|
|
|
|
|
| Way To Go Canada! (Uhm...NOT!)
Posted: 11/15/2006 9:26:48 PM | Way to go Rona! (uhm...NOT!)
what loser and what an embarrassment for Canada.
and the best she could come up with is the "blame the Liberal thing" again. i see she had a meeting with O'connor before she left. you'd think by now they'd figure that it didn't work in the US and it's time to try something new. next they'll be blaming their dogs. it will cost us too much.
why are they selling us short? it's like being called stupid. it's like giving up the fight before you've even tried.
- the Liberals plans was so bad and they were so greedy that nothing got done so instead of doing something we are just going to blame the Liberals and put off making a decision about it until sometime in the future when we'll talk about it again-
how can we expect other developing developed countries to live up to Kyoto (and save our butts) when-we can't?
i think we should be leading the world, not dragging it down.
we are intelligent, resourceful and creative, not stupid, ignorant and lazy.
this is not a cost to society. it's only a cost to an oil economy.
like all new technology it is a benefit.
and Canada can lead the way in developing new technology. | |
|
| Way To Go Canada! (Uhm...NOT!)
Posted: 11/15/2006 9:38:32 PM |
I agree Arri, the tar sands are a huge culprit, and will continue to be in the future. Unless we pull out of NAFTA, Canada will be obligated to continue their development and increase production dramatically. I heard somewhere that the goal is something like 8 million barrels of oil produced daily by the years 2015-2020. Yikes!
Years ago, Canada became the largest single exporter of oil to the United States. Most Americans still think it is Saudi Arabia.
-Jim | |
|
| Way To Go Canada! (Uhm...NOT!)
Posted: 11/16/2006 1:18:57 PM |
"give him ideas on what *could* be done without totally destroying the economy, or disrupting everybody's lives - maybe it would be worth the trip."
Maybe *that is* the problem--this economy *is* destroying us. What good is this economy if it leads to the possible extinction and destruction of the planet?
None. But Kyoto isn't the saviour that it's held up to be, either. Even if the Liberals had passed Kyoto when they had the chance, by the time it would have been passed the only possible way we could have met our targets would have been by doing without central heating and traveling exclusively by dogsled for the next 30 years. How would THAT have helped?
We saw first hand in Ontario what happens when you put the economic factor first--ever hear of the Walkerton disaster? All in the name of fiscal reponsibility based on a totally bankrupt ideology.
Nice try, but a bogus argument. It wouldn't have mattered how much money you threw into the system, or who the government of the day was - there is *nothing* that can protect you from the willfully falsification of records. Let's not forget that those clowns had been doing exactly the same thing under the previous Liberal administration, and had been doing it for YEARS, before the cuts were made. It just happened to bite them in the ass when the Tories were in power.
And do *you* have any ideas as to how to get around this problem, because obviously the Conservatives (and the Liberals for that matter) don't seem to either. *Who* are their own worst enemies here?!
Yes, as a matter of fact, I do. And so do many others. The problem, though, is that it's impossible to have a real debate about energy & the environment in this country. Every possible alternative has it's proponents ..... and an even more vociferous group of opponents. And the opponents are usually the same people who are constantly ****ing, moaning, and whining that nothing is ever done, blithely ignoring the fact they THEY are usually the reason nothing is ever done.
Let's look at possible energy sources for a minute:
Greenies don't like hydrocarbons. Smog, greenhouse gasses. We must eliminate them as soon as possible.
Greenies don't like nuclear. Too dangerous. Radiation. Threat of nuclear proliferation.
Greenies don't like coal. Again, smog, greenhouse gasses. Strip mining.
Greenies don't like hydroelectric. Destroys environment. Kills fishies. Destroys other habitat.
Greenies DO like solar. Unfortunately, that won't help anybody north of 60 - it's dark 6 months of the year there. Given the current state of technology, unless you want to carpet half of Canada with solar panels, it's not a viable alternative. We'll ignore for the moment how much kicking and screaming they'd do if you actually TRIED to deploy that many solar arrays.
Greenies DO like wind power. Except when you actually deploy it, when they start ****ing about all the birds that get killed in the blades.
Hydrogen fuel cells? Great idea. bit of water vapour, but that's it. Oh, yeah - you have to generate the power to charge those cells with either hydroelectric, coal, hydrocarbons, solar, or wind. See above.
