top of page
a_forest_aerial.jpg

The Climate Action Blog

Musings on the catastrophic effects of climate change from Climate Action members

Search

With diesel exhaust linked to cancer and respiratory illness, let's encourage Ontario government to accelerate the shift toward an all-electric fleet of school buses.


York Region's climate action goal is a fully electric bus fleet by 2050. That target has to include school buses. The sooner the better.


With September here and school routines re-established, the collegial work of knowledge building in York Region District School Board and York Catholic District School Board schools reaches pace. School days ought to be filled with positive momentum, challenges faced, problems tackled/solved, personal fulfillment and life-affirming progress attained.


The formative leaders in the learning odyssey are teachers. Administrators and custodial care workers, in immeasurable ways, sustain the edifice of education. Dedicated adults steer the students to destiny's doorstep by daily transporting 56,000 children to York Region schools. Yet all these communities of advancement dwell in a compromised health atmosphere.


Clouds of anthropogenic pollutants surround and enter areas where diesel school buses run.


Barely visible wafts of poisonous chemicals and dangerous microparticles wheeze out of tailpipes to carry sickening emissions into nearby buildings, around the buses and even more inside them. Some kids (adults, too) may have or will get asthma, some will develop other respiratory ailments, many school days will be lost.


Someday, some of those kids as grown-ups may look at life-shortening diseases they have and wonder: why them? How galling for them that we already knew when they were young the ominous links to diesel engine exhaust (DEE) and traffic-related air pollution (TRAP).


DEE and TRAP are both Group 1 carcinogens, meaning strongly associated with certain cancers, according to the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC).


CANA's local environmental advocacy includes nudging levers of change and encouraging the elected to use their political power to build and reinforce healthy, just and sustainable living for all.


Our political outreach volunteers' requests to meet Newmarket-Aurora MPP Dawn Gallagher Murphy have gone unanswered. We'll report here what comes from pressing our political representative for a timeline on electric school buses when a meeting is eventually convened.


In the meantime, we'll tell you, dear reader, what we'll be saying to her.

We believe disparate sides on societal conflicts have better outcomes working from common ground. Opportunities hidden in challenges are always ours to find.


The economic impacts of school bus electrification are broadly positive and extend across health-care savings, operational cost reductions, job creation, and regional economic growth. Key findings from recent reports and analyses include:


Health-care cost savings: Electrifying school buses can reduce exposure to harmful diesel exhaust, which is linked to respiratory and cardiovascular diseases, leading to significant health-care savings. Ecology Ottawa estimates a single electric school bus could account for $980 a year in total health savings. That's approximately $20 million annual health-care savings as a result of reduced DEE and TRAP-promoted illness in children, and their hospital visits, once Ontario's entire school bus fleet is electrified.


Lowering operating costs: Electric school buses cost about 50 per cent less to maintain than diesel buses. Electricity to power electric school buses costs about 80 per cent less than diesel fuel per kilometre, resulting in more than $10,000 per bus savings per year, according to Canadian Urban Transit Research & Innovation Consortium.


Revenue generation via vehicle-to-grid (V2G): Many electric school buses can participate in V2G programs. Through Ontario government innovation funding, Elocity (1) is setting up bi-directional charging in the province allowing electric vehicles (EVs), and with hope including electric school buses, to feed stored energy back into the grid. This technology generates additional revenue which can also offset electric school buses charging costs.


Job creation and economic output: In Ontario alone, transitioning to electric school buses could create around 13,000 jobs and generate nearly $2 billion in economic output, strengthening local manufacturing and the automotive sector, according to the Pembina Institute.


Climate and environmental benefits: Electrification contributes to greenhouse gas emission reductions, helping provinces and countries meet climate targets. Ecology Ottawa reports one electric school bus reduces greenhouse gas production by 17 tonnes a year. That's 340,000 tonnes a year across Ontario's whole school bus fleet or more than four million tonnes over the aggregate of 12-year lifespans of Ontario's 20,000 school buses.


York Region is actively adding to its transit fleet and expanding on-route battery refilling. Bus depot upgrades will feature solar power for battery charging. When they return, federal and Ontario finance incentives for electric bus acquisition and transit charging ports could stretch further if the infrastructure is shared between public transport and school bus service in York Region.


