MxM News

Billionaire Bill Gates — long one of the loudest voices warning of climate catastrophe — now says the world has bigger problems to worry about. In a 17-page memo released Tuesday, the Microsoft co-founder called for a “strategic pivot” away from the obsessive focus on reducing global temperatures, urging leaders instead to prioritize fighting poverty and eradicating disease in the developing world. “Climate change is a serious problem, but it’s not the end of humanity,” Gates wrote.

Gates, 70, argued that global leaders have lost perspective by treating climate change as an existential crisis while millions continue to suffer from preventable diseases like malaria. “If I had to choose between eradicating malaria and preventing a tenth of a degree of warming, I’d let the temperature go up 0.1 degree,” he told reporters ahead of next month’s U.N. climate conference in Brazil. “People don’t understand the suffering that exists today.”

For decades, Gates has positioned himself as a leading advocate for global climate initiatives, investing billions in green energy projects and warning of the dangers of rising emissions. Yet his latest comments mark a striking reversal — and a rare admission that the world’s climate panic may have gone too far. “If you think climate is not important, you won’t agree with the memo,” Gates told journalists. “If you think climate is the only cause and apocalyptic, you won’t agree with the memo. It’s a pragmatic view from someone trying to maximize the money and innovation that helps poor countries.”

The billionaire’s change in tone is sure to raise eyebrows ahead of the U.N. conference, where climate activists plan to push for new emissions targets and wealth transfers from developed nations. Critics have long accused Gates and other elites of hypocrisy for lecturing the public about fossil fuels while traveling the globe on private jets. Now, Gates himself appears to be distancing from the doomsday rhetoric he once helped spread, effectively admitting that humanity faces more immediate moral imperatives than the weather.

(AP Photo/Alex Brandon)

Stunning Climate Change pivot from Bill Gates. Poverty and disease should be top concern.

From the Fraser Institute

By Jake Fuss, Julio Mejía, Elmira Aliakbari, Karen Graham and Jock Finlayson

Ottawa and the four biggest provinces have spent (or foregone revenues) of at least $158 billion to create at most 68,000 “clean” jobs since 2014

Despite the hype of a “clean” economic transition, governments in Ottawa and in the four largest provinces have spent or foregone revenues of more than $150 billion (inflation-adjusted) on low-carbon initiatives since 2014/15, but have only created, at best, 68,000 clean jobs, according to two new studies published by the Fraser Institute, an independent, non-partisan Canadian public policy think-tank.

“Governments, activists and special interest groups have been making a lot of claims about the opportunities of a clean economic transition, but after a decade of policy interventions and more than $150 billion in taxpayers’ money, the results are
extremely underwhelming,” said Elmira Aliakbari, director of natural resource studies and co-author of The Fiscal Cost of Canada’s Low-Carbon Economy.

The study finds that since 2014/15, the federal government and provincial governments in the country’s four largest provinces (Ontario, Quebec, Alberta and British Columbia) combined have spent and foregone revenues of $158 billion (inflation adjusted to 2024 dollars) trying to create clean jobs, as defined by Statistics Canada’s Environmental and Clean Technology Products Economic Account.

Importantly, that cost estimate is conservative since it does not account for an exhaustive list of direct government spending and it does not measure the costs from Canada’s other six provinces, municipalities, regulatory costs and other economic
costs because of the low-carbon spending and tax credits.

A second study, Sizing Canada’s Clean Economy, finds that there was very little change over the 2014 to 2023 period in terms of the share of the total economy represented by the clean economy. For instance, in 2014, the clean economy represented 3.1 per cent of GDP compared to 3.6 per cent in 2023.

“The evidence is clear—the much-hyped clean economic transition has failed to fundamentally transform Canada’s $3.3 trillion economy,” said study co-author and Fraser Institute senior fellow Jock Finlayson.

State of the Green Economy

• The Fiscal Cost of Canada’s Low-Carbon Economy documents spending initiatives by the federal government and the governments of Ontario, British Columbia, Alberta, and Quebec since 2014 to promote the low-carbon economy, as well as how much revenue they have foregone through offering tax credits.
• Overall, the combined cost of spending and tax credits supporting a low-carbon economy by the federal government and the four provincial governments is estimated at $143.6 billion from 2014–15 to 2024–25, in nominal terms. When adjusted for inflation, the total reaches $158 billion in 2024 dollars.
• These estimates are based on very conservative assumptions, and they do not cover every program area or government-controlled expenditure related to the low-carbon economy and/or reducing greenhouse gas emissions.
• Sizing Canada’s Green Economy assesses the composition, growth, share of Gross Domestic Product (GDP) output, and employment of Canada’s “clean economy” from 2014 to 2023.
• Canada’s various environmental and clean technology industries collectively have accounted for between 3.07% and 3.62% of all-industry GDP over the 10-year period from 2014 to 2023. While it has grown, the sector as a whole has not been expanding at a pace that meaningfully exceeds the growth of the overall Canadian economy, despite significant policy attention and mounting public subsidies.
• The clean economy represents a respectable and relatively stable share of Canada’s $3.3 trillion economy. However, it remains a small part of Canada’s broader industrial mix, it is not a major source of export earnings, and it is not about to supplant the many other industries that underpin the country’s prosperity and dominate its international exports.

Jake Fuss

Director, Fiscal Studies, Fraser Institute

Julio Mejía

Policy Analyst

Elmira Aliakbari

Director, Natural Resource Studies, Fraser Institute

Karen Graham

Jock Finlayson

Senior Fellow, Fraser Institute