Opposition forces Kyoto bill,

[Riverwind]

The polls say they would. It remains to be seen if they will.

I have not seen on poll that specifically asks Canadians what they would be willing to sacrifice to meet Kyoto. There are lots of polls that show Kyoto has theoretical support - I believe that will disappear once the reality sinks in.

[jdobbin]

You know what they say about computers, BS in, BS out.

I am saying that they are not precise enough to put a dollar figure on it. Estimates range from one to five degrees by the end of the century. It's probably going to be on the high side but that is a 500% difference in estimates by scientists who believe in global warming. You call that precise? I am saying that the earth is warming anyway regardless of mans interference. That is a fact, the only variable up for dispute is how much man's interference is affecting the rate.

Speaking of the Holocaust, perhaps those who have caught the Inconvenient Truth religion should stop acting like a bunch of Brownshirts when anyone questions some of the stuff that is in it or some of these way out economic forecasts from people who don't know dick about science.

I have no problem with looking at scientific reports that shed light on global warming. If the right wing believes the science is wrong, they should fund legitimate research on the subject. They shouldn't take imprecise numbers as a mandate for doing nothing or for denying the whole thing.

[jdobbin]

I have not seen on poll that specifically asks Canadians what they would be willing to sacrifice to meet Kyoto. There are lots of polls that show Kyoto has theoretical support - I believe that will disappear once the reality sinks in.

It was a CTV poll.

http://thetyee.ca/News/2007/02/02/GreenOpinion/

The pollsters asked: "Would you personally be willing to make major, minor or no real sacrifices to your current way of life if you thought it would help solve global warming?"

More than half the respondents said they would make major sacrifices. A further 38 per cent said they were ready to make minor sacrifices.

Substantial numbers said they support forcing consumers and industry to switch to alternative fuels (80 per cent), banning coal-fired generating facilities (62 per cent) and even rationing consumers' use of fossil fuels (56 per cent).

The Tories certainly have noticed the trend of what Canadians think but it is hard to say whether they think that their feet will be put to the fire in an election.

[Wilber]

I have no problem with looking at scientific reports that shed light on global warming. If the right wing believes the science is wrong, they should fund legitimate research on the subject. They shouldn't take imprecise numbers as a mandate for doing nothing or for denying the whole thing.

I don't know of anyone who is denying that the globe is warming. It was the Liberals who did nothing for ten years.

[jdobbin]

I don't know of anyone who is denying that the globe is warming. It was the Liberals who did nothing for ten years.

We've seen a few people in support of the idea of global cooling.

[Riverwind]

It was a CTV poll.

Interesting - however, when they asked "[would you] pay significantly higher prices for gasoline and home heating fuel" only 34% of Canadians said they would be willing. That was the only question that actually asked people to make a tangible sacrifice. The rest were feel good sentiments (would you fly only when necessary) or calls for big business to pay the cost (higher fuel efficiency standards).

If that god awful bill actually becomes law then I think the conservatives should table a $3/liter gas tax. If people complain they should simply say that it is the only way to ensure that Canada meets its Kyoto targets and if Canadians don't like it they should take it up with politicians that passed the law.

[jdobbin]

Interesting - however, when they asked "[would you] pay significantly higher prices for gasoline and home heating fuel" only 34% of Canadians said they would be willing. That was the only question that actually asked people to make a tangible sacrifice. The rest were feel good sentiments (would you fly only when necessary) or calls for big business to pay the cost (higher fuel efficiency standards).

If that god awful bill actually becomes law then I think the conservatives should table a $3/liter gas tax. If people complain they should simply say that it is the only way to ensure that Canada meets its Kyoto targets and if Canadians don't like it they should take it up with politicians that passed the law.

The Conservatives will have to offer something that addresses global warming if they believe in the science of it. I don't think Canadians will let the government weasel out of it. It wouldn't matter if it were a Liberal or Tory government.

Some Canadians are already interested in doing something that increases energy efficiency. That should be encouraged. Why is it so hard for the Tories to say Canada should be less dependent on oil?

[Canuck E Stan]

I have not seen on poll that specifically asks Canadians what they would be willing to sacrifice to meet Kyoto. There are lots of polls that show Kyoto has theoretical support - I believe that will disappear once the reality sinks in.

It was a CTV poll.

http://thetyee.ca/News/2007/02/02/GreenOpinion/

The pollsters asked: "Would you personally be willing to make major, minor or no real sacrifices to your current way of life if you thought it would help solve global warming?"

More than half the respondents said they would make major sacrifices. A further 38 per cent said they were ready to make minor sacrifices.

Substantial numbers said they support forcing consumers and industry to switch to alternative fuels (80 per cent), banning coal-fired generating facilities (62 per cent) and even rationing consumers' use of fossil fuels (56 per cent).

