Submission to the CleanBC Review Panel by Climate Realists of B.C.

In 2025, the B.C. government asked for submissions assessing its CleanBC climate policy. This is Climate Realists of B.C.’s response to this call for submissions.

By Patrick Hunt, President, Climate Realists of B.C., June 2025

The Terms of Reference for the CleanBC Review Panel reads:

“The Province is launching an independent review of CleanBC programs to ensure:

they are effectively reducing emissions,

while making life more affordable, and

supporting a strong economy.”

Our group, Climate Realists of British Columbia, understands that the CleanBC initiative to reduce carbon-dioxide emissions was based on the hypothesis, based on computer climate models, that CO₂, particularly human-caused CO₂, is primarily responsible for global warming (CO₂ is the “thermostat” of warming). But climate models do not have the same scientific value as empirical evidence. As Richard P. Feynman, Nobel Prize winner in Physics, has written: “It doesn’t matter how beautiful your theory is, it doesn’t matter how smart you are. If it doesn’t agree with experiment, it’s wrong.”

The so called “scientific consensus” that the “science is settled,” that CO₂—and particularly human-caused CO₂—is the primary cause of global warming, has been refuted again and again by reputable scientists with stellar scientific credentials. As noted above, models are not proven facts, and the CO₂climate models have continually been wrong when compared to actual observations (that is, when “hindcasted,” the model predictions have consistently been higher, and often much higher, than the observed temperatures).

If CO₂ is not the primary driver of global warming, now referred to as “climate change,” then what is? The current scientific literature reports many other factors that drive climate, including (but not limited to) solar fluctuations (e.g., sunspots), oscillations in ocean warming and cooling, El Niños, variations in cloud cover, even abundance or absence of cosmic rays. This information is widely available but unfortunately not widely reported in the media.

In scientific support of our position, we offer the following references:

Miodrag M. Mesarovic, “Scientific uncertainties feed skepticism on climate change.” Energoproject, Belgrade, Service, 2015. Available at https://doiserbia.nb.rs/img/doi/0354-9836/2015/0354-98361500194M.pdf
Richard Lindzen, William Happer, & Steven Koonin, “Re: Shell v. Mileiudefensie, et al.” Expert Opinion prepared for Foundation “Environment and Man” (Stichting “Mileiu en Mens,” M&M), 2023. Available at https://co2coalition.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/09/Lindzen-Happer-Koonin-Affidavit-30-Nov-2023-2.pdf.
W. A. van Wijngaarden & W. Happer, “Relative potency of greenhouse molecules.” Atmospheric and Oceanic Physics arXiv, 2021. Available at https://wvanwijngaarden.info.yorku.ca/files/2021/03/WPotency.pdf?x45936

Further, in Appendix A we submit the response from the artificial-intelligence application, www.Grok.com, to the following instruction:

Write a 700-word justification for the statement, “Carbon dioxide is not the thermostat of the world,” and provide annotated references supporting that statement.

How much warming will CleanBC prevent?

To ignore the readily available evidence that CO₂ is not the thermostat of the world is to wilfully ignore the responsibility for truth and good governance that citizens expect of their elected governments.

If your review of the CleanBC initiative is to have any value to the citizens of B.C., then we submit the review must not just evaluate if there has been any reduction in CO₂ emissions through the province’s anti-carbon policies, and by how much, but also whether the underlying assumptions about CO₂’s impact on global warming are valid.

A key question the review should be addressing: Has there been any corresponding reduction in temperature because of the implementation of CleanBC?

Has there been any corresponding reduction in temperature because of the implementation of CleanBC?

And further: even if anthropogenic CO₂ was the cause of global warming, the Net Zero objectives of CleanBC cannot be met without a substantial reduction in the standard of living in British Columbia, thereby invalidating the CleanBC objectives of 2) making life more affordable and 3) supporting a strong economy.

We wholeheartedly endorse a June 2025 paper by Jock Finlayson, chief economist, Independent Contractors and Businesses Association, and Ken Peacock, a consulting economist and former vice-president of the Business Council of B.C., that makes CleanBC’s failure to meet objectives 2 and 3 crystal clear.¹

The paper notes that CleanBC will create a $109 billion reduction in B.C.’s GDP from 2025 to 2029, but this would be all economic pain for almost no climate gain in reduced temperature since B.C.’s emissions represented only about 0.14 per cent of global emissions in 2022.² In other words, CleanBC will have a minuscule effect (perhaps 0.006°C by 2100) in reduced global warming. Also, an economic hit this large should not be politically feasible since it means a 10 per cent reduction in B.C. residents’ standard of living, with almost no tangible benefits.

