Words are weapons. "Man-made greenhouse gases" and "global warming" are the weapons of choice for the pro-Kyoto lobby. These two concepts are put in the service of alarmist special interest groups to explain a climatic process that is far from scientifically conclusive.

Greenhouse gases (water vapour, carbon dioxide, methane and nitrous oxide ) occur naturally in the atmosphere and are imperative to life on Earth. Without the heat-trapping qualities of these gases, the climate would be far colder. The debate is over what damage human-induced greenhouse gas emissions may cause to the environment.

The Kyoto protocol, signed in 1997, binds Canada to reduce its greenhouse gas emissions to 6% below 1990 levels over the period of 2008 and 2012. However, even this week, a growing chorus of climatologists and other experts challenged the science that underlies the fields of climate change and global warming.

They pressed the federal government to back off on the Kyoto Protocol until proper consultations are held with the scientific and energy community. The costs and the science of Kyoto should be put under the pubic microscope for all to judge.

Science aside, what is clear is that compliance to Kyoto Protocol will destabilize the Canadian economy and bite into the pocket book of every Canadian.

In a study commissioned by the Canadian Taxpayers Federation - Counting the Costs: The Effects of the Federal Kyoto Strategy on Canadian Households - Dr. Ross McKitrick from the University of Guelph predicts that price increases and wage reductions needed to bring energy consumption down to Kyoto levels will reduce annual real net household income by about $225 per month. That's a 5.5% drop in disposable household income starting in 2010.

"In light of the fact that Kyoto yields no economic or environmental benefits this is obviously a bad deal for Canadian households and should be rejected," concludes McKitrick.

Canadians have been kept in the dark as to the diversity of opinions around global warming and the true costs of Kyoto accord. Ottawa's plan to have consumers run cold showers and lower the thermostat amounts to a chemical fraction of the targeted emission cuts. New taxes on energy and costly emission credits will be necessary to meet the targeted CO2 cuts but Ottawa has yet to outline how these costs will affect consumers and industry.

The CTF believes Kyoto is bad public policy. On top of its staggering affect on household incomes starting in 2010 and every year after that, consider these other findings from Counting the Costs:

Ottawa hasn't conducted independent reviews of the science or cost estimates behind Kyoto;

Preferences for energy consumption are stable - changing consumption patterns could require natural gas price hikes of 90% and gasoline price hikes as high as 50%;

Assumptions of a smoothly-functioning international emissions credit market are flawed; and

A drop in real wages of 5.8% along with a 5.5% drop in real net incomes by 2010.

Conclusive scientific agreement on global warming is still up in the air. The costs of complying with Kyoto are astronomical. The polling is very clear: the more people learn about Kyoto the less they like it. The Prime Minister should put the Kyoto ratification decision to Canadians directly in a referendum as this issue is of equal magnitude - if not greater - to the Free Trade Agreement or the Charlottetown Accord.