How would the Liberals win affect those in the 2-5% range?

[ToadBrother]

I'm not saying reducing dependence on fossil fuels shouldn't be a goal but it goes farther than just producing electricity. Fixed power plants are fine but fossil fuels will still be the most concentrated form of portable energy for the foreseeable future.

Hydrogen.

[eyeball]

Oh please. Like anything Canada does is going to have ANY influence on the world's climate.

The example we set could easily have a huge influence. Why should developing countries make sacrifices if developed countries are going meh?

[angrypenguin]

The example we set could easily have a huge influence. Why should developing countries make sacrifices if developed countries are going meh?

We're already making sacrifices while they get to get away scot free and focus on their economy first.

[ToadBrother]

We're already making sacrifices while they get to get away scot free and focus on their economy first.

And?

[Wilber]

Hydrogen.

Maybe, if you can make enough energy to produce the stuff and then only if you can keep it liquid which requires keeping it at -253 degrees C. It is also not compatible with current IC engines so you are looking at very high costs involved in the production of engines or fuel cells that can use it. Something for the future possibly but not the silver bullet many think. I had Ballard Power stock for a couple of years. Luckily I was able to sell it at a small profit. Many weren't so lucky.

Personally, I don't think there will be a silver bullet for a long time, if ever The replacement of fossil fuels will require a variety of technologies.

Edited October 9, 2015 by Wilber

[ToadBrother]

Maybe, if you can make enough energy to produce the stuff and then only if you can keep it liquid which requires keeping it at -253 degrees C. It is also not compatible with current IC engines so you are looking at very high costs involved in the production of engines or fuel cells that you can use it. Something for the future possibly but not the silver bullet many think. I had Ballard Power stock for a couple of years. Luckily I was able to sell it at a small profit. Many weren't so lucky.

Personally, I don't think there will be a silver bullet for a long time, if ever The replacement of fossil fuels will require a variety of technologies.

I'm talking about using hydrogen for aircraft and transport ships, and maybe for trains and other forms of large capacity land transportation. Electric vehicles for the rest of us.

[Wilber]

I'm talking about using hydrogen for aircraft and transport ships, and maybe for trains and other forms of large capacity land transportation. Electric vehicles for the rest of us.

Quite possibly but again, storing it in volume requires keeping it a very low temperature and the energy efficient technology to produce hydrogen has a way to go. Electric cars are fine for a lot of things but range is the biggest problem. Tesla is the best of the bunch and it can't make it from my house to Kelowna on a charge. My car can go almost there and back on a tank of gas and my old Jetta TDI could make it there and back on 2/3 of a tank.

[Topaz]

Is it 200,000 family income or per person? Look at it this way, all those taxed should say they are giving it to the government as charity and take deduction. The rich would have to be hit sooner or later because the middle-class doesn't have any more money and really the government has help make the middle-class disappear.

[Bonam]

Because the demand for more stuff increases, and politicians are whores who need to make promises come election time. And for a sizable percentage of the public, the cost does not matter since it's not on their shoulders. The top earning 50% pay 96% of taxes. The bottom earning 50% of Canadians pay just 4% of taxes.

Now tell me, who do you think that bottom 50% are going to vote for? The party which says we need to tighten our belt and cut back, or the party who says "Party! Party! Party!" ?

Tax burdens as a % of GDP have remained relatively constant over many decades in most Western countries. I think despite all the political hysterics between "small government conservatives" (who don't really exist) and big spending liberals, the long term public consensus is fairly stable in most Western countries.

[Hydraboss]

Is it 200,000 family income or per person? Look at it this way, all those taxed should say they are giving it to the government as charity and take deduction. The rich would have to be hit sooner or later because the middle-class doesn't have any more money and really the government has help make the middle-class disappear.

What are you trying to say (it's not clear)? That any money earned over 200k should be given to charity for the deduction? I can't make it out.

The rest is a bunch of muddled nonsense.

[Bonam]

I'm talking about using hydrogen for aircraft and transport ships, and maybe for trains and other forms of large capacity land transportation. Electric vehicles for the rest of us.

