Jump to content

Canada Must Exit Climate Agreement Immediately


Recommended Posts

On 6/22/2022 at 3:57 AM, Nationalist said:

And what would you propose? Stop mining the oil sands?

Oil and gas prices have shot up because of stupidity. Europe made countless deals with Russia for oil and gas. The USA elects a moron who stomps on the American oil and gas industry. The Tweenkies scream and make all sorts of insane doomsday predictions. Then...Russia invades Ukraine and the shit show begins.

Utter morons...

We have other sources of energy that can, one day, fully replace oil and coal. It's already happening, but it can be done faster.

Why are you so afraid of adaptation and progress in order to improve how we live?

Why can't Canada become a leader in using renewables? Why is it so difficult to accept that renewables can also create jobs and economic incentives. 

Side note: Atomic energy needs to be looked at more seriously. 

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, marcus said:

We have other sources of energy that can, one day, fully replace oil and coal. It's already happening, but it can be done faster.

Why are you so afraid of adaptation and progress in order to improve how we live?

Why can't Canada become a leader in using renewables? Why is it so difficult to accept that renewables can also create jobs and economic incentives. 

Side note: Atomic energy needs to be looked at more seriously. 

Wind mills and solar panels will not power our society. None of this "green technology" can. Ask the Germans.

When there's a reasonable and functional replacement, I'm all for a conversation. Until then, I happen to like stable electrical power and I'd rather not freeze to death next winter...

Thank you very much.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, Nationalist said:

Wind mills and solar panels will not power our society. None of this "green technology" can.

Says you. And a rapidly shrinking minority.

Solar, wind, hydro, geothermal, fusion, hydrogen, tidal. none of them work... we have to listen to the oil barons!

Same old song.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

45 minutes ago, herbie said:

Says you. And a rapidly shrinking minority.

Solar, wind, hydro, geothermal, fusion, hydrogen, tidal. none of them work... we have to listen to the oil barons!

Same old song.

 

https://worldnewsera.com/news/startups/germanys-green-energy-failure-germany-turns-back-to-coal-and-natural-gas-as-millions-of-its-solar-panels-are-blanketed-in-snow-and-ice-tech-news-startup/

Yes. The song called The Truth.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, herbie said:

Says you. And a rapidly shrinking minority.

Solar, wind, hydro, geothermal, fusion, hydrogen, tidal. none of them work... we have to listen to the oil barons!

Same old song.

 

You’re clearly way out of your depth on this topic.  You better read past posts and do your homework.  Some of us know a lot about these technologies and their limitations.  

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, herbie said:

Oh Jeez, same old same old. While turning your backs on the limitation of fossil fuel.

No worry, now it's no longer necessary to stop peeing in the pool because Uncle Sam can legally start peeing in the pool again.

Uncle Sam lowered it's emissions more than those who signed

so clearly your little agreement does nothing to help the environment

it's just useless virtue signalling

Edited by Yzermandius19
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:

How can someone say that such technologies can NEVER WORK?

?

They can improve and come down in price through increased production and competition, especially if they’re integrated into how we build communities and homes in the building code and zoning regulations.  Really all new roofs should integrate solar shingles/panels.   Deep water cooling, geothermal and wind power (in brownfields or out of the way of human activity) should be standard at the regional/provincial level where the geography makes them viable.  Small nuclear reactors can probably make up the shortfall of electricity to power EVs and businesses at the community level.  However, major industry will rely on our large-scale hydro, nuclear, and natural gas plants for decades to come.  That’s fine because they’re cleaner than coal and green tech will gradually reduce their piece of the energy pie.  Gradually. Having improbable deadlines sets us up for failure.  We need to look at local contexts, not international ones.

Carbon taxes squeeze people financially, create inequalities, and almost inevitably become another tax to add to the slush fund of general tax revenues.  How that money gets spent or returned to taxpayers after coming through costly administration is problematic.  

Edited by Zeitgeist
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Zeitgeist said:

Small nuclear reactors can probably make up the shortfall of electricity to power EVs and businesses at the community level. 

This will remain an impossibility until such time as governments can convince people to trust them to regulate without undue influence of lobbyists forever lobbying the government to cut corners and reduce standards that cut into profits.

Not in our lifetimes in other words.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, eyeball said:

This will remain an impossibility until such time as governments can convince people to trust them to regulate without undue influence of lobbyists forever lobbying the government to cut corners and reduce standards that cut into profits.

Not in our lifetimes in other words.

Improvement to emissions levels will be incremental.  We’ll still need a strong oil and gas sector for energy security, affordability, and an important employment sector.  We undo our reductions with immigration anyway, as our gross emissions increase with the population.  Again though, replacing our retiring workforce is important. Automation will take care of some of that.  Reducing emissions is just one factor to consider in managing affairs.  Living standards and preventing poverty are more important, more measurable, and more immediate.

