The Return of the Green Shift!

[GWiz]

It looks like a strategy of trying to give an impression that there is a Green Policy....but I guess it's better than nothing! If Ignatieff was really serious about the Green Shift, he wouldn't have punted it away two years ago. The problem is that few, if any politicians have any real core values when it comes to issues. Every issue is a matter of weighing the cost of keeping the promise vs. the number of votes it will pick up. So, to get any politician to get serious about the environment, there has to be a groundswell of support...and one that is significant enough to counter the groundswell of money from the energy companies....before there is a chance of it becoming policy.

Saddly that is quite true...

Since I've taken the matter of "going Green" into my own hands by converting my home to Geothermal heating and cooling and since in Manitoba it's all Hydro Electric my home is as "Green" as one can get with a 0 carbon footprint...

[WIP]

As I have said in other threads, Canada, even with it's evil oilsands produces, in total, 2% of the world's carbon dioxide. Even if we banned all cars, all power plants, all industry and killed all the farm alimals that breath, it would still be like a fart in a hurricane. We should destroy our economy for a useless symbolic effort?

It's a little misleading to point to Canada's carbon footprint without considering that our population is less than .5% of the number of people in the world. Ofcourse it's also misleading to keep referring to this crap as "oil sands." This is a result of oil company propaganda that keeps trying to control messaging in the media. It's not oil, and not even close to oil. It's low grad bitumen, close enough to tar to be used for paving roads....which was the only use for it back when Alberta still had significant oil reserves.

[WIP]

Saddly that is quite true...

Since I've taken the matter of "going Green" into my own hands by converting my home to Geothermal heating and cooling and since in Manitoba it's all Hydro Electric my home is as "Green" as one can get with a 0 carbon footprint...

I have a friend who's putting in a geothermal system now. From what I understand, you need a significant amount of land to set up the system, and unfortunately I'm in an old city neighbourhood with a small lot.

[RNG]

It's a little misleading to point to Canada's carbon footprint without considering that our population is less than .5% of the number of people in the world. Ofcourse it's also misleading to keep referring to this crap as "oil sands." This is a result of oil company propaganda that keeps trying to control messaging in the media. It's not oil, and not even close to oil. It's low grad bitumen, close enough to tar to be used for paving roads....which was the only use for it back when Alberta still had significant oil reserves.

You sir, are ignorant. Yes, in it's natural form it is basically soft asphalt. But have you ever heard of upgraders? I bet about 10% of the gas you burn in your vehicle came from this "bitumen". Read a little.

Secondly, with 35 million people spread out over the second largest country in the world, of course we need to burn gas and diesel. Plus, we happen to be in the north. You know, it gets cold up here so we need to warm our living space. That too NECESSITATES burning stuff. Or maybe move here and your hot air will keep us warm.

[TimG]

It's a little misleading to point to Canada's carbon footprint without considering that our population is less than .5% of the number of people in the world.

So what? Per capita numbers are meaningless statistic in an interconnected world where goods are produced in one country and consumed in another.

[GWiz]

I have a friend who's putting in a geothermal system now. From what I understand, you need a significant amount of land to set up the system, and unfortunately I'm in an old city neighbourhood with a small lot.

That could be a problem alright... Probably could still be done, but it'd be prohibitively too expensive to do... How small a lot? I was initially going to do it in the front yard which is only about a 50' by 35' area which would have been enough even with water and sewer lines in the way...

[William Ashley]

Ignatieff's (failed) leadership campaign included a promise of cap and trade. Dion won, and ran on the "Green Shift" in 2008. After that, Ignatieff said the green shift was dead.

Well, it's back:

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/report-on-business/economy/economy-lab/the-economists/liberals-significant-climate-plan-cloaked-in-silence/article1968885/

Significant change in course is an understatement. Let me guess, his first step would be to shut down the oil sands, and introduce a carbon tax? Followed by what. cap and trade?

I can't wait for the next round of "Tax on Everything" ads.

Total BS.. liberals want to develop the oil sands but insure cleaner process and prevent more environmental damage and adverse health affects to Albertans. Part of their aim is to set an amount that is required for oil sands developments to invest in cleaner technologies - in other words the money is taken, but it can be put back into cleaner production.

The US corporations behind the oil sands make huge profits, they shouldn't just be dumping toxic chemicals into Canada and making money off it.

US Despoilment outside the US is a major concern globally among those aware of the damage US companies do around the world. Water shortages and pollution caused in India by CocaCola, mining damages else where, there is a rather long use of damage US companies do, in what makes it the richest economy in the world, it doesn't come without harm or slave labour. Alberta is no exception to a place being environmentally damaged and the health of its residents jepordized.

