Ross McKitrick

My op-ed in today's Financial Post explaining our new work on the costs of the federal Industrial Carbon Tax plan financialpost.com/opinion/opinio…

Thirteen tweets in the past five minutes 🍿🍿🍿 I’m enemy #176 Read my review here: mindingthecampus.org/2026/03/09/the… Share it around

Syrian archaeologist Khaled Al Asaad who devoted his life to the excavation and restoration of Palmyra, a UNESCO World Heritage Site. He was beheaded by ISIS after refusing to disclose the location of ancient artifacts, despite a month of torture. He died a hero of heritage protection.

Just published Link in reply

To any future historians reading this, this era will make a lot more sense if you remember that every name is the opposite of what it really is. The antifascists are fascists, the antiracists are racists, the fact-checkers are propagandists, etc. Hopefully this has been fixed by your time.

There have been some news items about the US DoE Report I coauthored, the EF rescission and the FACA lawsuit, which have created a few misconceptions. Here's an update on the project. judithcurry.com/2026/02/21/cle…

@globeandmail Out of nowhere? Where have you been for the past 10 years?

My new column in the Post: Carney excels at word games but not real policy reforms financialpost.com/opinion/carney…

The EPA ruling is available. The EPA is declining to issue a finding on the science. The rescission is based strictly on the legal argument that the EPA never had authority to regulate GHGs and the recent SCOTUS rulings forbid the EPA staff from improvising rulemaking authorities that properly belong to Congress. "We received comments in support of this alternative basis, including from commenters asserting that the EPA compiled and analyzed the scientific record unreasonably in 2009 by severing the analysis of endangerment and contribution and issuing findings separately from emission standards and from commenters asserting that the scientific record did not then, or does not now, provide the certainty necessary to make such findings. We also received comments in opposition to this alternative basis, including from commenters asserting that the scientific record supporting the findings is “overwhelming” and has been strengthened in the intervening years. Although the Administrator continues to harbor concerns regarding many of the scientific inputs and analyses underlying the Endangerment Finding, we are not finalizing this alternative given our conclusion that the EPA lacks statutory authority to regulate in response to global climate change concerns under CAA section 202(a)(1). The legal interpretation finalized in this action means that we cannot resolve remaining scientific controversies in this regulatory context and renders it unnecessary and inappropriate to invoke the Administrator’s authority to exercise judgment on these questions under that provision.." In other words, they lack regulatory authority over climate-related emissions, and they likewise lack regulatory authority to resolve scientific questions concerning climate change. epa.gov/regulations-em…

Back in December I had a pleasant chat with Adam Creighton of the IPA Australia about Net Zero policy issues and the DOE Report. Here's an excerpt and the full video is at bit.ly/4ruLLDG

This clip gave me chills. Former Obama DOE Under Secretary Steve Koonin explains that many climate models ran 2–4x too hot. The scientific community knew it. The public was never told. Those exaggerated models fueled a “climate crisis” narrative that rushed decarbonization, drove up energy prices, weakened the grid, hollowed out manufacturing, scared a generation of kids, and shipped jobs to China.

I got sent a set of questions from a reporter (Scott Waldman) about the DoE report. These are similar to questions I've been asked by 2 other journalists so here are the questions and my answers. 1. I thought this effort was intended as a critical review of climate science, not as a policy-shaping document. What was the group's mission and its task in drafting the report? - We explained our task in the Report Preface: "to write a report on issues in climate science relevant for energy policymaking, including evidence and perspectives that challenge the mainstream consensus." We were given full independence. Like the IPCC we aimed to be policy-relevant but not policy-prescriptive. 2. Do you see your work as a tool to use in legal battles over climate regulations? - We didn't write for that purpose. But anyone who works in the climate field knows their work may figure into policy battles. 3. It seems that the peer review, or DOE internal review, of the project flagged some issues, but the comments were rushed and came just days before the report was published? Do you want to comment on that process and/or if there will be a future peer-reviewed response? - We received expert comments from DOE scientists on the first draft, went through them all carefully and revised the draft accordingly before its release. While the timeline was a bit tight we had enough time to deal with all the review comments. As to the public comments on the published draft, the FACA lawsuit stopped the response process. I and the others have studied them and if we are able to publish responses and a revision, people will see that our overall findings hold up well and the final report would be even stronger. 4.There is discussion of the forthcoming NCA6 as well as what appears to be a red team review of NCA5. When can we expect to see those documents? The Climate Working Group has been dissolved and I am unaware of any plans for those projects.

Young climate activists can never be too careful in what they read or the questions they ask: lucybiggers.substack.com/p/the-story-of…

Michael Mann loses another round in court Add another $28k to Mann's mounting losses "It is the Court’s duty to punish and deter bad faith litigation tactics"

Last week I entered the ominously-named Dungeons of Science for an interview about climate change, but it turned out to be a friendly place hosted by a Nepalese journalist with a lot of good questions. dungeonsofscience.substack.com/p/ross-mckitri…

The starting pistol has fired. The race is on to get our oil to overseas markets before Venezuelan oil starts bumping our product out of U.S. refineries. My plan to win that race. 👇

For years @TheFIREorg warned that turning universities into ideological enforcement machines would generate backlash. In 2025, the backlash arrived w/ the government now leading the charge against campus speech. My latest in @thedispatch

If a military team made a mistake during a nuclear-war preparedness exercise and accidentally obliterated 20 million people, you would not expect to find some of the very same people merrily admitting a couple of years later that they had done it again. Would you?

If a new virus was wiping out half our young population every 20 years we'd see it as our #1 crisis. Crashing fertility is the virus. newsweek.com/canada-fertili… There are no easy answers but countries that don't deal with this have no future. macdonaldlaurier.ca/canada-at-a-cr…

Waiting for a return to “normal” is a mistake. A new era for Canada’s economy has already begun. My latest for @TheHubCanada on what the biggest economic stories of 2025 mean for Canada's future: thehub.ca/2025/12/11/get… #cdnpoli #cdnecon