CANA recommends a transition plan with time-bound targets and regular reporting on government progress toward school bus electrification. Commitment and transparency could help address public perceptions that the Ford government is intent on slow-rolling the transition away from fossil fuels' dangerous changing of climate.


Expanding clean energy production and electric grid infrastructure with a focus on health improvements in air, water and soil quality will net investments, job creation, technological innovation and signal Ontario's rise as the Canadian clean economy leader it should be.


Call your trustee and your MPP and let's start this transition to electric school buses now.





Over 75% of Canadians are concerned about climate impacts on safety, food prices, taxes, and insurance


When we first started this column, we stated climate change is scary; extreme weather comes to mind for most people, especially this summer, with wildfire pollution and floodwater. You can’t turn on the media without the latest disaster.


What we don’t think about as much is the interconnectedness of biodiversity, water systems, and greenspaces with climate change, and we should. We’re now in a catch-22, and unless we interrupt this vicious cycle, the chaos will keep escalating.


Our oceans, lakes and waterways, meadows, wetlands, peatlands and mature forests quietly and consistently absorb Earth’s greenhouse gases. This system worked until industrialization triggered fuel-hungry growth that outpaced what nature could handle. Now, emissions accumulate faster than ecosystems can absorb them, warming oceans and land, intensifying weather patterns, and disrupting life support systems.


Sudden tropical-style downpours no longer soak into soil like they used to. The ground becomes so dry and compacted it repels water, triggering flash floods like in Toronto and Montreal last year.


At the same time, vegetation dries out faster and becomes tinder as temperatures soar. Already in 2025, Canada is experiencing its second-worst wildfire year on record. In Manitoba, over 12,000 people have been evacuated. Nova Scotia has been hit by both fire and floods. Sandy Lake First Nation in Northern Ontario had to be evacuated by air. Southern Ontario has endured multiple air quality advisories. Yet, Premier Ford continues to cut over $40 million from wildfire emergency services in 2025.


Nationwide, over 7.8 million acres have burned, equivalent to 3.5 million soccer fields or eight times the size of Toronto.


Now imagine ecosystems washed away, burned, contaminated, and further weakened as protected greenspaces are lost to development. Fire is part of natural renewal, but recovery can’t keep pace with this new frequency. Over 100 native species have already disappeared in Canada, and many others that had begun to recover in Ontario are now precariously vulnerable under Bill 5.


Why is Doug Ford willing to sell off a third of Wasaga provincial park to developers? Every ecological loss weakens our planet’s ability to store carbon. The cycle intensifies. This is scary stuff but there’s no hiding from it anymore.


According to the Stockholm Resilience Centre, we’ve now surpassed the seventh planetary boundary for Earth’s health. Driven by emissions, ocean acidification now undermines marine food webs, carbon cycles, and climate regulation. The first sign was widespread coral reef destruction. What was once a warning for future generations is happening now.


In fact, what the Paris Agreement aimed to prevent by 2100 may arrive in just five years unless emissions are rapidly curbed. That means drastically reducing both CO₂ and methane, with the most impactful step being a full phase-out of fossil fuels.


So, is this finally enough to start taking more serious action? One person it seems can trigger economic upheaval but wildfires, floods, food insecurity, and deadly heat and pollution still don’t shift political priorities? The solutions do exist. Climate action is economic stability. Climate action is cost-of-living stability.


For many, the reckoning has begun. Over 75% of Canadians are concerned about climate impacts on safety, food prices, taxes, and insurance. Insurance rates are a new climate barometer, and they’re rising. Why aren’t climate priorities aligned with national economic goals, Ontario’s infrastructure, and youth well-being?


In Ontario, we are on track to miss our climate targets. Greenspaces and ecosystems, including the Greenbelt, face weakened protections now reliant on diluted federal laws. Renewable energy is sidelined in favour of gas-fired power, while Ontario bets on unproven, U.S.-developed nuclear technology still a decade away — even as the premier pushes a fossil fuel pipeline to avoid relying on the very country we're depending on for nuclear.