We also wholeheartedly support the conclusion in the paper by economists Ken Peacock and Denise Mullen entitled, “Government’s own modelling shows its CleanBC plan will dampen economic growth and set B.C.’s prosperity back more than a decade,” published in Business Council of British Columbia’s publication Economic Perspectives dated August 9, 2023.³

The Peacock and Mullen paper presents the forecast by the B.C. Ministry of Finance that, under CleanBC, in 2029 the GDP of B.C. will be reduced by $28.1 billion, which would be 10% of the B.C. economy that year. Again, a cut this large is not politically or economically acceptable and completely contradicts points 2 and 3 of the CleanBC objectives.

Before aroused public opinion forces the Government of B.C. to change course, as is happening in the United States and Europe, and before more damage is done to the economy of British Columbia, we strongly advise the B.C. government to abandon its harmful and pointless energy policies, acknowledge that there is no “climate emergency” (since CO2 is not the “thermostat” of climate), and facilitate the continuing development of our conventional energy resources, which are the basis of our prosperity and high standard of living, while encouraging new sources of energy such as nuclear power.

In conclusion, I assert that CleanBC is impossible to achieve scientifically, is economically disastrous, and will be politically unacceptable as soon as the public realizes the cost to their standard of living for no appreciable benefits.

Respectfully submitted,

Patrick Hunt

President, Climate Realists of British Columbia

Appendix A

The Appendix provides the response from the artificial-intelligence application, www.Grok.com, to the following instruction:

Write a 700-word justification for the statement, “Carbon dioxide is not the thermostat of the world,” and provide annotated references supporting that statement.

Grok Response:

Justification: “Carbon Dioxide is Not the Thermostat of the World”

The statement “carbon dioxide is not the thermostat of the world” challenges the widely held view that carbon dioxide (CO₂) is the primary driver of global climate change. While CO₂ is a greenhouse gas that contributes to warming, its role as the dominant control mechanism—or “thermostat”—for Earth’s climate is overstated when other factors, feedback mechanisms, and historical data are considered. This justification explores why CO₂‘s influence is more nuanced and why other natural and anthropogenic factors play significant roles in regulating global temperatures.

1. Historical Climate Variability

Earth’s climate has fluctuated significantly over geological time scales, often independent of CO₂ levels. For instance, during the Medieval Warm Period (approximately 900–1300 CE), global temperatures were comparable to or warmer than today, yet CO₂ concentrations were lower, around 280 ppm compared to today’s ~420 ppm [1]. Similarly, the Little Ice Age (1300–1850 CE) saw cooler global temperatures with CO₂ levels remaining relatively stable. These examples suggest that factors like solar activity, volcanic eruptions, and ocean circulation patterns can significantly influence climate independently of CO₂ [2]. If CO₂ were the primary thermostat, such temperature variations would align more closely with CO₂ fluctuations, which they do not.

2. The Role of Water Vapor

Water vapor is the most abundant greenhouse gas, contributing 60–70% of the greenhouse effect, compared to CO₂’s 20–25% [3]. Its concentration in the atmosphere varies widely and is influenced by temperature, evaporation, and atmospheric dynamics. Unlike CO₂, which is evenly distributed, water vapor’s regional variability and feedback effects (e.g., cloud formation) can amplify or dampen warming. Clouds, for instance, can reflect sunlight (cooling) or trap heat (warming), depending on their type and altitude [4]. This complexity suggests that water vapor and associated feedbacks play a more dynamic role in climate regulation than CO₂ alone.

3. Solar and Cosmic Influences

Solar radiation is the primary energy source for Earth’s climate system. Variations in solar output, such as those during the 11-year sunspot cycle or longer-term changes like the Maunder Minimum, (when sunspot activity was low) have been linked to temperature shifts [5]. Additionally, cosmic rays, modulated by solar activity, may influence cloud formation by ionizing atmospheric particles, potentially amplifying solar effects [6]. These external forcings demonstrate that CO₂ is not the sole or dominant driver, as solar and cosmic factors can significantly alter climate independently.

