Clean Air Act

[jdobbin]

Global warming is a problem, but the situation is not as bleak as those with an agenda would have you believe. Drastic measures that could have serious consequences to our economy and standard of living are nto yet necessary.

I didn't say anything about drastic measures. I think there should be *some* measures taken aside from consultations that stretch out years from now. The Liberals were no better than this, make no mistake.

Eventually, there could be some serious consequences for our environment if we don't.

[cybercoma]

I didn't say anything about drastic measures. I think there should be *some* measures taken aside from consultations that stretch out years from now. The Liberals were no better than this, make no mistake.

Eventually, there could be some serious consequences for our environment if we don't.

Eventually, the sun will burn out and we'll be a frozen rock floating in space. We don't fund programs to find ways to make the sun last longer.

Sure some money should probably be spent to help reduce CO2 emissions because they do create some warming, but how much money do we spend if we don't know how big the problem is? The idea that there is going to be "serious consequences" is nothing more than doom and gloom. There is no data to show that concentrations will get so high in the next 100 years that we will have caused serious consequences by our actions. By and large, companies are moving more towards reducing their emissions as they can and saavy consumers are using more environmentally friendly methods of lighting their homes, heating their homes and driving to work. So, I'd say even if we did nothing...we're trending towards a reduction and therefore a slowing of global warming. But can we slow it? How much of an affect does the added CO2 have on the global temperature? Will the earth still warm even if we're not here?

There are few and limited answers to those questions.

[jdobbin]

Eventually, the sun will burn out and we'll be a frozen rock floating in space. We don't fund programs to find ways to make the sun last longer.

But we do make decisions that could affect us in a few years. Even the pollution control measures in the Clean Air Act are weak. I think the evidence of smog are pretty clear yet there will be consultations lasting years on that as well. Perhaps Canada could look what California has already done in this capacity.

It seems the policy of the Clean Air Act is to put off indefinitely emissions and smog reduction in favour of consultations. And then when some of these deadlines are reached, the wiggle room is such that the government and industry can fall on the intensity measures which are another word for increases.

I don't know that the government can sell this policy in urban areas of Canada or Quebec.

[cybercoma]

Since we're sliding away from Global Warming and into Air POllution, check the other thread I made.

[jdobbin]

Since we're sliding away from Global Warming and into Air POllution, check the other thread I made.

I was commenting on the entire act, not just global warming. And this thread is called the Clean Air Act.

[Drea]

Nice post Cybercoma. However I think that we should in fact dump a lot of money into the problem. The funding should go to scientific research. We need to understand the problems we face and determine a course of action instead of the knee jerk political reactions that are so common.

The simple fact that governments utilize reactionary solutions should give us some pause for thought.

I agree that we shouuld dump a lot of money into the program, though I disagree as to where it should go. It should go towards Liberal-friendly corporations, such as Power Corp., in the form of emissions-trading profits.

No way! Haliburton should get the contract -- after all Haliburton must be the best at everything -- they are so successfully rebuilding Iraq so we should most definetly get them here in Canads to fix our global warming problem.

[cybercoma]

I was commenting on the entire act, not just global warming. And this thread is called the Clean Air Act.

Fine, the evidence on smog is clear, in the sense that it has no long-term effects on health. Unless you're talking about particulates in the air, which do and have vastly improved since the 1970s. All six criteria for measuring air quality have been reduced significantly in the last 20-25 years. Mostly because of emission standards that are already in place, more fuel efficient vehicles (they put computers and catalytic converters in cars nowadays y'know... ) and scrubbers that have been installed in factories.

But that's not important is it? You just want the government to spend spend spend. You don't care about the science behind the problems, you just want something....anything done. Air pollution is being reduced everyday, even without further government intervention because rules are already in place.

So what did you want the clean air act to do? Close all industry that puts CO2 into the air? Close any factory that creates any small insignificant amount of air pollution? How many Canadians need to lose their job to meet the immediate goals you want?

[jdobbin]

Fine, the evidence on smog is clear, in the sense that it has no long-term effects on health. Unless you're talking about particulates in the air, which do and have vastly improved since the 1970s. All six criteria for measuring air quality have been reduced significantly in the last 20-25 years. Mostly because of emission standards that are already in place, more fuel efficient vehicles (they put computers and catalytic converters in cars nowadays y'know... ) and scrubbers that have been installed in factories.

But that's not important is it? You just want the government to spend spend spend. You don't care about the science behind the problems, you just want something....anything done. Air pollution is being reduced everyday, even without further government intervention because rules are already in place.

