Apolitical Staples

Sure the Conservatives have the advantage of not wanting to do anything at all. So, any movement by them at all will be trumpeted as a major triumph, when in reality it will mean squat. When they do create their plan, I hope they lay out the costs of doing nothing (more pine beetle infestations, more forest fires, worse storm damage, droughts, etc., etc.). I somehow doubt it will happen. It will be all about how we must move back to horse and buggies and lay off the entire manufacturing sector. There will be no mention of international carbon trading (or as they keep calling it “hot air credits”) or any international effort at all. In short, it will be a prop in the CPC re-election campaign. Canadians deserve better. It ain’t going to happen. How’s that for some Sunday morning cynicism?

“As I’ve said before this could be the Free Trade election all over again but this time with an even bigger split amongst the left.”

You’ve maybe found the cryptogram as to why the Globe and Mail’s editorial came out so uncharacteristically strongly against Dion and Liberals. Follow the money.

Free trade got through, IMO, because the usually scrappy, disagreeable captains of industry for once agreed that free trade was necessary to help Canada drop its relic of protectionism and join the global trading explosion. Somehow whenever that happens, the MSM gets behind the idea … why?

Because who pays for advertising? … Business and government. When both parties wanted to do Free Trade the utopian journalists had a choice to make on who to back:

Mel Hurtig and Maude Barlow and their once a year ads in the media

Or back

Business and Government who spend hundreds of millions on advertising.

The choice was easy then and it’s easy now.

Kyoto is dead.

Having said that, for the record, I think we need to have a plan that reduces CO2 as fast as economically possible, Harper will do that.

Greg - your support for ‘international carbon trading credits’ won’t do a thing about controlling, in some part, the human role in climate change. In fact, it will result in the increase of both emissions and pollution.

As I’m sure you know, not using our taxpayer money in Canada to develop new technologies, and put them in place in both industries, homes, transportation - but instead sending that money to China and India, both of which are exempt from Kyoto emissions standards, to build emission-heavy and polluting factories - actually harms the world.

China is building more than 500 new coal-fired energy plants - none covered by Kyoto - cheap plants that will pollute and emit - and you want Canada to fund that? Why?

Actually, to reduce our emissions by over 30% - the ratio at which it now stands because it went up by over 24% from the 1990 levels - well, to reduce our emissions would indeed require the shut down of our major industries such as oil, automobile, etc; and reduction of all energy use (heat, electricity) and carbon taxes, and so on. Are you in favour?

I agree with nomdenet; the G&M has realized the economic disaster that would be required to reduce our emissions by 35% - yes, that’s right, it’s now 35% not 6% - in FIVE years.

Oh, the problems are even deeper:

1) Dion’s central platform, is his only platform,

2) it is not only wrong, but it is a complete red herring, a false premise based on a mathematical impossibility, and

3) the very existence of this single platform is simultainiously evidence of his own party’s failure on this issue.

It’s almost as if a team of conservative strategists devised this strategy for Dion.

Sinister Greg, you should really acknowledge that, since Canada’s emissions are only 2% of the world total, we will be suffering all those costs “(more pine beetle infestations, more forest fires, worse storm damage, droughts, etc., etc.)”, whether we do anything or not. Therefore, they are not costs of inaction at all.

Guys, seriously, I would be satisfied if Harper said the following: “The Liberals have so screwed up Kyoto we have no chance of making the targets for this round. However, we will make hard targets and stick to them in a good faith effort to reduce our CO2 emissions by 2012. At that time we will accept the penalties under Kyoto and commit Canada to meeting the targets set down in the second round.” If he did that and followed up with real targets (not intensity targets), I could live with it and Harper would come out the winner.

