Canada: Environmental Fossil

[August1991]

The fossil award was distributed by the environmental group Climate Action Network to countries deemed to have contributed the least to progress in the climate talks.

And a Bonn-based development group, Germanwatch, placed Canada 51st out of 56 countries that were assessed for their performance and policies on climate change.

"Frankly, it's becoming embarrassing," said Steven Guilbault of Greenpeace.

Sweden, Britain and Denmark won top ranking in the report, while Canada is among the bottom 10.

The only countries ranked below Canada are Kazakhstan, United States, China, Malaysia and Saudi Arabia.The only countries ranked below Canada are Kazakhstan, United States, China, Malaysia and Saudi Arabia.

CBC

This is hilarious. Canada has one of the largest expanses of pristeen environments in the world and some environmental lobby group rates us last. European tourists come to Canada every year because there is no environment in Europe anymore. And Europeans happily consume our raw materials leaving us with the lousy arbitrary environmental stats that they then deplore.

But European hypocrisy is only matched by the hypocrisy of our own politicians.

Opposition MPs and environmentalists from Canada, meanwhile, struck a common theme at a news conference in Nairobi, saying the federal government's lukewarm position on the Kyoto Protocol doesn't reflect Canadian public opinion.

"The majority of Canadians are firmly and strongly behind living up to our Kyoto obligations," said John Godfrey, the Liberal environment critic.

"We are here because we want the world to know that Canadians are united in their commitment to the Kyoto Protocol," said Emilie Moorehouse of the Sierra Club.

Bloc Québécois environment critic Bernard Bigras quoted federal Environment Minister Rona Ambrose as saying "we are on track to meeting all our obligations under the Kyoto Protocol but not the targets."

"I don't think that's the position parliamentarians expect from the minister of the environment," he said.

The Liberal Party had 13 years to do something and it did basically nothing - except spend money for advertising, PR and school kits (ie. One Tonne Challenge).

Rarely have I seen an issue that attracts so much hand-wringing and moral smugness with so little substance or even basic knowledge. This is an issue where it is so easy to declare innocence and blame someone else. The environment is an issue tailor-made made for the imaginary, Liberal-type fix. People don't really want a solution. They just want to hear that the problem is solved.

If the Tories aren't careful, they'll get crucified on this issue.

[gc1765]

This is hilarious. Canada has one of the largest expanses of pristeen environments in the world and some environmental lobby group rates us last. European tourists come to Canada every year because there is no environment in Europe anymore.

This probably has to do with the population density of Europe vs. Canada. Besides, the people who destroyed the environment in Europe are not the same people currently complaining about the environment (since they are likely long dead).

And Europeans happily consume our raw materials leaving us with the lousy arbitrary environmental stats that they then deplore.

I know that at least with the forestry industry, Europeans have some of the highest environmental standards. They won't buy our lumber unless it meets strict environmental regulations (don't have a source for that right now). Not sure about other industries though.

[bk59]

The fossil award was distributed by the environmental group Climate Action Network to countries deemed to have contributed the least to progress in the climate talks.

And a Bonn-based development group, Germanwatch, placed Canada 51st out of 56 countries that were assessed for their performance and policies on climate change.

This is hilarious. Canada has one of the largest expanses of pristeen environments in the world and some environmental lobby group rates us last. European tourists come to Canada every year because there is no environment in Europe anymore. And Europeans happily consume our raw materials leaving us with the lousy arbitrary environmental stats that they then deplore.

I added the bold type above. The "fossil of the day" award was made specifically on the basis of efforts in relation to global warming. It has nothing to do with how much natural environment we have in Canada and has nothing to do with the management of our natural resources. I think you may have confused the various issues.

[blueblood]

The fossil award was distributed by the environmental group Climate Action Network to countries deemed to have contributed the least to progress in the climate talks.

And a Bonn-based development group, Germanwatch, placed Canada 51st out of 56 countries that were assessed for their performance and policies on climate change.

"Frankly, it's becoming embarrassing," said Steven Guilbault of Greenpeace.

Sweden, Britain and Denmark won top ranking in the report, while Canada is among the bottom 10.

The only countries ranked below Canada are Kazakhstan, United States, China, Malaysia and Saudi Arabia.The only countries ranked below Canada are Kazakhstan, United States, China, Malaysia and Saudi Arabia.