The Tories certainly have noticed the trend of what Canadians think but it is hard to say whether they think that their feet will be put to the fire in an election.

Talk is cheap. Everyone says they are willing to do something,that's the easy part.And in their minds,they really feel they should and could do something,

but when the actual implementation of the "sacrifices" hits them in their pocketbook or interfers with their lifestyle or work life, you'll see these respondents change to the true feelings about doing "major" sacrifices.

[Riverwind]

Some Canadians are already interested in doing something that increases energy efficiency. That should be encouraged. Why is it so hard for the Tories to say Canada should be less dependent on oil?

Energy efficiency is great but regulations set today take nearly a decade to actually have an effect unless they are accompanied by a economic incentive such as high energy prices. Meeting Kyoto at this time will require a USSR style economic collapse which is always possible - just not desirable from the perspective of most Canadians.

[jdobbin]

Talk is cheap. Everyone says they are willing to do something,that's the easy part.And in their minds,they really feel they should and could do something,

but when the actual implementation of the "sacrifices" hits them in their pocketbook or interfers with their lifestyle or work life, you'll see these respondents change to the true feelings about doing "major" sacrifices.

Don't think the Tories will be let off the hook for doing nothing more than what they've done so far, do you?

There were sacrifices for their clean air and water as well. You think Canadians were not prepared to pay fopr that either?

[jdobbin]

Energy efficiency is great but regulations set today take nearly a decade to actually have an effect unless they are accompanied by a economic incentive such as high energy prices. Meeting Kyoto at this time will require a USSR style economic collapse which is always possible - just not desirable from the perspective of most Canadians.

So what do you think they will do that actually has an impact?

[Riverwind]

So what do you think they will do that actually has an impact?

A combination of energy efficiency incentives/regulations some of which which will be directed at the power generation industry. The net result will be an increase in energy prices which will further reduce consumption.

It is worth noting that the California expects to meet the Kyoto targets by 2020. Harper could set the same timeframe and leave the kyoto obessed liberals flat footed.

[Canuck E Stan]

Don't think the Tories will be let off the hook for doing nothing more than what they've done so far, do you?

There were sacrifices for their clean air and water as well. You think Canadians were not prepared to pay fopr that either?

Don't think the Tories will be let off the hook for doing nothing more than what they've done so far, do you?

No they won't because they're paying the price for what the hypocrite Liberals didn't do for 13 years.

You think Canadians were not prepared to pay fopr that either?

Again let me say talk is cheap.

Look at the poll,

the only relevant question that pertains to the respondents and their pocketbook was:

Are you willing to pay more for fuel and home heating? Only 31% said they would.

Most the other questions either presented someone else having to foot the bill or do the work for change.

I don't believe most people know how much a new furnace,windows or insulation would cost to retrofit their houses.

If the question said would you be willing to spend $35,000 to retrofit your house to help the environment would you?

I think most would answer as the fuel question.

As for purchasing a vehicle, would you be willing to pay 35% more for your next car for the sake of the environment would you?

Again I think the numbers would reflect they wouldn't.

[jdobbin]

I think most would answer as the fuel question.

As for purchasing a vehicle, would you be willing to pay 35% more for your next car for the sake of the environment would you?

Again I think the numbers would reflect they wouldn't.

I pay 35% less for a car with more fuel efficiency.

I guess we'll have to see what Canadians will accept and will not accept. It is apparent what they weren't going to accept is a government that won't do anything.

[jdobbin]

A combination of energy efficiency incentives/regulations some of which which will be directed at the power generation industry. The net result will be an increase in energy prices which will further reduce consumption.

It is worth noting that the California expects to meet the Kyoto targets by 2020. Harper could set the same timeframe and leave the kyoto obessed liberals flat footed.

I think it is worth noting that California is being aggressive in making the changes whereas the Tories have rejected that. They have also rejected Bush when he says he wants to eliminate the dependency on oil and gas.

You have to wonder what they will accept. There is only much bio-mass money they can put out there to subsidize agriculture.

[Wilber]

I don't know of anyone who is denying that the globe is warming. It was the Liberals who did nothing for ten years.

We've seen a few people in support of the idea of global cooling.

A few, but then 20 years ago that was also being put forward by many scientists, not a few of whom are probably now on the warming band wagon.

[Wilber]

Don't think the Tories will be let off the hook for doing nothing more than what they've done so far, do you?

As opposed to what the Liberals didn't do for 10 years?

[madmax]

We've seen a few people in support of the idea of global cooling.

And those people didn't read the article, or only took out the bits that they wanted. The article was ran in the back pages of a few mags, like many studies in mags. By the time the study was released the new data coming in was undermining the study. Since then the data has been steady and convincing. The point of the article, was how did they get that study so wrong.

