Climate Change and Northern Ontario by 2050
November 26, 2018 - The science of climate change has moved from theory to fact. Next step is reality. Even with global best-efforts to reduce carbon emissions, temperatures are expected to rise for at least 25 years and storms will grow in intensity. What could these projections mean for the economy of Northern Ontario and its transportation system? This piece is the first in a series of articles that address scenarios that could play out by 2050.
As climate change continues, demands for solutions grow. For Northern Ontario, opportunity manifests as the 180,000 sq. km. area known as the Great Clay Belt. This ancient glacial lake bottom encompasses the Ontario census areas of Cochrane, Timiskaming, and Abitibi County in Quebec. Out of 29 million acres of potential arable land, roughly 250,000 acres are farmed today. Despite fertile soils, cold temperatures and poor drainage, not to mention the “curse” of blackflies and mosquitos, impeded settlement.
The Ontario Climate and Agriculture Assessment Framework (June 2017) paints a much warmer future for the Clay Belt over the next 30 years. Growing Degree Days (GDD) are predicted to increase from 1370 per year on average, to 1925 per year by the 2050s. This means that future growing conditions in the Clay Belt could be better than in Eastern Ontario or Manitoba, today. The combination of longer growing seasons in the Clay Belt and higher land prices in Southern Ontario has already prompted renewed interest in the area.
With an arable land base one and a half times the cropland area of Manitoba, it is possible to surmise that the Clay Belt could support a similar population and economy. Not only might the Clay Belt become more productive, but with less ice on James Bay and a longer growing season, the commercial forestry boundary could shift farther north into the Hudson Bay Lowlands, too.
Could a million people relocate to the Clay Belt by 2050? If climate change is sufficient to grow corn in the Clay Belt, areas farther south are also likely to look less desirable. In particular, coastal areas may see forced relocation. A northern migration stimulated by eco-refugees is not hard to imagine.
Rising food demand could also make the Clay Belt a significant and needed agricultural area. Even the median estimates have the world adding one billion more people to feed every 20 years to 2050. At the same time, some existing food production areas are likely to decline. Rising oceans will flood highly productive delta areas in Bangladesh and Egypt, while increasing temperatures will extend the deserts. Parts of a populated area stretching from the Middle East to India will experience temperatures above 50°C. Such temperatures make human habitation and agriculture unbearable.
An increase in grain production in the Clay Belt would require long haul rail service to reach export ports. Fortunately, much of the rail infrastructure built by the Grand Trunk Pacific Railway still remains in service or could be expanded on existing rights-of-way. This area is also served by Highway 11, which is a well-served truck route. Feeder road infrastructure to access Clay Belt farms and grain handling facilities will follow demand. For parts of the Clay Belt that are not suitable for crops, livestock could be supported. Whether or not beef production could support an abattoir, there most certainly would be an increase of trucking.
Additionally, existing communities from New Liskeard to Hearst are likely to expand. It is difficult to identify which city will dominate the region, but Timmins certainly has a head-start. With greater population, highway improvements and better air connections are likely to follow. Perhaps the most fundamental change though, is political. Prosperity and population in the Clay Belt will pull the economic centre of balance much farther north. Areas lying between the agricultural areas of the Clay Belt and Southern Ontario will also gain population and transport connections because a rising tide lifts all boats.
Clearly, the impact of climate change is going to have a negative impact on many parts of the world. Rising ocean levels, more violent hurricanes, expanding deserts and hotter average temperatures all portend dangers for large parts of the world. Growing population trends may be adjusted down by food shortages and harsher environments. But it is an ill wind that blows no one any good.
Northern Ontario has always had a cold climate that limited agriculture in the Great Clay Belt. However, this location may be one of the big winners because of climate change by 2050. The basic transportation infrastructure is in place to capitalize on this growth, but it is not too soon to begin planning for the day that one million people want to move here. Success always brings new challenges.
Dr. Barry E. Prentice is a Senior Transportation Fellow with Northern Policy Institute.
The content of Northern Policy Institute’s blog is for general information and use. The views expressed in this blog are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of Northern Policy Institute, its Board of Directors or its supporters. The authors take full responsibility for the accuracy and completeness of their respective blog posts. Northern Policy Institute will not be liable for any errors or omissions in this information, nor will Northern Policy Institute be liable for any detriment caused from the display or use of this information. Any links to other websites do not imply endorsement, nor is Northern Policy Institute responsible for the content of the linked websites.
Northern Policy Institute welcomes your feedback and comments. Please keep comments to under 500 words. Any submission that uses profane, derogatory, hateful, or threatening language will not be posted. Please keep your comments on topic and relevant to the subject matter presented in the blog. If you are presenting a rebuttal or counter-argument, please provide your evidence and sources. Northern Policy Institute reserves the right to deny any comments or feedback submitted to www.northernpolicy.ca that do not adhere to these guidelines.
Comment Climate Change to 2050
Posted By Ambrose Raftis on 1/7/2019 9:04:11 AM
Historically I was of the belief that Northern Ontario would be the place to be in Ontario to get some of the upsides to Climate change with the warmer average temperature but, this is not ringing true. I read a more recent prediction that suggested hotter shorter summers with wetter cooler falls and longer extended winters. The report suggested that the warmer artic regions forced air south creating additional moisture and longer winters.
For the last 2 years, I have burned 160% of a typical winters wood. The wind and extended winters is great for skiing but the extended winter shortens up the growing season. What we are getting is no July or August frosts which is quite helpful for growing but falls are cold and wet, not great for curing crops.
I would suggest four-season technology with the growing of food using solar and wind energy coupled with net community metering would be in the best interest of Northern residents. The expansion of commodity farming does not have a very positive economic and social impact for these "industrial farm" communities. We already see rural municipalities starved for taxes as land is amalgamated into mega (often foreign-owned) farms. We need only look at the prairie provinces to see what it does to rural communities.
Focusing on meeting our own needs using our own resources would be a good strategy for making the Northern rural areas sustainable in the long run. This would work for both First Nation and other existing communities. A sustainable community will be attractive to people as we enter the "part-time contract economy" with the elimination of carbon-based fuels.
Rebuttal to defeatist mindset
Posted By Harold Dickert on 5/3/2024 10:52:34 AM
I strongly disagree. Opening up these northern areas is an acceptance of defeat, like "throwing in the towel". Yet with the new technologies and approaches, civilization already as the ability to not only get off fossil fuels, but to start drawing down atmospheric carbon. And YES... we will experience a temperature bump. It may take a few hundred years to get our climate back to pre industrial levels. When that is achieved, then the areas of the north will once again be too cold. How much worse then will we make the situation by having to evacuate those areas after we have also destroyed the wilderness? The wilderness of Canada has to stay wild!