Transport ships should use nuclear reactors as has been very conclusively demonstrated by the navy as a safe and effective means of marine propulsion and energy production for over half a century now.

As for aircraft... hydrogen fuel is honestly just too expensive. Some space launch vehicles use cryogenic hydrogen for fuel, and even in that application, people try to avoid its use due to the cost and complexity of the associated systems. Hydrogen turbopumps, cryogenic tankage, etc, are all really expensive and complex. Not only would hydrogen systems be more complex, more costly, and require more volume and mass in the tankage and plumbing, but they would impose additional levels of danger, which is unacceptable in commercial aviation.

For recreational (propeller) aircraft, battery-electric solutions are not really far away from reality. But for jet airliners, hydrocarbon fuels are the only plausible solution until/unless some revolutionary technologies are introduced. There are a few plausible nuclear technologies that would be suitable for commercial aviation but they are unlikely to be met with public/political support.

As for trains... they are riding on rails on fixed routes, and adding necessary electric infrastructure to the rail systems would be by far the simplest way to go if one was to try to reduce emissions from trains.

Edited October 9, 2015 by Bonam

[Argus]

Basically you're spending your time doing something you don't believe in because it's a habit your picked up from a woman...

So you mean if an attractive woman in your life believed in carbon-tax you'd get on board with that too?

Well... how attractive?

[Argus]

The example we set could easily have a huge influence. Why should developing countries make sacrifices if developed countries are going meh?

Lots of European countries have made tremendous efforts at reducing carbon emissions.

So far the third world has pretty much said 'meh'.

[Argus]

I think the contributions of that industry to the economy don't factor in the true costs of using fossil fuels, and if the long term plan is to end the use of fossil fuels, then while you're correct that it could lead to a revenue downturn, that doesn't seem a very strong argument for continuing to use fossil fuels.

A revenue downturn? Is that the name you're giving to the massive depression throwing hundreds of millions of out work and killing millions more through starvation and poverty?

[ToadBrother]

A revenue downturn? Is that the name you're giving to the massive depression throwing hundreds of millions of out work and killing millions more through starvation and poverty?

You have this fascinating of just inventing objections and then acting as if there was even the smallest degree of evidence that they would happen.

[eyeball]

Lots of European countries have made tremendous efforts at reducing carbon emissions.

So far the third world has pretty much said 'meh'.

I have no doubt that's true of many of the third world governments that our governments and corporations negotiate with in secret but I have no reason to think the ordinary person says that.

[Smallc]

Meanwhile, many first-nations go without clean drinking water and the women get raped, murdered, and missing. Due to laziness right?

I'm not sure about that (it actually varies) but I promise that it isn't Harper's fault.

[Smallc]

India has a plan to reduce their CO2 emissions by 33-35% of 2005 level by 2030.

I'll hold my breath until then.

[Smallc]

Some FNs have never had proper water systems.

Not because the money wasn't there, generally. Many of us in rural and northern areas are in the same boat, or not far from it.

Edited October 10, 2015 by Smallc

[Moonlight Graham]

Due to incompetent tribal governments, mostly. Who is in charge of those water facilities? Chances are the Chief's brother in law, who has never had any training, doesn't read the manual, and doesn't show up three days out of five.

In other words, you have absolutely no idea and just pulled that out of your arse.

[Moonlight Graham]

I'm not sure about that (it actually varies) but I promise that it isn't Harper's fault.

Well we're all aware of the amazing things the Harper gov has done to help aboriginal poverty and crime.

[Smallc]

Well we're all aware of the amazing things the Harper gov has done to help aboriginal poverty and crime.

He's done about the Sam as every government. The truth is, no government will do much of anything. Too many people make far too much money off of the status quo.

[SpankyMcFarland]

Lets see how many doctors stay in ONT since wynne is cutting their salaries so she can pay the teachers more money.

I think they'll get by, all the same. They are well paid by any standard and they are still free to go. Let the wonderful free market decide what happens.