By Vijay Jayaraj
The June G7 Summit in Évian-les-Bains, France, marked a major pivot. Driven by severe energy and commodity shocks stemming from the conflict in the Middle East—specifically transit disruptions in the Strait of Hormuz—G7 leaders overwhelmingly prioritized energy security, price insulation, and survival of the fossil fuel supply chain over aggressive timelines for reduction of greenhouse gas emissions.
Who could have predicted that, rather than condemning oil and gas, the powerful torchbearers of hostility toward hydrocarbons sought to improve the flow of oil and natural gas.
G7 Reality Check
The G7’s decision does not end climate politics, but it does mark a return to the better instincts of energy policy: Test claims against evidence, weigh costs against benefits, and value the importance of energy to human progress.
The summit highlighted Canada’s potentRal to deliver additional capacity to energy markets over the coming years. Until recently, Canada’s leadership was hellbent on the net zero agenda, refusing to utilize fully domestic reserves. Now, it is looking to expand oil and gas supplies in cooperation with other G7 members – the U.S., U.K., France, Germany, Italy and Japan.
The present U.S. administration has been a model for other countries, openly rejecting climate dogma that dominated energy policy for decades. In that sense, the G7 shift is part of a broader correction.
At the forefront of climate politics has been the claim that Earth’s climate is at risk of irreparable harm by modern industry and the proposition that the appropriate defense is central control of all human activity. To question the formulation was heretical if not criminal.
This arrogance perhaps is best answered by the simple facts of carbon dioxide (CO2), the alarmists’ main bogeyman. A harmless trace gas in the atmosphere, CO2 is necessary for life as a constituent of plant photosynthesis. Modern increases in atmospheric concentrations from the burning of fossil fuels have not caused dangerous warming but have contributed to significant greening of Earth and boosted crop harvests.
The work of Dr. William Happer and others show that doomsday predictions are based on exaggerations of CO2’s warming potential and manipulation of computer models that have little to do with real-world natural phenomena.
Sane Policy Requires Correct Science
Public policy should not be drafted as if every heat wave, storm, or drought proves a political agenda. Otherwise, as we have seen, governments end up seeking to eliminate energy sources that have brought the world unprecedented prosperity and are required for further advancement.
Fossil fuels still support transportation, food production, and industrial expansion across the world. In poorer countries reliable power is especially valued ahead of environmental virtue signaling.
Synthetic fibers used in everyday clothing are derived from petrochemicals. Fertilizers that allow modern agriculture to feed 8 billion people are produced from natural gas. By deliberately attacking the fossil fuel industry, the climate movement inflates the cost of everything, creating artificial scarcity in a world of abundance.
The G7 is not a minor forum. It shapes the language of power, finance, and development among some of the world’s most influential economies. Having set aside the climate agenda, G7 leaders are confronting energy reality.
Contributing to this return to sanity has been research like that captured in “Challenging Net Zero with Science,” a CO2 Coalition publication that provides a basis for supporting rational energy policy and rejecting the climate industrial complex’s dangerous fantasies.
Public debate often rewards loud certainty over careful analysis. The coalition’s message has been straightforward and disruptive: A net zero policy that undermines affordable energy will destroy prosperity and social stability.
True environmental stewardship is adapting to nature while maximizing human prosperity. It requires building resilient infrastructure, expanding access to cheap energy, and rejecting efforts to lower the standard of living.
Let us hope that 2026 G7 forum paves the way for pragmatic policies that advance the human condition and protect individual liberties.
Originally published at Daily Signal, July 8, 2026.
Vijay Jayaraj is a Science and Research Associate at the CO2 Coalition, Fairfax, Virginia. He holds an M.S. in environmental sciences from the University of East Anglia and a postgraduate degree in energy management from Robert Gordon University, both in the U.K., and a bachelor’s in engineering from Anna University, India. He served as a research associate with the Changing Oceans Research Unit at University of British Columbia, Canada.
“Public debate often rewards loud certainty over careful analysis.”
MUR ?
😉
Story Tip:
Is the UK about to go dark?
Net Zero-Obsessed Britain Faces Down Unspoken Energy Crisis
Approximately a 1 GW shortfall is forecast.
The article understates the severity of what Britain will experience. All of its AGR nuclear power stations will be forced to close within the next decade. For essential engineering reasons, these shutdowns cannot be remediated or postponed. A decade from now, only two English nuclear power stations will be operating: Sizewell B and Hinkley Point C.
The current energy policy crisis in the UK won’t significantly change until major blackouts occur and governments admit the failure of their Net Zero-renewable energy transition. This will inevitably happen when they cannot get enough `borrowed’ backup power from the EU during another general wind drought or major plant breakdown. So, this is a time bomb with a short fuse that has been deliberately planted by successive stupid governments. God help us all!
The change has zero to due with any actual change in policy. It is politics, the politicians want power and wealth. They say whatever seems to be the most likely thing to bring them wealth and power. When prices of fuel shot up due to the war they spout whatever platitudes to keep them in wealth and power , when the prices go back down they spout whatever will keep them in wealth and power.
And they will work to keep the inflated prices in place.
Many have woke to the fact that their legacies are at risk. The current leaders will be blamed for destroying the Western Civilization’s prosperity and resulting freedom. Not one of them want to risk that fallout from current policies.
“Until recently, Canada’s leadership was hellbent on the net zero agenda, “
PM Mark Carney has been flushing out of cabinet all of the worst of Trudeau’s most enthusiastic supporters. They also happened to be the most strident about global warming. Carney has also succeeded in a new pipeline agreement to the Pacific Coast, where such was being strenuously oppposed by Trudeau.