Gotta start somewhere. Like the earth is flat, the sun revolves around the earth. The earth is cooling, no its not:-).

The debate on climate change has been very strong for 20 years amongst scientists. The fact that there isn't a line up of top scientists supporting the anti global warming supporters is troubling.

[jdobbin]

As opposed to what the Liberals didn't do for 10 years?

The issue was on the backburner in people's minds. It has only been in the last year or so that the public has put huge pressure on every major industrial government.

I have no doubt that that if the Liberals had won, they would have faced huge pressure for their very weak environmental program.

If the right wing defence for doing nothing is that the Liberals did it first, then they aren't going to last the long. They promised change.

[jdobbin]

The debate on climate change has been very strong for 20 years amongst scientists. The fact that there isn't a line up of top scientists supporting the anti global warming supporters is troubling.

I agree. But the right wing looks to discredit scientists in general by saying that their science is imprecise so that they can discredit science that they don't like such as smoking causes cancer or the evolution.

[B. Max]

The debate on climate change has been very strong for 20 years amongst scientists. The fact that there isn't a line up of top scientists supporting the anti global warming supporters is troubling.

I agree. But the right wing looks to discredit scientists in general by saying that their science is imprecise so that they can discredit science that they don't like such as smoking causes cancer or the evolution.

What science, put it up there.

[madmax]

I agree. But the right wing looks to discredit scientists in general by saying that their science is imprecise so that they can discredit science that they don't like such as smoking causes cancer or the evolution.

There are a few people here whom discredit Suzuki vs dislike him. They challenge his view of global warming. That said, there are alot of scientists that are going to have to be discredited. I wouldn't say the "right wing" There are people on the right that agree with the science.

I will put these companies in for good measure and assume that at least one of these leaders is to "the right"

In a letter to the Prime Minister, the heads of Alcan, Bombardier, Shell Canada, Falconbridge, Home Depot Canada and Desjardins Group, among others, said Canada needs a 50-year strategy to deal with the fallout from climate change.

The letter, obtained by the Canadian Press, calls for a plan that goes well beyond the 2008-2012 timetable laid out in the Kyoto protocol.

"As corporate leaders representing a broad cross-section of the Canadian economy, we believe that all governments, corporations, consumers and citizens have responsibilities under the Kyoto protocol," the letter says.

"The world must act urgently to stabilize the accumulation of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere and minimize the global impacts of climate change."

The executives said they accept the consensus view of a UN panel that climate change elevates the risk to human health and to the environment.

There are people whom Shout "the Left" as if the left were responsible for "global warming" and without them, there would be no such thing. This topic has been difficult for myself to grasp. Slavik mentioned clearly about complexities and sound bites and the average person. But people whom claim that this is some leftist conspiracy are taking away the voice of those on "the right" whom understand the science.

[B. Max]

I agree. But the right wing looks to discredit scientists in general by saying that their science is imprecise so that they can discredit science that they don't like such as smoking causes cancer or the evolution.

There are a few people here whom discredit Suzuki vs dislike him. They challenge his view of global warming. That said, there are alot of scientists that are going to have to be discredited. I wouldn't say the "right wing" There are people on the right that agree with the science.

There are people whom Shout "the Left" as if the left were responsible for "global warming" and without them, there would be no such thing. This topic has been difficult for myself to grasp. Slavik mentioned clearly about complexities and sound bites and the average person. But people whom claim that this is some leftist conspiracy are taking away the voice of those on "the right" whom understand the science.

Well get it up there i want to see it. You obviously have seen it. What is it a big secret.

[Wilber]

As opposed to what the Liberals didn't do for 10 years?

The issue was on the backburner in people's minds. It has only been in the last year or so that the public has put huge pressure on every major industrial government.

I have no doubt that that if the Liberals had won, they would have faced huge pressure for their very weak environmental program.

If the right wing defence for doing nothing is that the Liberals did it first, then they aren't going to last the long. They promised change.

If the Liberals weren't promising change, why did they sign an agreement that committed the country? As you say, it was on the back burner then and there was little pressure for them to sign. The Conservatives did nothing for a year with a minority, the Liberals did nothing for ten with a majority. They have no excuses or credibility on this issue and passing this bill is about as cynical and dishonest as you can get. If they wanted to make compliance with Kyoto law they had ten years with a majority to do it. Wa happened?

As for the Conservatives, we'll just have to wait and see. Shouldn't be hard to do better than nothing.

[madmax]

Well get it up there i want to see it. You obviously have seen it. What is it a big secret.

You want to see it.....

I have seen it......

is it a big secret.....

What's the password?

You sound like Polynewbie with the "BIG SECRET" conspiracy