The realistic solution is the naturally occurring reduction in world population coming with the absence of the Baby Boomers from around 2050, the natural advances in technology, and the fact that as people worldwide become more educated and urbanized, they have fewer kids.  Demographics, education, urbanization, and technology are the big drivers here.  Carbon taxes are an unnecessary expense.  Hammering our oil and gas sector just damages our economy, raises the cost of living, and puts us at the mercy of foreign tyrants who will sell us as much energy as possible to the detriment of our own energy sector.  

Edited by Zeitgeist
Link to comment
Share on other sites

force will be the terms

Enviromentalism will go down in flames with the rest of the leftist agenda

this is a civil war now

the right is not going to defeat the contemporary left

we are going to wipe them out

this is war for all the marbles, every leftist sacred cow will be slaughtered

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

the next thing to come crashing down will be the catastrophic global financial & economic crisis

the masses will be too busy trying to avoid being homeless in the streets to worry about carbon

it will be a miracle if it doesn't result in the rise of Fascism in fact

although Fascists may have some environmental concerns, burning fossil fuels won't be one of them

gold & oil will rule once again

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, ironstone said:

Some fool wants assisted suicide because of the fear of climate change.

Dougie is right about the mass psychosis.  People are literally destroying themselves out of fear when actually very little has happened or changed environmentally.  Or rather, environmental change is a constant which is unavoidable.  We adjust to conditions and adapt.  We’re better equipped to do this as a species than at any time in history.

The allowance of assisted suicide for mentally ill people will make it easier for people to succumb to irrational fear.  Rather than help people, the state gives them a cheap exit.   This is what we today call “wellness” and “protecting the vulnerable.”   The double speak Orwell talked about.  Use language to paint evil as virtue.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Zeitgeist said:

1. Dougie is right about the mass psychosis.  People are literally destroying themselves out of fear when actually very little has happened or changed environmentally.  

2. Or rather, environmental change is a constant which is unavoidable.  

3. We adjust to conditions and adapt.  We’re better equipped to do this as a species than at any time in history.

 

1. People who cannot engage in public discussions without excessive emotionality, including anger, should recuse themselves.

2. On a certain level this is elementary, on another it feels to acknowledge a human caused problem that is facing us.

3. That would include public collaboration on mitigation. I agree that we have the tools to solve this problem, however those tools are being used by moneyed groups who have a vested interest in the status quo including governments.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Michael Hardner said:

1. People who cannot engage in public discussions without excessive emotionality, including anger, should recuse themselves.

2. On a certain level this is elementary, on another it feels to acknowledge a human caused problem that is facing us.

3. That would include public collaboration on mitigation. I agree that we have the tools to solve this problem, however those tools are being used by moneyed groups who have a vested interest in the status quo including governments.

But environmental change is just one of our problems and it’s actually hard to discern the impacts of human inputs.  We do know the costs of putting up barriers to the energy supply upon which our existence depends.

Extinction Rebellion to the green movement is like the Red Brigade or Bader Meinhof to the communist revolutionaries.   They want to destroy the current system to create their notions of a utopia.  It’s central planning gone evil genius totalitarian.  Such moves always end in dystopia.  Incremental reform is the only way to fixing environmental problems.  Sir Edmund Burke.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Michael Hardner said:

1. People who cannot engage in public discussions without excessive emotionality, including anger, should recuse themselves.

but they don't recuse themselves

they make ridiculous demands and claim that everyone who doesn't acquiesce to those demands wants to destroy the planet

they want reasonable people to be ignored and punished in their quest to achieve a green utopia

even though it will actually result in dystopia

and these are the loudest and most prominent voices in the environmental movement

it has long since been hijacked by far left radicals who can't be reasoned with

Edited by Yzermandius19
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Zeitgeist said:

1. But environmental change is just one of our problems and it’s actually hard to discern the impacts of human inputs.  

 2.  They want to destroy the current system to create their notions of a utopia.  It’s central planning gone evil genius totalitarian.  

1. Partly but also pretty clear that humans are driving the current warming.

2. Carbon Markets and such are market based solutions.  GHW Bush implemented a similar system for CFCs I think, and it succeeded.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

59 minutes ago, Yzermandius19 said:

1. but they don't recuse themselves

 

2. and these are the loudest and most prominent voices in the environmental movement

it has long since been hijacked by far left radicals who can't be reasoned with

1. They should, every bit as much as the angry anti Trudeau and Trumps need to step back and reflect on their participation.

 

2. Weirdly they have been largely ineffective in changing policy over thirty years....

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Zeitgeist said:

 

Extinction Rebellion to the green movement is like the Red Brigade or Bader Meinhof to the communist revolutionaries.   They want to destroy the current system to create their notions of a utopia.  It’s central planning gone evil genius totalitarian.  Such moves always end in dystopia.  Incremental reform is the only way to fixing environmental problems. 

it's on trajectory to outright terrorism

they will start taking hostages and blowing shit up at some point

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:

2. Weirdly they have been largely ineffective in changing policy over thirty years....

because they are selling communism

using the environment as the sales pitch

if they dropped the commie baggage, environmentalism would be a lot easier to sell

Edited by Yzermandius19
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...