CBC

This is hilarious. Canada has one of the largest expanses of pristeen environments in the world and some environmental lobby group rates us last. European tourists come to Canada every year because there is no environment in Europe anymore. And Europeans happily consume our raw materials leaving us with the lousy arbitrary environmental stats that they then deplore.

But European hypocrisy is only matched by the hypocrisy of our own politicians.

Opposition MPs and environmentalists from Canada, meanwhile, struck a common theme at a news conference in Nairobi, saying the federal government's lukewarm position on the Kyoto Protocol doesn't reflect Canadian public opinion.

"The majority of Canadians are firmly and strongly behind living up to our Kyoto obligations," said John Godfrey, the Liberal environment critic.

"We are here because we want the world to know that Canadians are united in their commitment to the Kyoto Protocol," said Emilie Moorehouse of the Sierra Club.

Bloc Québécois environment critic Bernard Bigras quoted federal Environment Minister Rona Ambrose as saying "we are on track to meeting all our obligations under the Kyoto Protocol but not the targets."

"I don't think that's the position parliamentarians expect from the minister of the environment," he said.

The Liberal Party had 13 years to do something and it did basically nothing - except spend money for advertising, PR and school kits (ie. One Tonne Challenge).

Rarely have I seen an issue that attracts so much hand-wringing and moral smugness with so little substance or even basic knowledge. This is an issue where it is so easy to declare innocence and blame someone else. The environment is an issue tailor-made made for the imaginary, Liberal-type fix. People don't really want a solution. They just want to hear that the problem is solved.

If the Tories aren't careful, they'll get crucified on this issue.

yup just like the europeans saying they want all of this biodiesel to go green, and with canola being the most efficient feedstock, the europeans want to get their mitts on as much biodiesel as possible. Canada is one of the worlds best canola exporters so you would think we would have a market, NOPE, those hypocrits don't want our canola because it's all GMO (which makes it yield high/grow better not poison you), even though it is going to get burned for fuel, they still won't touch it, that's a bunch of liberal bs if you ask me

[Borg]

Germanwatch and green peace?

Now there is a combination.

I wonder how many of them truly live the life they preach?

I think I will go throw another log on the fire and then let my car idle for at least 15 minutes today.

Borg

[August1991]

The "fossil of the day" award was made specifically on the basis of efforts in relation to global warming. It has nothing to do with how much natural environment we have in Canada and has nothing to do with the management of our natural resources. I think you may have confused the various issues.

You and I both know that your finer point is going to get lost in the shuffle.

And anyway, if Germany imports Canadian paper, who is truly to blame for the greenhouse gases paper production emits into the atmosphere?

[MightyAC]

This is hilarious. Canada has one of the largest expanses of pristeen environments in the world and some environmental lobby group rates us last. European tourists come to Canada every year because there is no environment in Europe anymore. And Europeans happily consume our raw materials leaving us with the lousy arbitrary environmental stats that they then deplore.

Canadians really try hard to believe that because we're basically empty we're somehow clean and pristeen. Per capita we are one of the worst glutons and polluters in the develloped world.

[cybercoma]

I know that at least with the forestry industry, Europeans have some of the highest environmental standards. They won't buy our lumber unless it meets strict environmental regulations (don't have a source for that right now). Not sure about other industries though.

The same pertains to Canada. Retailers like Home Depot (I should know ) carry mostly FSC certified lumber. They've also begun labelling their "eco options" products which are products that are either healthier, cleaner for the environment or save energy.

[White Doors]

This is hilarious. Canada has one of the largest expanses of pristeen environments in the world and some environmental lobby group rates us last. European tourists come to Canada every year because there is no environment in Europe anymore. And Europeans happily consume our raw materials leaving us with the lousy arbitrary environmental stats that they then deplore.

Canadians really try hard to believe that because we're basically empty we're somehow clean and pristeen. Per capita we are one of the worst glutons and polluters in the develloped world.

Well first of all CO2 is not a pollutant. I am really tired of this global warming clap-trap taking much needed attention away from POLLUTION. Especially air and water pollutants. Also conserving wildlife corridors.

