

A recent public survey conducted by think tank The Dais shows strong public support for government interventions to combat online harms, including those caused by misinformation and disinformation.

The federal government’s proposed Online Harms Act, which aims to control harmful online content, is still making its way through the parliamentary process. However, the bill has draw criticism for failing to adequately hold social media companies accountable for the harm caused by false information.

Whether the bill is passed into law remains to be seen. And there are always legislative challenges and difficulties when governments directly get involved in online content moderation.

That means communications and climate change experts should develop and promote initiatives that encourage digital literacy, urge netizens to actively cross-reference and verify information sources and remind them to be wary of emotional appeals. These could be important first steps toward reducing the detrimental effects of conspiracy theories during disasters.

The post Better digital literacy could help reduce climate and disaster conspiracy theories appeared first on TMU Research & Innovation Blog.

Many have argued the energy industry needs to change to reduce carbon emissions, but one concern that remains is the consequence this will have on economic prosperity. THE CANADIAN PRESS/Jeff McIntosh

As the climate crisis escalates, there are urgent and difficult choices that need to be made to drastically reduce our carbon emissions before more irreparable damage is done.

Many have argued the energy industry needs to change to reduce carbon emissions, but one concern that remains is the consequence this will have on economic prosperity.

Discussions vary across interest groups. Do we need to outright replace the fossil fuel industry with the renewable energy industry as soon as possible? Should we slowly phase out fossil fuels while making clean renewable replacements? Or, should we continue with a powerful fossil fuel industry while separately growing a renewable industry in parallel?

How these different choices could impact our economies seems unclear, and it is this lack of clarity that opens up the field for frustrating discussions. At the recent COP28 climate summit in the United Arab Emirates, the conference president shockingly said that there is “no science” behind any decision to phase-out fossil fuels from our energy systems — a statement which he later claimed was “misinterpreted.”

My recent research examines energy industry restructuring options for a green transition to renewable energy from an economic perspective.

Although economic analysis is helpful, it is not sufficient on its own for making these important decisions. So, my research also draws on sustainability which involves considering the conditions faced by future generations, and a concept known as equifinality reminding us to keep our minds open to many possible approaches that may satisfy the same objectives.

Renewable energy innovation and GDP

My research indicates that renewable energy innovation contributes to higher GDP. Contrary to some commonly held beliefs, a clean transition is, and has been for at least a decade, good for the economy — even in earlier stages of its development.

My findings also suggest that government and industry support for the fossil fuel industry negatively affects a country’s renewable energy innovation. The two industries are not compatible.

When the fossil fuel industry invests in itself, it also appears to improve GDP, which creates confusion about the best way to ensure economic prosperity while transitioning to clean energy.

But this investment, often made through lobbying, only prolongs the existence of the fossil fuel industry by keeping renewable energy competition out. This creates a false dichotomy between reducing emissions and improving GDP when, in fact, clean innovation can achieve both simultaneously.

My research indicates that clean innovation makes a stronger economy and reduces emissions. If we want to reinforce that dual progress, rather than accepting trade-offs, then we have to stop supporting the fossil fuel industry which aims to slow it down.

Helping renewable energy thrive

Economically speaking, the fossil fuel industry is negatively impacting consumer welfare by maintaining higher-than-necessary prices due to limited competition. This, in turn, bumps up GDP through inflated profits, having subsidised an already dominant polluting industry, reducing clean innovation and delaying cleaner progress — obviously not the way to grow a healthy economy.

In fact, GDP is not a standard of living measure or a measure of innovative competitiveness. To address inflation and the cost of living crisis, we should be promoting more competition across industries. This is a more productive type of capitalism that brings wider benefits to all of us, including more innovation, lower prices, and better products for domestic and export markets.

Government subsidies that boost the fossil fuel industry hinder consumer welfare and the transition to clean energy. Some examples include subsidies to fund more carbon capture and storage technology and the use of fossil energy in hydrogen storage systems.