Edited April 5, 2011 by William Ashley

[punked]

Total BS.. liberals want to develop the oil sands but insure cleaner process and prevent more environmental damage and adverse health affects to Albertans. Part of their aim is to set an amount that is required for oil sands developments to invest in cleaner technologies - in other words the money is taken, but it can be put back into cleaner production.

The US corporations behind the oil sands make huge profits, they shouldn't just be dumping toxic chemicals into Canada and making money off it.

US Despoilment outside the US is a major concern globally among those aware of the damage US companies do around the world. Water shortages and pollution caused in India by CocaCola, mining damages else where, there is a rather long use of damage US companies do, in what makes it the richest economy in the world, it doesn't come without harm. Alberta is no exception to a place being environmentally damaged and the health of its residents jepordized.

But that is BS to. Today the Liberals said they wanted to take Hydro power through Quebec instead of NS for the Church Hill project. Problem is that the NS deal has been 10 years in the making and that Quebec has said no to that project time and time again. So instead know what NL and NS get? NOTHING because the Liberals would rather NL and NS not have sustainable hydro than offend Quebec. So it is clear they don't want cleaner power at all.

[Shady]

This should be easy enough to do. Charge an export tax to any country that refuses to get with the program

I see. And what will you do when other countries impose a tax on Canadian goods as a response to our tax on them?

And this folks, is another example of why economic illiterates should never be in positions of power as it relates to our economic policies. /facepalm.

[RNG]

I see. And what will you do when other countries impose a tax on Canadian goods as a response to our tax on them?

And this folks, is another example of why economic illiterates should never be in positions of power as it relates to our economic policies. /facepalm.

This forum needs a "good post" icon or something instead of me having to post that I really like what Shady just said.

[eyeball]

I see. And what will you do when other countries impose a tax on Canadian goods as a response to our tax on them?

Stick by our guns.

And this folks, is another example of why economic illiterates should never be in positions of power as it relates to our economic policies. /facepalm.

It's even worse, it's what happens when virtue trumps economics.

[Shady]

Stick by our guns.

Good. You can explain that to the hundreds of thousands of Canadians that lose their jobs because of that policy.

It's even worse, it's what happens when virtue trumps economics.

Idiocy isn't virtuous. All you're doing is cutting off your nose to spite your face. It's all symbolism over substance. The only substance being the middle class jobs and lives you destroy in the process.

[WIP]

So what? Per capita numbers are meaningless statistic in an interconnected world where goods are produced in one country and consumed in another.

And it doesn't bother you in the least that only a small percentage of the world's population has benefited economically from dumping carbon into the atmosphere, while the nations with the smallest carbon footprints are in or near the tropics....and the ones who are facing the greatest impact from a changing climate. Besides, the days of cheap energy are gone, and so will be this globalized capitalist system of producing in one location and shipping all over the world.

[WIP]

You sir, are ignorant. Yes, in it's natural form it is basically soft asphalt. But have you ever heard of upgraders?

Yes! And I hear they are very popular with farmers and ranchers in the areas where the oil companies plan to build more of them: Armed sheriffs guard Alberta upgrader hearing

I bet about 10% of the gas you burn in your vehicle came from this "bitumen". Read a little.

Well, I reduced my carbon footprint by moving close enough to work to not need to drive to work...and get rid of the 2nd car.

Secondly, with 35 million people spread out over the second largest country in the world, of course we need to burn gas and diesel. Plus, we happen to be in the north. You know, it gets cold up here so we need to warm our living space. That too NECESSITATES burning stuff. Or maybe move here and your hot air will keep us warm.

Most Canadians live in cities, just like I do, so cut the bullshit Paul Bunyon!

[bloodyminded]

Most Canadians live in cities, just like I do, so cut the bullshit Paul Bunyon!

But this majority does not comprise the sensible Canadians, the thrifty and hard-working and values-based Canadians...the real Canadians!

The real Canadians are mostly rural-based, and evidently are disproportionately Albertan. It's the phenomenon known as "accidental-geographic wisdom."

[WIP]

But this majority does not comprise the sensible Canadians, the thrifty and hard-working and values-based Canadians...the real Canadians!

The real Canadians are mostly rural-based, and evidently are disproportionately Albertan. It's the phenomenon known as "accidental-geographic wisdom."

I think we are experiencing something similar to the U.S.; where rural and suburban voters have more political power than the people who are living in cities. One of the most telling statistics on U.S. state by state demographics is that it is actually the red, religious right, pro-business, Republican-supporting states that take more from the Federal system than they pay in federal taxes; while the liberal, Democrat, blue states are the ones who pay more in taxes than what they get back in services! The best thing that could happen to America's economic and political situation is if Rick Perry and his tea party clown posse were serious about seceding from the U.S.A. and becoming a republic again@

But, I'm fine with energy subsidies for people living in the North, but I can't accept this being used as an excuse for becoming a petro-state.