Now - when you have a large, anally vocal, SPECIAL INTEREST GROUP that absolutely refuses to let you even consider ANYTHING, how the hell do you expect anything to get done? The *only* solution they deem to be acceptable is to turn out the lights entirely.
Sorry - everybody ELSE deems that to be unacceptable.
Like I said in another post, in another thread: Greenies are their own worst enemy.
Until the greenies get off their asses, and start HELPING people develop realistic solutions instead of holding their breaths until they get their way, *nothing* is going to be done .... except for feel-good, impractical, totally useless things like Kyoto. | |
|
| |
arri
|
Joined: 10/5/2005
Msg: 30 | |
| Way To Go Canada! (Uhm...NOT!)
Posted: 11/16/2006 6:37:11 PM | @Cotter
As you can see, I am not against harvesting the tar sands. I think it's important to the economy of Alberta, Canada and resource that needs to be utilized. However, as a result of expanded production and rush to increase the production, we have a dirty process that has jeopardized our country's reputation as a leader in global causes.
We have to lead by example. | |
|
| Way To Go Canada! (Uhm...NOT!)
Posted: 11/16/2006 7:37:17 PM | I have read and re-read this thread...
I have a theory and I hope people way more enlightened can demolish it or add to my theory...
The world economy is based on black gold, ie: petrol and gasoline products.
Now, is it possible that there is no political will right now to change anything. So basically, who cares about KYOTO...
I mean, Canada, the US and many European countries, NEED petrol in whatever form... So, the world economy is NOT ready for the changes. To change our consumption of other forms of heating. (ie: using the sun's energy, the wind catching devices, sort of like windmills, and making a substitute form of petrol form corn... In Canada it would be corn where ETHANOL can be made and it is the same kind of energy that our car needs.)
Petrol is a major source of polutant...
Please google Brazil sugar cane production. It is mind boggling. That country has absolutely no dependance on oil. The sugar cane plantation not only make sugar, but the left over is transformed into Ethanol and this product has an average cost of 30 to 40 cents per litre. It does not polute and there will always be an endless supply as long as the sugar can crops are planted every year. (Renuable primary source)
In Canada farmers, (I come from a farm and I live in an agricultural area), cannot get rid of their corn. They grow it to feed the cows and that is about it. There are Ethanot pumps but they are not accessible to every city ... It is my understanding ... There seems to be a distribution problem... (Lord knows, we need to help our farmers...)
Anyway... There was a very good reporting effort by CNN, which suprised me for that "kind" of chanel, about the Brazilan investment in Ethanol and they are not at all dependent on the world events or any terrorist threats... Simply, they do not need the BLACK GOLD!!! The country provides energy to all its citizens and even the major car makers, GM, Ford and others have even "marketed" cars that are fuel efficient with ethanol!!! They are able to make cars for that kind of energy... (Imagine, AMERICAN companies have the technology to produce cars that do not polute! They offer it to third world countries but not to AMERICANS!!!)
So... my question is... Why is my country, Canada, not lobby our government to be like Brazil?... Why be dependent on the volatile acts of violence from the terrorists... I do not want to sound biased, not be accused of profiling, but we all know they are mostly of arabic blood...
So... If we are no longer dependent of their BLACK GOLD... Then the arabic countries that are part of NATO will lose a lot of power... I believe there will be a shift of power and maybe just maybe the arabic countries will go back to living in the sand dunes with their camels ...
I am not trying to be offensive... I am just trying to add to the discussion...
Maybe, just maybe there is no political will right now because, the world economy is not ready for the shifts in power...
Who has THE POWER anyway? 
A confused canadian... | |
|
arri
|
Joined: 10/5/2005
Msg: 32 | |
| Way To Go Canada! (Uhm...NOT!)
Posted: 11/16/2006 8:06:04 PM | ^^^ the issue is not just energy. oil is much more valuable than that. Our entire industrial system is based on the polymer chemistry and asphalt for our roads. That's one of the reasons that economically it makes sense to use natural gas to produce oil or bitumen. natural gas is cheaper because it only has energy value.
Incidentally, it takes 77000 btu to produce 55000 btu in ethanol. | |
|
| Way To Go Canada! (Uhm...NOT!)
Posted: 11/16/2006 8:22:46 PM | Its unfortunate that the press only focusses upon the national level policies. At the municipal level there are so many positive changes happening that differences are being made.