What a smoke screen this is. Unbelieveable waste of money.

interesting op-ed on global warming:

http://calsun.canoe.ca/News/Columnists/Cor...14/2351620.html

[MightyAC]

This is hilarious. Canada has one of the largest expanses of pristeen environments in the world and some environmental lobby group rates us last. European tourists come to Canada every year because there is no environment in Europe anymore. And Europeans happily consume our raw materials leaving us with the lousy arbitrary environmental stats that they then deplore.

Canadians really try hard to believe that because we're basically empty we're somehow clean and pristeen. Per capita we are one of the worst glutons and polluters in the develloped world.

Well first of all CO2 is not a pollutant. I am really tired of this global warming clap-trap taking much needed attention away from POLLUTION. Especially air and water pollutants. Also conserving wildlife corridors.

What a smoke screen this is. Unbelieveable waste of money.

interesting op-ed on global warming:

http://calsun.canoe.ca/News/Columnists/Cor...14/2351620.html

Maybe you quoted the wrong post. I didn't refer to CO2 or global warming.

[White Doors]

This is hilarious. Canada has one of the largest expanses of pristeen environments in the world and some environmental lobby group rates us last. European tourists come to Canada every year because there is no environment in Europe anymore. And Europeans happily consume our raw materials leaving us with the lousy arbitrary environmental stats that they then deplore.

Canadians really try hard to believe that because we're basically empty we're somehow clean and pristeen. Per capita we are one of the worst glutons and polluters in the develloped world.

Well first of all CO2 is not a pollutant. I am really tired of this global warming clap-trap taking much needed attention away from POLLUTION. Especially air and water pollutants. Also conserving wildlife corridors.

What a smoke screen this is. Unbelieveable waste of money.

interesting op-ed on global warming:

http://calsun.canoe.ca/News/Columnists/Cor...14/2351620.html

Maybe you quoted the wrong post. I didn't refer to CO2 or global warming.

yeah, hit the wrong reply button.

[Charles Anthony]

Canadians really try hard to believe that because we're basically empty we're somehow clean and pristeen. Per capita we are one of the worst glutons and polluters in the develloped world.

Per capita?!?!? What is that supposed to mean??? Such a figure is completely ridiculous. Canada barely has a population!

If all of the people in Canada disappeared except you and I, per capita, you and I would be the greatest poluters in the entire universe.

Per caudica!

[MightyAC]

Canadians really try hard to believe that because we're basically empty we're somehow clean and pristeen. Per capita we are one of the worst glutons and polluters in the develloped world.

Per capita?!?!? What is that supposed to mean??? Such a figure is completely ridiculous. Canada barely has a population!

If all of the people in Canada disappeared except you and I, per capita, you and I would be the greatest poluters in the entire universe.

The point is we pollute like a country with a much larger population. Are you suggesting it is ok to be one of the dirtiest countries in the world per person simply because in total our pollution numbers are lower than larger nations?

[Charles Anthony]

The point is we pollute like a country with a much

Using a "per capita" statistic does not prove that point.

Why not just simply measure the amount of pollution and divide it by our land mass????? Would that prove your point??

[betsy]

I am not sure if I misunderstood the news report....but apparently the opposition delegation that went with Ambrose to this conference (consisting also of environmentalists and NDP) had purposefully embarrassed Ambrose by bringing up their concern right there.

If it is true, why do these NDP and Environmentalists delegation have to display our dirty linen in public? Why did they bring it over there....the battle ground for those kind of disagreements is right here, in Canada!

Our position about Kyoto is not embarassing, especially if several Kyoto members have been complaining about their own failures to meet the target. That is what the conference is for...constructive discussion.

The behaviour of these delegation is what is embarrassing!

[MightyAC]

The point is we pollute like a country with a much

Using a "per capita" statistic does not prove that point.

Why not just simply measure the amount of pollution and divide it by our land mass????? Would that prove your point??

Why not just bend over and moon the whole world.

Most of our country is empty but we pollute the hell out of the areas we inhabit. If you don’t think that is a problem then your plan to divide pollution by land mass is a great one. Seems like Homer Simpson logic to me though. Re: Simpson's episode 200 Homer is responsible for polluting Springfield so badly the town is forced to relocate 5 miles from its original location.

[Charles Anthony]

Why not just bend over and moon the whole world.

I already have.

Most of our country is empty but we pollute the hell out of the areas we inhabit.

That is not a "per caudica" statistic. Now you are using my land mass ratio logic.