[Jack Weber]

But this majority does not comprise the sensible Canadians, the thrifty and hard-working and values-based Canadians...the real Canadians!

The real Canadians are mostly rural-based, and evidently are disproportionately Albertan. It's the phenomenon known as "accidental-geographic wisdom."

Nice!!!!

[noahbody]

And it doesn't bother you in the least that only a small percentage of the world's population has benefited economically from dumping carbon into the atmosphere

It made Al Gore a billionaire.

while the nations with the smallest carbon footprints are in or near the tropics....and the ones who are facing the greatest impact from a changing climate.

Greatest impact? How so?

[RNG]

Yes! And I hear they are very popular with farmers and ranchers in the areas where the oil companies plan to build more of them: Armed sheriffs guard Alberta upgrader hearing

Wow, people play NIMBY!!!!11.

Well, I reduced my carbon footprint by moving close enough to work to not need to drive to work...and get rid of the 2nd car.

Great for you, but many can't.

Most Canadians live in cities, just like I do, so cut the bullshit Paul Bunyon!

Yes, but goods have to move from port to point of consumption. From factory to store, and on and on. Your statement is really meaningless.

Edited April 6, 2011 by RNG

[ToadBrother]

It made Al Gore a billionaire.

I thought tobacco did that.

[RNG]

And because WIP lives in a city, he doesn't need heat in the winter? He seems to have avoided that little bit of FACT.

[Shady]

And because WIP lives in a city, he doesn't need heat in the winter? He seems to have avoided that little bit of FACT.

I'd love to learn that special secret. Not having to use heat during the winter would be quite nice. Unfortunately, I've found that even living in a city, one needs to be warm.

[WIP]

Greatest impact? How so?

Because many nations in the Global South have large coastal areas that will be subject to flooding from rising sea levels. A 3 foot rise in sea level will inundate 40% of Bangladesh, an already overcrowded nation lacking the infrastructure needed to adapt to this sort of catastrophe.

Also, the South has already been experiencing greater impacts of the droughts and floods that had long been predicted to come along with the increased amount of energy and moisture in the atmosphere. We are only starting to notice that our weather is becoming more volatile than usual. The effects nearer the Equator have been more pronounced. I came across another example of this last week, while checking the Weather Underground website. One of the big stories, was the catastrophic flooding in southern Thailand caused by an unbelievable downpour of 40 inches of rain in one day, that averaged 2 inches of rain falling per hour at times. The accompanying news reports said at least 17 people died, and about 850,000 were affected by the flood.

Thailand is more prosperous and developed than many third world nations, but in the modern age of burning fossil fuels, the overall trend has been that most of the negative external costs of burning coal and oil, have been to burden the poorest nations that have contributed the least to the increase in manmade greenhouse gases to the atmosphere.

Edited April 8, 2011 by WIP

[WIP]

And because WIP lives in a city, he doesn't need heat in the winter? He seems to have avoided that little bit of FACT.

Here's the fact you're avoiding: the average individual has a limited range of choices when living in a society. The real issue is whether or not we are going to reduce the consumption of fossil fuels. If you're campaigning for the continued subsidizing of tar sands developments instead of renewable energy sources, then you can't undo the damage by reducing your own carbon footprint.

[noahbody]

Because many nations in the Global South have large coastal areas that will be subject to flooding from rising sea levels. A 3 foot rise in sea level will inundate 40% of Bangladesh, an already overcrowded nation lacking the infrastructure needed to adapt to this sort of catastrophe.

Low-lying Pacific islands regarded as "poster child" examples of the threat from rising sea levels are expanding not sinking, a new study has revealed.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/australiaandthepacific/tuvalu/7799503/Pacific-islands-growing-not-shrinking-due-to-climate-change.html

One of the big stories, was the catastrophic flooding in southern Thailand caused by an unbelievable downpour of 40 inches of rain in one day, that averaged 2 inches of rain falling per hour at times.

Is extreme weather something new? No. Still Gore recently blamed the record snowfall and cold temperatures in the States on global warming. What's extreme is the lengths they'll go to keep their theory alive. Trusting their predictions of what MAY happen in 100 years when their short-term predictions such as predicting a record hurricane season that ended up having a grand total of zero, requires a lot of faith. Pointing to weather events that have been occurring since the beginning of time and labeling them as proof is primitive thinking. It's like when a volcano erupted and people would say it's proof the gods are angry. Some people still believe that.

The accompanying news reports said at least 17 people died, and about 850,000 were affected by the flood.

How many people die because of winter each year?

Edited April 8, 2011 by noahbody