Take for example "The Natural Step" which is a busniness model being adopted by municipalities/cites/towns/districts all across the country. THe idea behind the Natural step is to do business in a different way, a way that oes not denegrate our natural or social systems. We've adoptedit here as our guiding document. The outflow of adopting this approach are such initiatives as "Green Buidling" requirements, reduced vehicle use and other green measures. I coudl write an essay on GReen Building Technoolog, but ultimately, it reduces the amount of energy required to build and then to operate a building, which studies have proven to show that energy consumption is down as much as 70% in some cases.
So, while we have isues such as the tar sands and clear cut logging at the national and provincial scale, we also have very green policies at the grass root municipal level.
So, feel free to look up "The Natural Step" and "Green Building" on the internet and see what YOUR town is doing to combat climate change and to become more "green". | |
|
| Way To Go Canada! (Uhm...NOT!)
Posted: 11/16/2006 9:13:15 PM | re Gorshkov #29
Hello Gorshkov: Maybe Kyoto did/didn't work. But We are still back to aquare 1 on the economy. Do we just plow ahead blissfully, going into that "endless winter night"? The problem as I see it, *is* this economy. I don't see a silver bullet like Kyoto solving all the problems in one fell swoop. "Reduce, reuse, recycle"--its a 3 pronged approach. We all focus on the last element, but what about the first 2? People in Ontario collectively reduced their electricity use in order to avoid another August 12th blackout (not exactly sure that was the date).
You say that you have a solution/idea, *but what/where is it*? Then you go up and down the list criticizing the greenies for pissing and moaning about possible solutions. Me thinks that if you really wanted to shut these people up, then you have a great chance to do so. So, *where is it*?
As for Walkerton, if you were to have followed the commission that examined the events leading up to the tragedy, you would have seen that the *cuts* Harris and his caddies made played a *significant* role in precipitating the tragedy. The line about throwing all kinds of money into the system is a red herring and a non-starter. The ball is in your court on that one, amigo.
Maybe greenies don't like any of the proposed solutions for the reasons that you suggested, but they (like the rest of us) are going to have to come to some kind of compromise in order to generate some consensus as to what to do, or else......
Nice chatting with you, and cheers.
TAK | |
|
| Way To Go Canada! (Uhm...NOT!)
Posted: 11/16/2006 9:39:55 PM | Hey guys...thanks to all of you for your input and opinions.
Meanwhile...At the Conference, the accusations and finger pointing continue:
French Minister Shocked by Canada's Kyoto Position
Canadian Press
NAIROBI, Kenya -- French Environment Minister Nelly Olin says she is shocked by Canada's decision to renounce its emissions-cutting targets under the Kyoto Protocol.
But Environment Minister Rona Ambrose says Olin is meddling in Canadian domestic politics, reiterating that the Conservative government was left with an impossible challenge on the climate file because of the previous government's failure to take action.
Under the Kyoto Protocol, Canada is committed to cutting its greenhouse emissions six per cent from 1990 levels, but its emissions have actually risen 27 per cent since 1990.
Canada is the only country that has publicly repudiated its targets under the climate treaty, and French President Jacques Chirac has already made some scathing comments about countries that go back on their commitments.
http://tinyurl.com/y9tygg | |
|
| Way To Go Canada! (Uhm...NOT!)
Posted: 11/16/2006 10:00:52 PM | Here's what I find funny
(from www.stephentaylor.ca)
November 15, 2006
Media bias on climate change
Much ink has been spilled on the "fossil of the day" award which was given to Conservative environment minister Rona Ambrose at this year's U.N. Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC).
Activists complain that the Canadian government deserved the dubious distinction for its inaction on addressing greenhouse gases.
As one of my readers points out, this is not the first time that Canada has earned the "fossil of the day" award. At last year's UNFCCC conference in Montreal, Mr. "gavel banger" himself, then-minister of the environment (a Liberal), received the "fossil of the day award" too! (do an inline search for "fossil")
News stories on (Conservative) Rona Ambrose receiving the fossil of the day award: 193
News stories on (Liberal) Stephane Dion receiving the fossil of the day award: NONE | |
|
e-wok
|
Joined: 9/25/2006
Msg: 37 | |
| Way To Go Canada! (Uhm...NOT!)
Posted: 11/16/2006 10:11:21 PM | But Environment Minister Rona Ambrose says Olin is meddling in Canadian domestic politics, reiterating that the Conservative government was left with an impossible challenge on the climate file because of the previous government's failure to take action.