Instead of funding these backward subsidies, governments should implement pollution taxes while also supporting renewable energy innovation.

My research demonstrates that pollution taxes work well with clean innovation capabilities. Supporting research and innovation in renewable energy and using a carbon tax as a tool can boost the economic benefits of transitioning to clean energy.

The findings of my work suggest that a robust economy is related to industry restructuring so that renewable energy innovation can thrive. Fostering novel scientific discoveries in clean energy innovation should be prioritized while reducing non-competitive industry formations and organizations, such as fossil fuel oligopolies and industry associations.

Making decisions with the future in mind

Increasing public awareness and understanding of fossil fuel industry games is a way to accelerate change. It’s important to recognize that industries at different life cycle stages contribute to the economy in different ways.

A newer rising industry with determined entrepreneurs, like that of renewable energy, invests in innovation to create value. On the other hand, a declining industry plays end-game strategies, like engaging in self-promotional activities, to maintain their existing position and create barriers to new industry entries.

However, consumer welfare increases with competition, not collusion. Economic analysis is not sufficient on its own for decision-making in this area because positive economic outcomes can be generated by different kinds of strategies supporting an industry’s life cycle goals.

Government policy decisions should be made based on economic analyses alongside broader sustainability criteria. Ignoring the equifinality argument and reverting to discussions about replacing coal with gas as a bridge only ensures fossil fuels remain in use for at least another generation of infrastructure.

Communities should apply sustainability and equifinality lenses to decision-making, understanding that there are many possible means to an end. For example, if a community has specific concerns about one type of renewable energy system, they should explore other alternative clean energy options instead of defaulting to fossil fuels.

An educated public should reject simplistic and single-sided arguments and understand there are usually more nuanced solutions to problems supported by evidence-based analysis. By embracing a more holistic approach, we can develop more sustainable societies by opening up renewable energy possibilities.

The post Renewable energy innovation isn’t just good for the climate — it’s also good for the economy appeared first on TMU Research & Innovation Blog.

The past few years have witnessed a surge in the popularity and momentum of environmental, social and governance (ESG) investing — a form of responsible investing that aligns financial returns with positive environmental and social ones.

Institutional investors and asset managers have been viewing ESG investing as a means to mitigate investment risks and increase long-term returns. The basic premise is that industries that effectively manage their environment, social and government-related risks will be less susceptible to changes in regulations or societal expectations. This will improve their performance over the long term.

In recent months, however, numerous news articles have highlighted the growing tensions and conflicts surrounding ESG investing. In February, Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis pushed legislation to further restrict state investments involving ESG. Meanwhile, many ESG opponents have targeted BlackRock, the world’s largest funds manager and most prominent provider of ESG products and services.

ESG has received criticism from both ends of the ideological spectrum. Right-wing forces regard ESG as politically charged governance that advances “woke capitalism” led by corporations. In contrast, the left has expressed skepticism regarding ESG’s claims, arguing that its business- and market-friendly approaches to equity and sustainability are antithetical to the interests of the working class.

How can we make sense of the public debates surrounding ESG investing? As a scholar researching how issues like decarbonization are contested in the public sphere, I find these debates indicative of the growing polarization in the fossil fuel sector.

The politics of ESG investing

A closer look at the rising anti-ESG sentiment in the United States shows that attacks on environmental, social and governance investing are based on cultural, rather than economic grounds.

As noted in a Wall Street Journal analysis, the main goal of conservative activists is to turn the anti-ESG movement into “a rallying cry against woke capitalism, much the way critical race theory became shorthand for broader criticisms about how race is taught in schools.”

Useful piece from @lizzieameager tracking anti ESG legislation in the states https://t.co/GCCsnk7ORM pic.twitter.com/ayLh3XTsyC

— Polly Bindman (@pollybindman) October 3, 2022

Meanwhile, the conservatives’ attacks on ESG investing call for anti-ESG legislation. This contradicts their belief that governments should not determine how capital is allocated and investment decisions are made.