[Murray B.]

Well first of all CO2 is not a pollutant. I am really tired of this global warming clap-trap taking much needed attention away from POLLUTION. Especially air and water pollutants. Also conserving wildlife corridors.

What a smoke screen this is. Unbelieveable waste of money.

First of all, White Doors, the environment is just too important to be left to the lunatic fringers.

Carbon Dioxide is the life gas of green plants just as Oxygen is to animals. Carbon Monoxide is a poisonous and dangerous pollutant that should be minimized. Too many of these "environmentalists" do not know the difference.

One thing that the LFs have completely ignored is the Carbon Dioxide that is converted back to oxygen by green plants. What has to be considered is overall CO2 production and not just the amound produced by combustion. It is unlikely that Canada produces any net CO2 and we should be selling our Oxygen credits to Japan.

Another strange thing about this issue is the concept of taxing an oil producer like Saudi Arabia instead of those who burn the oil and actually produce the CO2. The Saudis do not control how the oil is used. If it is burned then it will produce CO2 but if it goes into plastic then it doesn't. The carbon credits should have to be purchased by the end user that produces the gas.

On a different but similar note, why is our government subsidizing the use of food to power our vehicles? This is a monstrous concept. Millions of people are starving in this world and we are burning corn and grain in our cars and trucks. Is this really the message that we should be sending to the world?

[blueblood]

On a different but similar note, why is our government subsidizing the use of food to power our vehicles? This is a monstrous concept. Millions of people are starving in this world and we are burning corn and grain in our cars and trucks. Is this really the message that we should be sending to the world?

I'll bite...

These pollute much less than oil and are close in efficiency. This helps us farmers out by creating a market for our excess grains. Grain costs a lot of money to grow and we need to cover our costs and make a living. If someone gives me a good price to make biofuels then they get it. I can't just give my grain away I'd go broke. If someone wants to pay me a good price to feed starving people than so be it. I am opposed to it though as this leads to dumping. What right do I have to flood the market of a 3rd world nation putting their small farmers out of business. It's better that we put it into our cars so that we put the market back into synch. and not screw over the guys from other places trying to make it, let the guys from the 3rd world feed the guys from the 3rd world. By the way if people are starving it is really inconsiderate of them to have so many kids, it's not my place to take care of them, if you can't take care of kids keep your legs shut as you do not have the right to bring a new person into a life of squalor.

[Borg]

By the way if people are starving it is really inconsiderate of them to have so many kids, it's not my place to take care of them, if you can't take care of kids keep your legs shut as you do not have the right to bring a new person into a life of squalor.

Tsk! Tsk!

Didn't you know there are folks out there who believe it is our duty to feed those who cannot - or even worse - will not feed themselves?

Even worse - yet another Tsk! Tsk! - you impose common sense as a solution. You know there will likely be someone take you to task about your "righteous" argument!

Surely those who practise the joy of sex need bear no responsibility for this? After all they are simply living their lives as they see fit.

Someone in the western world WILL find a way to get food and medicine to those poor folks who are suffering.

Perhaps yet another rock star?

Or perhaps a washed up politician looking for a few brownie points and a healthy commission on money raised?

Borg

[August1991]

One thing that the LFs have completely ignored is the Carbon Dioxide that is converted back to oxygen by green plants. What has to be considered is overall CO2 production and not just the amound produced by combustion. It is unlikely that Canada produces any net CO2 and we should be selling our Oxygen credits to Japan.

That's wrong. Canada's forests are a bank with CO2 deposits. When forests burn or when trees die and decompose, the CO2 is released back into the atmosphere. If Canada plants more trees than it harvests, then we can claim to be a net reducer of CO2 emissions.

To put it simply, this is an extremely technical question and by and large, Canada did not negotiate well in the Kyoto agreement. In part, this is due to the fact that Kyoto unfortunately tried to achieve two goals: a reduction of CO2 emissions and redistribution of wealth from rich countries to poor countries. Canada's bureaucrat/Liberal negotiators took a tier-mondiste position.

Another strange thing about this issue is the concept of taxing an oil producer like Saudi Arabia instead of those who burn the oil and actually produce the CO2. The Saudis do not control how the oil is used. If it is burned then it will produce CO2 but if it goes into plastic then it doesn't. The carbon credits should have to be purchased by the end user that produces the gas.

