Search Climate Insights Directory

The report argues that communication is a critical climate solution that must be integrated into the budgeting and design of all local government programs. It outlines six key strategies for effective communication: investing in dedicated funding, conducting audience research, prioritizing climate justice and equity, leveraging social norms and storytelling to reduce psychological distance, utilizing trusted community messengers, and employing diverse communication channels. The document emphasizes that local governments are uniquely positioned to drive action because a majority of Americans want their local officials to address climate change.

The document posits that the lived experience and intergenerational knowledge of Métis harvesters provide more granular and longitudinal climate data than official monitoring systems. It highlights how environmental changes—such as unpredictable berry ripening and shifting animal populations—are detected by harvesters long before they appear in scientific datasets. The author argues that colonial frameworks have marginalized this knowledge, and that true climate resilience requires integrating Métis observation as primary data, protecting harvesting rights, and supporting the intergenerational transmission of land-based knowledge.

The document posits that the lived experience and intergenerational knowledge of Métis harvesters provide more granular and place-specific climate data than formal monitoring systems. It highlights how changing environmental patterns—such as unpredictable saskatoon berry ripening and altered freeze-thaw cycles—are already evident to harvesters. The author argues that the erosion of harvesting access due to industrial contamination, habitat loss, and social threats constitutes a climate impact and a violation of food sovereignty. The text calls for a redesign of climate monitoring to co-develop frameworks with Métis communities and treat the transmission of harvesting knowledge as a priority for climate adaptation.

The study finds that Canadian municipalities spend millions annually managing single-use plastic (SUP) waste, though specific costs are often undertracked. Plastics comprise approximately 15% of both garbage and recycling streams by weight. The report highlights significant data gaps for items like vaping devices and tampon applicators, which are frequently found in wastewater screenings but rarely in solid waste audits. Environmental analysis shows cigarette butts are the most abundant SUP by count, while bottles and cups dominate by mass. A critical economic finding is the potential risk to Canadian agriculture, where microplastic pollution could lead to annual crop production value losses between CAD 0.5 and 2.16 billion. To address these issues, the authors developed a Plastic Waste Cost Calculator for local authorities and recommend transitioning to volumetric waste measurements and establishing a universal flushability standard for wipes.

The study evaluates the financial and environmental burden of eight common single-use plastics in Canada. It finds a significant lack of consistent data across municipalities, with costs often underestimated because they are based on weight rather than the high volume these plastics occupy. The report highlights that cigarette butts are the most frequent litter item, while plastic bottles and cups generate substantial management costs. It also estimates that microplastic pollution could risk between 0.5 and 2.16 billion CAD annually in Canadian agricultural production for wheat and corn. To address these gaps, the authors developed a 'Plastic Waste Cost Calculator' tool for local authorities and recommend shifting toward volumetric waste measurement and standardized data collection.

The report argues that low-density urban sprawl is fiscally unsustainable for Canadian municipalities, contributing to a national infrastructure deficit of CAD 270 billion. Using Winnipeg as a primary case study, it demonstrates how the failure to account for long-term maintenance and carbon costs in development decisions creates a 'municipal Ponzi scheme' where new growth is used to mask the liabilities of old infrastructure. The author recommends reforming development cost charges, property taxes, and fiscal impact assessments to prioritize compact, complete communities that generate more revenue and produce fewer emissions.

The report evaluates 17 types of natural infrastructure across four functional families (cover, basins, watercourses, and groundwater) to support water management in the Canadian Prairies. It argues that while natural assets like grasslands and wetlands are essential, constructed analogues such as bioretention and green roofs are necessary in urban areas to bridge the infrastructure gap. The document provides performance rankings and technical data to help decision-makers build a more robust business case for nature-based solutions over traditional grey infrastructure.

The report examines the link between urban sprawl and high energy consumption, arguing that current energy policies overlook the role of urban design. It advocates for "complete communities"—dense, walkable, mixed-use neighborhoods—as a primary strategy for emissions reduction. Using the Sustainable Asset Valuation (SAVi) methodology, the report compares car-centric and sustainable transportation scenarios in Winnipeg, finding that sustainable shifts offer significantly higher net benefits and a superior benefit-to-cost ratio. It identifies key barriers such as NIMBYism, flawed municipal governance, and the financial instability caused by sprawl, while proposing solutions including zoning reform, parking policy changes, and new municipal revenue tools.

The document identifies concentrated carbon capture as a "safe bet" for industrial processes with high-concentration CO2 streams, such as cement and ammonia production, while categorizing non-concentrated applications (e.g., natural gas power) as "risky bets." It highlights the technology's potential role in Canada's net-zero pathways, noting that while it could reduce oil and gas emissions by 17 to 50 megatonnes by 2030, its large-scale deployment depends on long-term policy certainty and government financial support, including investment tax credits.

