This is, surprisingly for Cecil, faulty logic. The total land area and the arable land area of Canada need not correlate in any way. Maybe a tiny portion of the land is suitable for farming. So, quintuble arable land may or may not be a lot of land, even if Canada had the largest (total) territory of all countries.
Even if the arable land area after CC is in fact a lot of land, it isn’t so because of the large land area of Canada.
Also, as I noted above, warmer temperatures in historically cold regions don’t necessarily result in more arable land if that land is subject to frequent droughts or floods (California is evidence that over a given timeframe and geographical area, both can occur simultaneously) or periods of extremely hot or extremely cold weather (both of which are also consequences of climate change).
Nevertheless, it’s probably true that Canada stands to benefit more than most countries from a warming climate, particularly with Arctic amplification creating warming at a faster rate than in more southerly latitudes. We certainly had a beautiful warm spring here in southern Ontario this year with temperatures into the 80s in early April. But Canada is not immune from the downsides, either.
I also question how arable the land is when the last glaciation period failed to scrape down the surface enough and leave good soil on top. The Canadian Shield area is not The Prairies. Too rocky and uneven, even if rising temperatures lead to a longer growing season and too hard to mechanically farm the fields.
Oh, just for that I’m having two poutines today! One for me and one for you.
Alternative reply: You’ll have your poutine and you’ll like it!
Alternative reply 2: Have you ever tried Acadian poutine? Poutine râpée - Wikipedia It will have you begging for the fries, gravy and cheese curds.
Not sure I understand this sentence. The glaciers scraped off the topsoil and left bare rock when they melted. It takes many centuries for topsoil to be generated by natural processes. That’s why most of eastern Canada (also New England and areas around Lake Superior on the USA side) have thin, unfertile soil. In Quebec, for example, the best land for farming is within about 50 miles of the St Lawrence River and lesser distances to its major tributaries. That area has more soil for two reasons:
At any rate, warmer temperatures will not do much to make up for the thin soil, so don’t expect lots more food to grow there.
I’m a vegetarian, so I’ll feed mine to the cats. They’ll love it.
This is acceptable. 
Glaciation often smooths the surface. Glacial till and rising waters from glacial melt create lakes which allow for fertile sedimentation, unfortunately this didn’t happen on the Shield, which was my point that it can’t become the new breadbasket.
And beer itself will be a weapon:
“God damn them all, I was told
This beer was worth its weight in gold
We’d feel no pain, shed no tears
But it’s a foolish man who shows no fear
At a glass of Garnet’s home-made beer”
Actually, there is an belt of somewhat fertile soil in northern Ontario that was where a glacial melt lake was. It’s called the Great Clay Belt. The northern branch of the Trans-Canada Highway goes through it. However, it suffers from a short growing season. A warmer climate will no doubt increase that, although it won’t change the amount of sunlight it gets.
Even the article quoted states much of the newly available land will be have soil too acidic or stony to be of much use in the short term. But these are solvable problems if the land is actual needed for farming. Most of it would not be for any foreseeable reason. As I now see has been pointed out multiple times.
And a long forgotten lonely cairn of stones
Canada may be poised for world domination, but sadly, it won’t be Canadians doing the dominating.
As global warming melts the polar ice caps, the displaced polar bears will move south into Canada and eat all the Canadians (Canadians are too polite to object, eh), thus creating a voided niche.
We opportunist-Americans, seeking refuge from our hellish fire & brimstone environment, now rampant throughout the Lower 48, created by the downward-cascading climate changes, will move north into the newly vacated niche. Then we’ll shoot all the polar bears with our assault rifles (we have plenty of those), rename Canada: America II (land of the me), and continue to bully the world.
Or, maybe we’ll come to our senses, pull together, and put a stop to our self-destruction.
Oh, sweet summer child.
Taking into consideration how in the US we are fighting with each other, maybe the Canadians will make a difference…
The Devil’s Brigade - The Canadians Arrive
Canadian commanders upon seeing the ragtag American soldiers:
-“God save the King!”
-“God save us all!”
.
.
On edit: In the comments:
God: “Here’s some Canadians.”
(Snopes says this is untrue.)
This is the transcript of a radio conversation of a US naval ship with Canadian authorities off the coast of Newfoundland in October, 1995. Radio conversation released by the Chief of Naval Operations 10-10-95.
Americans: Please divert your course 15 degrees to the North to avoid a Collision.
Canadians: Recommend you divert YOUR course 15 degrees to the South to avoid a collision.
Americans: This is the Captain of a US Navy ship. I say again, divert YOUR course.
Canadians: No. I say again, you divert YOUR course.
Americans: This is the aircraft carrier USS Lincoln, the second largest ship in the United States’ Atlantic fleet. We are accompanied by three destroyers, three cruisers and numerous support vessels. I demand that YOU change your course 15 degrees north, that’s one five degrees north, or countermeasures will be undertaken to ensure the safety of this ship.
Canadians: This is a lighthouse. Your call.
Yeah, I don’t buy it either.
Definitely untrue. The first time I saw that, it supposedly took place during WWII with a different ship. Just another uban legend.
How does Canada control the Great Lakes?
[Del]Nicely[/del].
Seriously though, the international border runs smack down rhe middle of four Great Lakes, and the fifth is entirely in the U.S.
How do the northern Canadian lakes (Lake Winnipeg, Reindeer Lake, Lake Athabasca, Great Slave Lake*, Great Bear Lake, etc.) compare to the Great Lakes for water volume? Certainly by area they look substantial.
*Will need a name change.
Also, what about Alaska? That map lumps Alaska in with the rest of the USA as being slightly worsened by climate change, but surely it will be in roughly the same condition as northern Canada.
Sort of like what the USA did w.r.t. the British Empire in the 19th century?
Climate change question, since much of this thread is about the potential for agricultural change in Canada. You know how for various kinds of flowers, plants and crops there are suggested growing zones, showing which regions are appropriate for which seeds? My question is, have those growing zones had to be revised since they were first mapped out?