Ambrose and Harper lack the sophistication and experience to
engage in serious global affairs. HOW FRIGGIN TACKY is it to stand before
the world acting defensive of your failings by blaming your woes
on those "bloody liberals." I'm betting 95% of the world leaders
and reps didn't even understand what she was talking about....who
are those liberals? Eco-terrorists??
Has anybody ever at any time heard BUSH stand before the UN and
blame those damn democrats?? NEVER!!! Even HE knows that's
stupid.
You represent CANADA when you get up to the podium, Ambrose - not Conservatives
or liberals....wholly dumb shits!
Then they wonder why they are now trailing the liberals across Canada
in the latest polls. This crew is too inexperienced to run this country.
BTW: Ambrose, your hair is looking bitchin, but call an election
and get your embarrassing ass off the podium!!! | |
|
| Way To Go Canada! (Uhm...NOT!)
Posted: 11/16/2006 10:15:42 PM |
Well it looks like our dirty little secret is finally officially out for all the world to see
A dirty secret that's also existed during the past 13 years of LIBERAL federal government
It's amazing how often liberals complain about things stephen harper's government hasn't done [as a MINORITY government, not even a year old], when the previous LIBERAL MAJORITY government of 13 YEARS!!!!! didn't do them either | |
|
e-wok
|
Joined: 9/25/2006
Msg: 39 | |
| Way To Go Canada! (Uhm...NOT!)
Posted: 11/16/2006 10:19:14 PM |
It's amazing how often liberals complain about things stephen harper's government hasn't done [as a MINORITY government, not even a year old], when the previous LIBERAL MAJORITY government of 13 YEARS!!!!! didn't do them either
Yeah, but, like I said earlier, you'll never find Chretien going on the podium
on foreign soil and blame some domestic political party for bad optics.
Have you?? You didn't find that odd that she was blaming previous
parties for Canada's failings? OMG, this is funny stuff....I am literally
stunned by her provincial attitude. | |
|
| Way To Go Canada! (Uhm...NOT!)
Posted: 11/17/2006 12:42:23 AM | Well it looks like our dirty little secret is finally officially out for all the world to see
A dirty secret that's also existed during the past 13 years of LIBERAL federal government
It's amazing how often liberals complain about things stephen harper's government hasn't done [as a MINORITY government, not even a year old], when the previous LIBERAL MAJORITY government of 13 YEARS!!!!! didn't do them either
You are misinterpreting what I meant by my statement. It was intended to put blame on all our politicians, whether Liberal, Conservative or NDP, for doing little to move proactively on the global warming issue, particularly after signing on to Kyoto. Clearly the Liberals should be held the most accountable. Canadians who are concerned about the environment and global warming are getting pretty fed up by the lethargic response from our elected officials.
Maybe it's time to give the Green Party a chance. | |
|
| Way To Go Canada! (Uhm...NOT!)
Posted: 11/17/2006 7:07:18 AM | | Harper is a Bush wannabe that will place the interests of corporate Canada above that of Canadians. Screwing us on the environment is just another in the long list of sell outs just like soft wood lumber. | |
|
| Way To Go Canada! (Uhm...NOT!)
Posted: 11/17/2006 7:09:23 AM | | Unfortunately we have a big country here,and there's no really green way to move goods across it except by diesel power,like trucks and trains. There's also a lot of construction,which is done by diesel powered heavy equipment. How do we provide clean heat and electricity to the whole country? Sure,some provinces have vast hydro-electric capabilities,but not all. Really,it's going to be hard meeting the conditions in the Kyoto Accord given these factors. If we adopted it fully,it would wipe out the heavy construction and trucking industries in a lot of provinces. | |
|
| Way To Go Canada! (Uhm...NOT!)
Posted: 11/17/2006 8:08:23 AM | Ya lets worry about cars etc. and sweat the small stuff here....while places like Brazil burn entire essential forests down on purpose....get your facts straight and then rethink the deal i say.
Heck we plant over 3 trees here for every 1 we cut.
We have so much pollution crap on our cars they run like shit now etc. and yet we need to do more they say.
Great machine gun down the idiots who are burning forests in south america.
I was there and saw it myself....most horrific thing I ever saw.
Take a trip and see it yourself....then you would drive the BIGGEST SUV made and feel proud how good you do in comparison to those countries on destroying the planet.