So what did you want the clean air act to do? Close all industry that puts CO2 into the air? Close any factory that creates any small insignificant amount of air pollution? How many Canadians need to lose their job to meet the immediate goals you want?

The booming economy reversed many of the gains on smog control that you mention.

I'd settle for standards that California are setting.

If the Conservatives want to run on the idea that Toronto's air is getting cleaner, by all means...

[cybercoma]

I didn't realize it was the federal government's job to be concerned with Toronto only. Canada as a whole has reduced air pollution by leaps and bounds since 1970. I guess maybe we should do something like create provincial governments, or municipal governments for more localized problems. Nah... the idea would never work.

[jdobbin]

I didn't realize it was the federal government's job to be concerned with Toronto only. Canada as a whole has reduced air pollution by leaps and bounds since 1970. I guess maybe we should do something like create provincial governments, or municipal governments for more localized problems. Nah... the idea would never work.

Toronto is just one city. Several others in Ontario and now in Quebec have increased smog. Even Calgary was reporting smog this year.

I guess all this talk on the Clean Air Act is moot. It won't pass anyways. Back to the drawing board.

[watching&waiting]

The only way to address smog is to have all 3 levels of government do things together. The Federal can address the air quality coming from outside sources and the provincial can set the level for their industries and the Local governments will have to do proper planning for the tall buildings and how they are poistions to allow the air currents to help clean out the smog and distribute it so it will not have toxic values. Just trying to get one level of government on side is hard but all 3 will be like pulling teeth.

[jdobbin]

The only way to address smog is to have all 3 levels of government do things together. The Federal can address the air quality coming from outside sources and the provincial can set the level for their industries and the Local governments will have to do proper planning for the tall buildings and how they are poistions to allow the air currents to help clean out the smog and distribute it so it will not have toxic values. Just trying to get one level of government on side is hard but all 3 will be like pulling teeth.

The federal Tories haven't done that. They have said they will have consultations.

[jbg]

JBG you seem to think scientific investment is a waste of time, why is that?

I agree that we shouuld dump a lot of money into the program, though I disagree as to where it should go. It should go towards Liberal-friendly corporations, such as Power Corp., in the form of emissions-trading profits.

No way! Haliburton should get the contract -- after all Haliburton must be the best at everything -- they are so successfully rebuilding Iraq so we should most definetly get them here in Canads to fix our global warming problem.

Drea got the sarcasm. Try again, Jerry.

[B. Max]

The federal Tories haven't done that. They have said they will have consultations.

Nothing wrong with that.

[jdobbin]

Nothing wrong with that.

Which the justifiably criticized the Liberals for.

[B. Max]

Nothing wrong with that.

Which the justifiably criticized the Liberals for.

No the liberals were going to buy hot air credits. Another one of there wealth transfer schemes. They consulted with the watermelons and one worlders at the cesspool of corruption.

[jdobbin]

No the liberals were going to buy hot air credits. Another one of there wealth transfer schemes. They consulted with the watermelons and one worlders at the cesspool of corruption.

No read the timeline above. The were going to consult with the car industry on emission controls which the Conservatives opposed. Now they are for it. After consultations.

[B. Max]

No the liberals were going to buy hot air credits. Another one of there wealth transfer schemes. They consulted with the watermelons and one worlders at the cesspool of corruption.

No read the timeline above. The were going to consult with the car industry on emission controls which the Conservatives opposed. Now they are for it. After consultations.

The last we heard the liberals exempted the auto industry. When Ambrose said they were including the auto industry Mcguinty flipped out and that time line was only about two weeks ago.

[jdobbin]

The last we heard the liberals exempted the auto industry. When Ambrose said they were including the auto industry Mcguinty flipped out and that time line was only about two weeks ago.

They didn't exempt the car industry. They were opposed from bringing in legislation by the Conservatives. McGuinty didn't even have to bring it up because he knew Liberals couldn't introduce the law.

[B. Max]

The last we heard the liberals exempted the auto industry. When Ambrose said they were including the auto industry Mcguinty flipped out and that time line was only about two weeks ago.

They didn't exempt the car industry. They were opposed from bringing in legislation by the Conservatives. McGuinty didn't even have to bring it up because he knew Liberals couldn't introduce the law.

Nonsense. As usual the liberals catered to Ont. and were going after alberta.

[jdobbin]

Nonsense. As usual the liberals catered to Ont. and were going after alberta.

Now that is nonsense.

[B. Max]

Nonsense. As usual the liberals catered to Ont. and were going after alberta.

Now that is nonsense.

It's a fact.

[jdobbin]

It's a fact.

Sorry. Don't believe it one bit.