Carney is full of announcements, not much evidence of action on the ground though.
An ex-member of Trudeau’s team described how they used to call the Dept of PM & Cabinet the ” Dept of Announcements”.
And wasn’t that the reality?
Your question is a good one. His pipeline agreement with Alberta and BC is real. It avoids dealing with the tanker ban on the BC coast by doubling the capacity of the TransMountain pipeline and increasing the oil shipment out of Vancouver.
His cancelation of the carbon tax on diesel and gasoline was real.
His dismissal of at least half a dozen of Trudeau’s most fanatic ministers on global warming was real. The most strident of Trudeau’s ministers on global warming was Steven Guilbeault, and he fled the cabinet and Parliament just before the announcement on pipelines.
His commitment to increasing the rearming of the Canadian armed forces is real. This was made much easier by his getting rid of the world’s most useless defence minister Bill Blair.
These were all actions to date. We shall see if his designation of major projects in the national interest actually has some effect. We have some reason to suspect this might be the case because of the wails of despair coming from the usual environmental suspects such as Greenpeace, Sierra Club, etc.
Never fall into the trap of expecting that what was true for Justatwit has any bearing on Carney. Department of Announcements was indeed the case under Justatwit. And because of it, they were almost thrown out of office in the 2025 national election. The national carbon tax on gasoline and diesel attracted most ot the public wrath, so Carney and his very different group of main mininsters flushed it completely. As I said earlier, the worst and most incompetent mouth-breathers of Trudeau’s government are now purged.
I suppose we have to take an optimistic view of the pipeline.
It is budgeted quite a bit higher than the TMX which is not economically viable. Taxpayers still have to take a huge loss to sell off that one. More carbon tax and sequestration are also attached to the project. Will world customers pay for that?
Also the terminal port cannot load ocean tankers.
It does not look like a good project. No pipeline operator is interested.
PM Mark Carney has just slapped an industrial carbon tax on heavy industries of $95 per tonne of CO2 equivalent(eq). This tax will increase to $135 per tonne of CO2 eq by 2035 and max out at $140 per tonne of CO2 eq by 2040. He still believes that CO2 cause global warming. The five companies of the Oil Sands Alliance which process tar sand bitumen into gasoline and diesel say this tax will put them out of business and are fighting the tax.
Why does this guy ignore the obvious that Canada has long cold and snowy winters and without fossil fuels 41 million people would freeze to death in winter.
“Mark Joseph Carney (born March 16, 1965) is a Canadian politician and economist who has served as the 24th prime minister of Canada since 2025. Carney was also elected as leader of the Liberal Party and the member of Parliament (MP) for Nepean in 2025. He was previously Governor of the Bank of Canada from 2008 to 2013 and Governor of the Bank of England from 2013 to 2020.
Carney was born in Fort Smith, Northwest Territories, and raised in Edmonton, Alberta. He graduated with a bachelor’s degree in economics from Harvard University in 1987, and earned a master’s degree in 1993 and a doctorate in 1995 from the University of Oxford, both in economics. Carney worked at Goldman Sachs before joining the Bank of Canada in 2003 as a deputy governor. ”
I read Wikipedia as: Liberal party… Bank of Canada… Bank of England… Harvard… Goldman Sachs.
Yes and Carney has tapped his Goldman Sachs colleague Tim Hodgson to be Energy Minister I think.
Makes sense, the whole climate caper has always been about extracting $$$s from the established global financing flows.
Carney has been all over this since it started.
(of course there had to be a drink in this for Mark and his associates. After all, they’re not communists, as The Godfather said 🤑🫠).
I think the $$$ are just an incentive. The real goal was destruction of Western democracies/Capitalism.
Very nice. There is no climate crisis, adding more CO2 into the atmosphere can’t cause catastrophic runaway global warming. It is purely a government supported effort to gain more control and power. It is that simple.
Bob:
Yes. The climate hobglobin that scares the public into voting for or acquiescing to policies they would never otherwise agree to – unless it was a “We are all gonna die!” crisis.
Not a true conspiracy but, using Bjorn Lomborg’s term, a “confluence of interests” where multiple groups use a purported “climate crisis” to further their own agendas.
Public policy should not be drafted as if every heat wave, storm, or drought proves a political agenda. Otherwise, as we have seen, governments end up seeking to eliminate energy sources that have brought the world unprecedented prosperity and are required for further advancement.
QED-
‘Surely there’s a lesson’: Australia backs India’s nuclear boom while rejecting its own
What the hell is von der Leyen doing there ? She is not elected and is not in charge of a Nation.
Input from Plan International perhaps?
Climate change becoming a major driver of child marriage across Asia and the Pacific
What would any international conference be without a big dose of Blair’s Law and the usual suspects in Aunty’s sheltered workshop beating their drum eh? One Nation’s policy of defunding Aunty can’t come soon enough for these cretins that can actually approve of an Iran on the UNHRC.
Never mind that, what the hell is Starmer doing there – he’s a bloody idiot
I abhor the use of the nonsense term “fossil fuel.”
Using it bows to the Trans-Reality Alarmists even when used in the counter offensive.
Control the language, control the ideas.
And I abhor the use of the word “optics” as how something looks, and not something you look through.
And I abhor the use of the word “calculus” in place of “calculation”.
These are losing battles.
The leaders of the G7? . . . I could not imagine a grouping of brains more UNFIT to discuss climate change scientifically and objectively.
And there is this: in politics, words are cheap, but associated action rarely follows.
Please get back to me when there is something important to report. /sarc