When and where and how the plastic degrades, the CO2 will be released into the atmosphere. But your point is well taken. A carbon tax should be connected directly to emission into the atmosphere if it is to serve as a correct incentive.

On a different but similar note, why is our government subsidizing the use of food to power our vehicles? This is a monstrous concept. Millions of people are starving in this world and we are burning corn and grain in our cars and trucks. Is this really the message that we should be sending to the world?

Murray, that's zero-sum thinking of themonstrous kind. People in rich countries are not well fed because people in poor countries starve. Similarly, if we take from rich people this doesn't mean there will be more for poor people. The planet is not a big cake with resources to be divvied up. Life doesn't work that way.

[August1991]

Most of our country is empty but we pollute the hell out of the areas we inhabit. If you don’t think that is a problem then your plan to divide pollution by land mass is a great one. Seems like Homer Simpson logic to me though. Re: Simpson's episode 200 Homer is responsible for polluting Springfield so badly the town is forced to relocate 5 miles from its original location.

Homer Simpson? I'll let that one slide.

MightyAC, Canada has alot of space and few people. Furthermore, most of Canada was under several kilometers of ice about 15,000 years ago meaning that the ice scraped off the topsoil leaving now easily resources exposed. (The glaciers in North America stopped at about the US/Canada border. In Europe, it was Scandinavia or the Baltic Sea. See: Wisconsin/Weichsel glaciation.)

It should not be surprising that Canada's high income depends on taking stuff out/off of the ground and transforming it. (We'd be foolish to do anything else. Since we don't get much sunlight and we don't have old stuff, I'm not expecting a major tourism industry any time soon.)

Extracting and processing raw materials often means emitting lots of CO2. Not surprisingly, countries like Canada, Australia, the US, Russia, Finland, Sweden and Norway have relatively high CO2 emissions per capita.

Canada doesn't emit CO2 because we're profligate or anti-Green. We do it on behalf of the countries that buy our exports. It is (relatively) easy for Ireland or Denmark to agree to Kyoto. They don't process raw materials as we do.

There is alot of hypocrisy in Kyoto (and environmental issues in general) and I'll offer one more example. The vast majority of Quebecers favour Kyoto because in their mind, Quebec uses hydro-electricity which has no CO2 emissions.

I happen to feel strongly about environmental protection. I'm not one of these posters like B.Max who never fails to make a fool of himself by arguing that global warming is nonsense. It's not. Global warming is a problem. I just get depressed when I see how we're going about solving this problem.

I am not sure if I misunderstood the news report....but apparently the opposition delegation that went with Ambrose to this conference (consisting also of environmentalists and NDP) had purposefully embarrassed Ambrose by bringing up their concern right there.

If it is true, why do these NDP and Environmentalists delegation have to display our dirty linen in public? Why did they bring it over there....the battle ground for those kind of disagreements is right here, in Canada!

Betty, the NDP, the Liberals and even some of the Environmentalists don't really care about the environment. They want to embarrass the Conservatives and they see Rona Ambrose as the weak link in the chain.

Many of the environmentalists seem to have convinced themselves that defeating the Tories is the best way to protect the environment.

The NDP wants to help poor people but if the NDP ever got into power, it would be poor people who would suffer.

The NDP/environmentalist types measure their productivity by how effectively they can conduct a meeting. They argue endlessly about the perfect while the world passes them by. The Liberal sort are a little different, but the result is the same. The Liberals hire an advertising/PR company to tell everyone how the problem is being dealt with.

[Canuck E Stan]

Many of the environmentalists seem to have convinced themselves that defeating the Tories is the best way to protect the environment.

Without shooting the messenger, here are the facts that seem to be removed from the equation about CO2:

CO2 and Canada

Two percent.

That's how much of the world's man-made CO2 Canada produces. Most Canadians don't know that. We are, sh? It didn't say in The Canadias the saying goes, the proverbial "drop in the bucket."

So, now that you know the truth, consider this: What would happen if Canada were never to produce another man-made CO2 molecule ever again?

If every man, woman and child never exhaled again and therefore never produced anymore hated CO2, what would be the effect?

What would happen if all Canadians just disappeared and therefore all that hated machinery and technology that makes survival through a Canadian winter possible, just sat idle? No cars driving around, no need to heat homes or turn on lights. No more plants and factories. What would the effect on the global climate be?