Transit projects have been cut, with millions being spent to remove Toronto bike lanes while highways are fast-tracked through protected lands. Municipalities still reel from Bills 5, 17 and ​​23 , which limit their power to uphold energy saving standards, greenspace protections, and sustainable planning.


Federally, it remains to be seen. Hopes for a climate-economy approach turn to skepticism. For some, the politics of power seems to be blocking meaningful action. ‘Climate’ is a dirty word and plans, if they exist, remain vague or insufficient. The next three years are critical for meeting Canada’s climate commitments and safeguarding our health.


Do we brace for more danger and rising costs or push politicians by becoming a greater collective that drives bottom-up change through local choices? We can, through purchasing power and our voice in community planning and energy choices.


Climate Action Newmarket-Aurora advocates at local councils to phase out fossil fuel use, and to raise concerns about damaging provincial legislation. Repeal petitions are circulating on the latter, and a constitutional challenge is underway by First Nations.


Take action letters to protect ecosystems and carbon sinks like for Ontario proposals to remove ‘protected’ lands from Wasaga, French River and Grundy Lake provincial parks are on our website. Calls, emails to officials, and community conversations do matter and so will 2026 municipal elections, where residents can vote for councils that prioritize climate alongside infrastructure and housing needs. Our power is part of that politics.

That’s the power of yes: protecting youth, safer communities, clean air and water, and long-term prosperity. But “yes” also means saying “no” to short-sighted development, dismantling protections, false solutions, and silence. Sometimes, saying yes to a livable future requires a firm no right now. Just like the ‘elbows up’ against the imposed tariffs while we get our collective economic act together, we must expect the same in our existential fight on climate change.


“Wait and see” is no longer safe or acceptable. We still have a small window to act reasonably, ambitiously, and urgently even if some try to legislate denial or threaten to walk away from Confederation.


The controversial Protect Ontario by Unleashing Our Economy Act, Bill 5, rushed into law June 5, awaits its first tests when legislative business resumes in September. Coalitions opposing Bill 5 have made their objections known to the Ford government regarding its override of municipal laws, and brushing off science-backed, citizen-supported environmental protections and Indigenous objections.


Bill 5 stripped down several environmental laws that preserve clean and resilient nature systems, eviscerated species at risk protections, amended the Energy Board Act, Heritage Act, Rebuilding Ontario Place Act, and Mining Act. It also armed government ministers with power to declare special economic zones (SEZs), permitting their unaccountable choice of development projects deemed best for Ontario’s future. No due regard for social and environmental consequences needs to be applied.

Two social and environmental impact projects where Bill 5 overrides may apply are already destined for public opposition: the Dresden Landfill, an industrial waste dump slated for southwestern Ontario’s farm belt; and the Ring of Fire area in northern Ontario, home to many Indigenous communities and potential repository of critical minerals for mining.


Under Bill 5, the landfill project will skirt an environmental assessment (EA). Since the EA process could provide clarity and mitigation strategies against potential for explosions due to geological instability; contamination threat to nearby Sydenham River and species at risk; and disruption to farmland and aquifer recharging, one wonders what sense it makes to override normal legislated cautions? Is the corporate wealth generated from probable contamination, noise and increased air pollution’s health effects worth foisting onto future generations?


In Premier Doug Ford’s hurry to register any kind of political “win”, his majority government bulldozed Bill 5 through parliament with little regard for inclusion of those affected by mine development in the Ring of Fire. After-the-fact promises to consult First Nations sound hollow next to Bill 5’s back-pocket exemptions if things don’t go Ford-fast or his cabinet’s way.


Free, prior and informed consent from First Nations takes government good will and respect for Indigenous concerns. This provincial government’s short-shrift of both could cause unnecessary backlash and delay development rather than unleash Ontario’s touted mining bonanza.


The provincial government pledges that unburdening itself from consultation, consensus building, transparency, oversight and accountability measures will shield Ontarians from the American tyrant-at-large. Smoothing our way to quicker economic pickup may prove unlikely.