The document distinguishes between 'safe bet' concentrated-stream carbon capture and 'wild card' unconcentrated applications, noting that while the former is commercially viable for certain heavy emitters, the overall sector has a history of underperformance and high costs. In Canada, the technology is projected to contribute between 17 and 50 megatonnes of emissions reductions in the oil and gas sector by 2030, supported by federal investment tax credits of up to 50%. However, the author cautions that deployment depends on policy durability and prudent use of public funds, particularly as demand for oil and gas is expected to decline during the energy transition.

The report finds that climate change is significantly increasing the number of 'lost winter days' (days above freezing) across Canada, with some regions seeing an additional week of such days annually. The analysis highlights specific impacts in provinces like Prince Edward Island and Nova Scotia, and major cities including Vancouver, Toronto, and Montreal, noting consequences for snow accumulation, ice coverage, and winter industries.

The report highlights 'bright spots' in Canada where local governments are integrating natural infrastructure—such as wetlands, trees, and rain gardens—to complement traditional grey infrastructure for services like stormwater management and flood protection. It examines the City of Nelson's use of bylaws, Halifax Regional Municipality's policy embedding, and EPCOR's integrated investment strategy in Edmonton.

The report examines how the City of Nelson, Halifax Regional Municipality, and EPCOR integrate natural infrastructure into their water management. It highlights the use of local bylaws in Nelson, a multi-level policy hierarchy in Halifax, and a hybrid grey-natural approach by EPCOR in Edmonton to enhance climate resilience and flood mitigation.

The report estimates that CAD 346.6 million is provided annually via national grants for natural infrastructure in Canada, with CAD 98.4 million reaching the Prairie provinces from combined federal and provincial sources. It finds that while conservation is a common objective in funding programs, the majority of actual spending is directed toward restored ecosystems (57%) and engineered systems (41.1%), with conserved ecosystems receiving only 1.7% of funding. The Natural Infrastructure Fund (NIF) is identified as the only fund explicitly targeting natural infrastructure projects.

The document details the technical framework of the HEAT™ model used to assess the economics of heat pump adoption in Canada. It specifies the building archetypes, equipment configurations, and future-shifted climate data for Vancouver, Edmonton, Toronto, Montréal, and Halifax. The report outlines the financial inputs, including energy price forecasts, carbon pricing based on the federal backstop, and a comprehensive list of federal, provincial, and municipal incentives available at the time of analysis.

The report finds that heat pumps are the lowest-cost heating and cooling option for most Canadian households over the system's lifetime, though adoption is hindered by high upfront costs, information gaps, and structural barriers for renters. It recommends streamlining rebates, establishing one-stop shop services, and updating building codes to include cooling requirements.

The report finds that heat pumps are the most economical heating and cooling option for the majority of Canadian households over their system life cycle, particularly in cities like Vancouver, Montreal, and Halifax. Despite this economic advantage, adoption remains low due to behavioral, economic, and structural barriers, including high initial costs, lack of consumer confidence, and complex government rebate programs. The document argues that heat pumps are critical for both decarbonizing residential buildings and increasing resilience against extreme heat, which has caused significant mortality in regions like British Columbia. It recommends that governments maintain financial supports, simplify application processes through 'one-stop shops', implement indoor maximum temperature limits in building codes, and mandate high-efficiency, non-polluting systems in new constructions where electrically-powered heating is most cost-effective.

The Canadian Association of Physicians for the Environment (CAPE) urges the Edmonton City Council to ban cosmetic pesticides, asserting that such bans are popular, cost-effective, and essential for protecting human and environmental health. CAPE argues that the current risk assessment approach is insufficient and advocates for an 'alternatives assessment' paradigm that prioritizes hazard prevention over acceptable risk. The document links pesticide use to broader planetary health crises, noting that pesticides can negatively impact soil biodiversity and carbon sequestration, thereby exacerbating the climate emergency. CAPE cites various health risks associated with pesticides, including links to cancers, reproductive problems, and Parkinson's disease, and points to successful bans in other jurisdictions as models for Edmonton to follow.

The report finds that while Canadian community foundations (CCFs) have grown their endowments to nearly CAD 7 billion as of 2020, they have largely failed to use these assets to combat climate change. Most CCFs rely on vague 'ESG integration' for risk mitigation rather than pursuing climate-positive investments. The analysis reveals significant capacity gaps and a lack of diversity on investment committees, which often act as barriers to strategic change. The report recommends moving toward positive screening, increasing transparency of holdings, and joining the Canadian Philanthropy Commitment on Climate Change to align financial assets with community climate goals.

The author warns that Canadian investors and infrastructure owners are operating in a world that no longer exists, as the financial risks of a warming climate remain underpriced. Citing a Canadian Climate Institute report, the text highlights that annual flood damage to homes and buildings could reach $4.5 billion to $5.5 billion within 30 years. The document contends that a lack of open-access climate risk data leads to flawed financial analysis and calls for regulators to mandate the disclosure of climate risks to prevent a systemic financial shock.