Absolutely nothing at all.

The world's climate "would not change at all," says Dr. Tim Ball, a retired professor of climatology at the University of Winnipeg for 28 years and the current chairman of the Natural Resources Stewardship Project.

Yesterday, thanks in large part to Canada's opposition MPs bad-mouthing their own country at the UN climate change conference in Kenya, Canada received the "fossil of the day" award along with Australia for ranking low on an environmental group's list for efforts to combat global warming.

Both Drs. Ball and Soon went into long and scientific reasons why they believe there is no link between rising CO2 levels and rising Earth temperatures, even forwarding complicated scientific articles and papers for me to read.

Both men agree since 1680, the tail-end of the Little Ice Age, the world has been warming, but they attribute most of the warming to sun cycles, not CO2 -- which makes up less than 4% of the atmosphere.

Indeed, ice-core data show when CO2 levels were 16 times higher than they are today, the world was covered in ice!

"The world has actually been cooling since 1998 even though man-made CO2 levels have increased," said Ball, from his home in Victoria, "but I bet that's not going to be mentioned in Nairobi."

Call it an "inconvenient truth."

"If their theory is correct, that increased CO2 levels causes warming, then the temperatures should be going up all the time, but they're not," pointed out Ball.

Dr. Soon gets more poetic. "Looking for the climate impact of CO2 is really like searching for a needle in the haystack.

"The idea that you have a CO2 knob that you can adjust up and down just to get an optimal climate is a great flaw in the non-scientific discussion of global warming," added Soon.

For Canadians who don't believe the facts in this column, here's a suggestion: Turn off your furnace, walk or cycle to work and stop breathing. The rest of you, feel free to exhale.

So worry about Kyoto and hold your breathe.....there,now exhale,you've just done your part for Canada and Canada's foremost climate expert Chretien, who made the Kyoto promise to the world.

Or you could send a cheque to Russia for a $billion to cover your share of Kyoto credits. The choice is yours.

[bk59]

You and I both know that your finer point is going to get lost in the shuffle.

And anyway, if Germany imports Canadian paper, who is truly to blame for the greenhouse gases paper production emits into the atmosphere?

If you are talking about this distinction being lost in the shuffle on this forum, then I agree with you. After all, most topics end up wandering from their initial post. And yes, I'm as guilty of doing that as everyone else.

If you are talking about that distinction being lost in the general media, then I have to disagree. Everything that I have read about this "award" has directly linked it to Canada's position on climate change and on their participation at the current UN conference. Nothing has tried to link it to other environmental policies or natural resource management polices. But please let me know if there have been articles like that somewhere.

Your point about supplier versus consumer blameworthiness is important. This has come up in other posts too, regarding Saudi Arabia as a supplier of oil versus those who consume the oil. Personally, I think both ends of the spectrum should be responsible for the environmental friendliness of their respective processes. Saudi Arabia should do everything it can to ensure that the extraction and refinement of oil, and transportation of it, is as environmentally friendly as possible. Just as the consumer then must try to limit the harm to the environment once they take possession of, and use, that oil. The question of overall oil consumption is a shared responsibility. Both the consumers who demand it and the suppliers who extract it share the duty to be careful and responsible.

[bk59]

Canadians really try hard to believe that because we're basically empty we're somehow clean and pristeen. Per capita we are one of the worst glutons and polluters in the develloped world.

Per capita?!?!? What is that supposed to mean??? Such a figure is completely ridiculous. Canada barely has a population!

If all of the people in Canada disappeared except you and I, per capita, you and I would be the greatest poluters in the entire universe.

Per capita statistics are ridiculous? Really? It is generally the best way to compare populations of different sizes. After all, using your logic, you could say that because India as a country consumes more food than Canada on any given day, Indians must therefore be better fed than Canadians. The only problem of course, is that India has a population of one billion while Canada's population is less than 5% of that. When you look at food consumed per person per day then you get an accurate picture of whether or not Indians are better fed than Canadians.

The point is we pollute like a country with a much

Using a "per capita" statistic does not prove that point.

Why not just simply measure the amount of pollution and divide it by our land mass????? Would that prove your point??

No, it wouldn't. Why? Because the land mass is not polluting or consuming resources. We, the people of Canada, are.