Ford’s rough handling of people and planning dynamics could be his undoing. No apparent design for using Bill 5 power, no agreement with other government levels on how it applies, no full-throated industry acceptance heard, and much antagonistic public reception in the news predict economic uncertainty not prosperity as advertised.


Nobody says governance is easy, or that democracy is a slick slide to the finish. Good governance requires clear principles, vision, planning, good will, openness, honesty and competence. Bill 5 begs the competence question: if Ford’s government has to downgrade, dismantle and dismiss decades of carefully crafted citizen, worker, Indigenous, business, industrial and environmental ethics, priorities and protections, is he really up for the job of managing our multi-faceted social, economic and environmental future?


If so, why hasn’t he shown respect for the lived wisdom and conscientious leadership of Indigenous peoples and built appropriate relationships; or heeded advice from the Association of Municipalities of Ontario and the Mining Industry?


Special economic zones


Ford’s government didn’t bother to make the case for potential uses of special economic zones or cabinet’s handpicking development projects and the need to release them from expert scrutiny and parliamentary oversight. And it hasn't demonstrated any understanding of SEZ process and guiding principles. Only has it propounded the powers ministers will now wield. Looks surreptitious. Smells autocratic.


SEZs have been used successfully in a variety of countries in the developing world. The World Bank has produced a guide book (1) on the Do’s and Don’ts of their use. Ford’s government gang gets full marks for achieving all the don’ts because it: lacks strategic planning; fails to address infrastructure needs and government co-ordination; has poor implementation capacity; demonstrates inability to mitigate environmental and social risks. 


If that weren’t enough to give us pause, Bill 5 pre-absolves Bill 5-enabled operatives from liability from Bill 5 impacts by preventing lawsuits against government ministers or officials who preside over Bill 5-enabled activities that go awry.


Association of Municipalities of Ontario


The AMO says their member communities are high-investor, critical economic partners within Ontario. Their upfront objectives lead with health, safety, environmental protection, community well-being and the upholding of Indigenous rights and relationships.

AMO’s submission (2) on Bill 5 stresses that SEZs require strong municipal and local partnership to succeed. SEZs that override local bylaws and decision-making and that execute local housing without limits bypassing local deliberation, risks unco-ordinated municipal growth, and presents cost consequences for delivering infrastructure.

To achieve full potential, vital SEZs need to develop good faith alliances with municipalities as key partners, not door mats. Agreement in advance and local support are crucial before projects move forward. Nowhere does Bill 5 ensure compliance with the duty to consult on the municipal level.


Economic prosperity, says AMO, is tied to health, safety and environmental prosperity. Which flows from rigorous protection of species-at-risk, natural habitats and environmental areas.


The public sector values and principles that AMO stands by, they insist, need ratification by the provincial government for revitalized economic development to establish traction.


Mining Industry


The mining sector is considerably wary of their investments riding on Bill 5’s environmental, social, and governance (ESG) deficits. One mining industry report (3) says Bill 5’s deregulatory thrust would primarily benefit small investment, junior exploration firms that would drive an uptick of prospecting activity in the Ring of Fire but little mineral extraction development.


It goes on to say, centralizing power in the disorganized Ministry of Mines, with its vague mineral claims management, are disincentives for serious mining investors. Mining analysts say the industry’s larger and long-term concern includes potential for political interference with no checks and balances on ministerial actions.


Mining industry feedback advises that Bill 5 lacks co-ordinated federal-provincial infrastructure planning and investment, and legislative mandates for free, prior and informed consent. Big investment funds that have heeded public demand and profit proofs prefer strong ESG frameworks and could see as a major governance failure the lack of Indigenous inclusion. Projects linked to Bill 5 could face reputational damage for investors, the industry anticipates, consumer boycotts or delays by instigating activist litigation.


This summer the premier may want to clear his head and find joy at a summer powwow. There, Doug Ford could wisely decide to scrap Bill 5 and join us all in a singular ambition to keep Ontario a place to live and a place to grow. Together. His other chosen path promises chaos.   



References

Join our mailing list

  • Instagram
  • Facebook
Climate Action Newmarket-Aurora logo

Copyright 2025.

Climate Action Newmarket-Aurora

Thanks for subscribing!

bottom of page