I am a VERY PROUD CANADIAN.....IMO I live in the best country in the world....so go complain about somebody else for a change.  | |
|
| Way To Go Canada! (Uhm...NOT!)
Posted: 11/17/2006 9:44:41 AM |
Harper is a Bush wannabe that will place the interests of corporate Canada above that of Canadians
Paul Martin was far more guilty of placing the interests of corporate Canada above that of Canadians. | |
|
| Way To Go Canada! (Uhm...NOT!)
Posted: 11/17/2006 4:19:34 PM | you people that think we can't meet Kyoto are a bunch of brainwashed losers! you've been breathing too many diesel fumes.
and nuclear is not the answer.
not only can we meet Kyoto we can exceed it's targets. are we not intelligent?
we have the greatest country on the earth not the stupidest and laziest.
"The earth, we could have saved her but we were too lazy and stupid. " Kurt Vonnegut | |
|
| |
| Way To Go Canada! (Uhm...NOT!)
Posted: 11/17/2006 4:52:40 PM | I don't think that the government can always be blamed or left to shoulder the entire load of societies problems.
Sure, it sucks that Canada is failing shamefully in terms of Kyoto, but a fair share of the responsiblity has to be shouldered by individuals, consumers. Should smokers get angry at the government for refusing to help them quit smoking by outlawing it, or somehow reducing the availability of tobacco?
When gas was at it's all time high over the last year, all you hear is complaining. And we are not talking simply from truckers, who have an actual *need* to use a vehicle, but from just your average citified person who no more has a need to drive than a smoker has a need to smoke.
Yes, government has a role to play, but this a democracy. If the people aren't behind it, with something more than their mouth, the government can't do much about it. And if your average citizen knows that they have made their sacrifice and contribution, than a wise government will follow. | |
|
| Way To Go Canada! (Uhm...NOT!)
Posted: 11/17/2006 9:34:20 PM | The Conference is all wrapped up for now, with plans to meet again next year:
http://tinyurl.com/yyf5qo
Yes, government has a role to play, but this a democracy. If the people aren't behind it, with something more than their mouth, the government can't do much about it. And if your average citizen knows that they have made their sacrifice and contribution, than a wise government will follow.
I believe that most Canadians are concerned with global warming. Polls consistently reflect that. However, there is only so much that consumers can do with what's currently available to us. As I stated earlier, governments and corporations need to work closely together to find cleaner energy solutions and make them accessible and affordable to all consumers. They are going to have to take the leading role, and then all consumers can follow more easily. I firmly believe we have the capability, resources, and creativity to do this (as another poster also suggested), but I'm not so sure that we have the will.
I don't think it's too wise to wait until the last minute to get moving. We only have one planet to live on, and sooner or later, every country is going to have to get on board. It may come down to our quality of life and survival if we don't. | |
|
| Way To Go Canada! (Uhm...NOT!)
Posted: 11/17/2006 10:06:39 PM | re: Xrayspecs message 49
"governments and corporations need to work closely together to find cleaner energy solutions and make them accessible and affordable to all consumers."
Oh boy. Where do I start. Governments and corporations are, IMHO, one in the same. "The executive of the modern State is but a committee for managing the common affairs of the whole bourgeoisie." I don't think its any surprise if I was to say that Harper is doing the bidding of the Alberta oil patch. Meanwhile, in the US, Halliburton's army is raping Iraq. My point is is that I can't see the state and capital working together to find cleaner energy solutions when it is in capital's interest not to do so, i.e. it negatively impacts their profits. Why do you think the legislation passed by the (supposi)Tories a few weeks back was laughable at best? In a perfect world, it might work, but I am just expressing *extreme* skepticism that they would work together to create a cleaner planet when it is not in capital's interest to do so.
chers | |
|
| Way To Go Canada! (Uhm...NOT!)
Posted: 11/17/2006 10:49:08 PM |
Governments and corporations are, IMHO, one in the same.
To all intents and purposes, they are, I agree. One won't be able to move forward without the other, hence my collective statement.
My point is is that I can't see the state and capital working together to find cleaner energy solutions when it is in capital's interest not to do so, i.e. it negatively impacts their profits.
I fully agree, and previously stated "but I'm not so sure that we have the will". It may indeed come down to corporate greed triumphing over quality of life and survival.
Pretty scary to contemplate, isn't it? | |
|
|
|
Home
login 
... cripies I've only moved three times this year).