The costs of making ESG investing a political issue are glaring. According to an analysis conducted by scholars at the Wharton School, a Texas law, prohibiting municipalities from doing business with banks that have ESG policies against fossil fuels and firearms, came at a price. This was because its issuers incurred $300 to $500 million in additional interest on the $31.8 billion borrowed in the eight months following the law’s enactment.

As exemplified by the Texas case, one of the main causes of rising anti-ESG sentiment among conservatives is the increasingly apparent existential crisis of the fossil fuel industry.

In May 2021, a landmark shareholder vote at ExxonMobil resulted in the ouster of three board members by Engine No. 1 — a small activist hedge fund pushing the oil giant to adopt a more aggressive climate strategy and reduce its carbon footprint.

From @Breakingviews: Investor group Engine No. 1 successfully shook up Exxon Mobil’s board at its annual meeting. @TheRealLSL explains why this is bad news for CEO Darren Woods and why a sale may be the best outcome for shareholders $XOM pic.twitter.com/BqyEeTZFfI

— Reuters (@Reuters) May 27, 2021

Around the same time, Shell was mandated to cut its greenhouse gas emissions by 45 per cent between 2019 and 2030 by a Dutch court in response to a lawsuit brought by environmental groups and activists. Such events raise serious questions about the future profitability and sustainability of carbon-intensive businesses.

Divergent views on ESG investing

The political disagreement over ESG investing can also be viewed as an ideological conflict over the role of capitalism in addressing societal problems like inequality and climate change.

This conflict encompasses three main ideas.

First, those advocating for ESG investing believe capitalism can be reformed and redirected to serve the common good by incorporating environmental and social criteria into financial decision-making and creating positive change incentives.

Second, conservative opponents of ESG are dismissive of ESG investing’s promotion of what they consider to be liberal causes.

Thirdly, progressive opponents of ESG accuse ESG investing of being a form of greenwashing — the deceptive practice of making a company or product appear to be more environmentally friendly than it actually is.

Independent assessments of ESG performance

ESG investing is still mired in controversy, and many believe it will play a significant role in the presidential election in the U.S. next year.

What are the implications of the controversy for Canada? Briefly speaking, while many Canadian corporations have expressed positive attitudes toward ESG, it is concerning that public narratives regarding the fate of bitumen have become increasingly polarized, which parallels the politicization of ESG investing in the U.S.

The public opinion on the profitability of the bitumen industry in comparison to the subsidies it receives from provincial and federal governments is becoming increasingly divergent. This has significant implications for the future of the bitumen industry and its relationship with the government. If the perception that the industry is not paying its fair share persists, political pressure to reduce or eliminate existing subsidies will rise.

We urgently require comprehensive and independent assessments of the compatibility of the Canadian fossil fuel industry with ESG criteria. This will allow us to make informed decisions about how Canada’s fossil fuel industry aligns with the global transition to a low-carbon economy in the future. By taking a proactive approach to ESG, we can create a more sustainable and equitable future for all.

The post How environmental, social and governance (ESG) investing controversies can impact fossil fuels appeared first on TMU Research & Innovation Blog.

To assess and identify the best retrofit practices for residential buildings regarding carbon emissions, Toronto Metropolitan Univerisity’s (TMU) Department of Architectural Science chair and professor Mark Gorgolewski and TMU graduate student ​​Fatma Osman partnered with Michael Singleton, executive director of Sustainable Buildings Canada (SBC). Their research examines commonly used retrofit strategies in Ontario using building Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) to identify low-carbon material selections and optimal retrofit approaches.

This research benefits the construction industry by providing designers with academic insights into low-carbon strategies to help in project planning and design. It will also allow SBC and other organizations to support the development of appropriate policies and procedures that result in low-carbon built environments.

Funding for this project by Mitacs. To learn more about how Mitacs supports groundbreaking research and innovation, visit the Mitacs website.

The post Lowering carbon emissions by optimizing energy retrofits appeared first on TMU Research & Innovation Blog.