4. Oceanic and Geological Factors

Oceans store and transfer vast amounts of heat, with cycles like the El Niño-Southern Oscillation (ENSO) and the Atlantic Multidecadal Oscillation (AMO) driving significant climate variability [7]. These cycles can cause global temperature changes of 0.5°C or more over short periods, rivaling or exceeding CO₂’s estimated impact. Additionally, geological processes like volcanic eruptions release aerosols that can cool the planet by reflecting sunlight, as seen during the 1991 Mount Pinatubo eruption, which caused a temporary global cooling of ~0.5°C [8]. These factors highlight that CO₂ is one of many variables influencing climate.

5. Limitations of Climate Models

Climate models often emphasize CO₂ as a primary driver, but they rely on assumptions about feedback mechanisms and climate sensitivity that remain uncertain. For example, the equilibrium climate sensitivity (ECS)—the temperature increase from doubling CO2—ranges from 1.5°C to 4.5°C in IPCC models, a wide range reflecting uncertainty [9]. Models also struggle to account for natural variability and non-CO₂ factors like land-use changes or black carbon (soot), which can have significant regional impacts [10]. Overreliance on CO₂-centric models risks oversimplifying the climate system, reinforcing the notion that CO₂ is not the sole “thermostat.”

6. Anthropogenic Non-CO₂ Influences

Human activities beyond CO₂ emissions, such as deforestation, urbanization, and agriculture, alter climate through changes in albedo (surface reflectivity), aerosols, and methane emissions. For example, deforestation reduces carbon sinks and changes local climates, while urban heat islands raise regional temperatures [11]. Methane, another potent greenhouse gas, has a warming potential 25–80 times that of CO₂ over shorter timeframes, yet its role is often under-emphasized compared to CO₂[12]. These factors indicate that CO₂ is part of a broader suite of human influences, not the singular control.

Conclusion

While CO₂ contributes to global warming, it is not the “thermostat of the world” due to the interplay of natural and anthropogenic factors, including water vapor, solar activity, oceanic cycles, geological events, and non-CO₂ human impacts. The climate system’s complexity, coupled with historical data and model uncertainties, suggests that attributing primary control to CO₂ oversimplifies reality. A holistic understanding of climate requires acknowledging these diverse drivers.

Annotated References

Mann, M. E., et al. (2008).Proxy-based reconstructions of hemispheric and global surface temperature variations over the past two millennia. PNAS, 105(36), 13252–13257.
- Provides evidence of temperature variations during the Medieval Warm Period and Little Ice Age, showing climate variability independent of CO₂ levels.
Lean, J. L. (2010).Cycles and trends in solar irradiance and climate. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Climate Change, 1(1), 111–122.
- Discusses solar irradiance variations and their impact on historical climate changes.
Schmidt, G. A., et al. (2010).Attribution of the present-day total greenhouse effect. Journal of Geophysical Research: Atmospheres, 115(D20).
- Quantifies water vapor’s dominant role in the greenhouse effect compared to CO₂.
Bony, S., et al. (2006).How well do we understand and evaluate climate change feedback processes? Journal of Climate, 19(15), 3445–3482.
- Explores the complex role of clouds and water vapor in climate feedback.
Svensmark, H. (2007).Cosmoclimatology: A new theory emerges. Astronomy & Geophysics, 48(1), 1.18–1.24.
- Proposes cosmic rays’ influence on cloud formation and climate.
Trenberth, K. E., et al. (2009).Earth’s global energy budget. Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society, 90(3), 311–324.
- Details the role of oceanic cycles like ENSO in climate variability.
Robock, A. (2000). Volcanic eruptions and climate. Reviews of Geophysics, 38(2), 191–219.

Notes

J. Finlayson & K. Peacock, “Tariffs and CleanBC: Weighing the Economic Costs of External Shocks and Domestic Policy.” Available at https://icbaindependent.ca/wp-content/uploads/2025/06/Tariffs-and-CleanBC-Economic-Report-FINAL.pdf. [↩]
Global emissions in 2022 were about 48 million megatonnes (Government of Canada, “Global Greenhouse Gas Emissions”; B.C.’s emissions that year were 65 million tonnes (B.C. government, “Provincial inventory of greenhouse gas emissions), or about 0.14 per cent of global emissions. [↩]
This paper can be found at https://www.bcbc.com/insight/governments-own-modelling-shows-its-cleanbc-plan-will-dampen-economic-growth-and-set-b-c-s-prosperity-back-more-than-a-decade?rq=cleanbc. [↩]