Kyoto is dead.
One thing Canadians do understand, is that you can’t drain a bathtub if the tap is still turned on:

Almost 850 coal-fired energy plants planned by China (562), India (213) and the U.S. (72) over the next few years — none covered by Kyoto — will pump an estimated… five times more …carbon dioxide into the air… than Kyoto removes, even if every other country hits its 2012 emission targets, which they won’t.

http://www.torontosun.com/News/Columnists/Goldstein_Lorrie/2007/02/18/3642612-sun.html

Let’s dig a little deeper at the pathology of Dion’s current stance, shall we.

If you believe Dion’s rhetoric that he is a bit of an environmental guru (I actually think this issue IS important to him), then the facts cited by Goldstein and others of late, must have been known to Dion for some time.

Which leaves two possibilities, both damning.

Dion is so ideologically blind so as to literally black out facts that don’t fit with his worldview, even when those are the most salient facts of his position,

or)

Dion knows and appreciates that Kyoto compliance is impossible, and that the core of his very political being, his signature issue, is premised on a lie. A deliberate falsehood, the strength of which is premised on keeping the public ignorant of the real facts, while preying upon Canadians’ good nature desire to do the right thing.

A blind ideologue, or a conniving political predator?

Discuss amongst yourselves.

Chester is right.

Greg - why should the Canadian taxpayer ‘accept the penalties under Kyoto’ - penalties incurred because the Liberal gov’t did zilch for 8 years? Why should we send billions of dollars in penalties to ‘developing countries’ which are exempt from emission standards?

They’ll build their coal fired plants, which will increase emissions and pollution - and, as you know, air actually moves. So, we will, by our financial contribution, actually be enabling the INCREASE in emissions and pollution! It will just ‘emit’ from China, India, etc. The world levels will actually increase!!

Kyoto is a money transference scheme, transfering billions from the industrial countries to the ‘developing countries’. These are not repayable loans; it’s a scheme to force the west to industrialize the third world, without fisical or environmental accountability. How can you be in favour of it?

Harper’s answer ought to be an absolute refusal to engage in this money laundering scheme - and a refusal to force Canadians to pay for the irresponsibility of the Liberal Party. Then, implement his own ‘clean air’ strategies, which are incremental, gradual and economically feasible.

Greg - why should the Canadian taxpayer ‘accept the penalties under Kyoto’ - penalties incurred because the Liberal gov’t did zilch for 8 years? Why should we send billions of dollars in penalties to ‘developing countries’ which are exempt from emission standards?

Because in a democracy we have to take responsibility for the actions of our government.

End of discussion.

Next?

Socialist Greg,

so if facts become known to a subsequent democratically elected government, that a particular policy is foolhardy and damaging to the people who elected them into power,

they are bound by the previous governments policies, what, ad infinitum?

I know what that sounds like, and “democratic” is the last word I’d use for it.

Greg - I agree with Chester. It is irresponsible of a government to force its citizens to pay for the irresponsibility of a previous government. Not the individuals and leaders of that gov’t; but the citizens. That’s called passing the buck in my view and that’s not democracy.

Did the citizens of Germany and Japan have to pay for WWII or was the Marshall Plan developed to enable them to move forward in a democratic manner?

Your perspective, Greg, is illogical because it rests on ‘guilt’. You are saying, as many Kyoto religious adherents are, that the West is ‘guilty’ because it industrialized and therefore, it should pay ‘sin money’ to ‘atone for its sins’. Heh. What a ploy. Because the West had the brains, took the risks, the innovative work - to develop new sources of energy (from fossil fuels rather than animal labour), which enabled it to support the increasing population (rather than relying on massive plagues, famines, to reduce that population)…the West should be ‘punished’? Sin money?

Your attitude to the gov’t is the same. Because the Liberal gov’t signed on to an unreachable target, based on Chretien’s narcissistic self-image as ‘better than the US’, and then, did nothing for 8 years - the Canadian citizen should pay for this irresponsibility? Why?

And, you haven’t answered my question. How can you support a process which increases pollution and emissions in the world - as does the Kyoto Accord? It simply transfers money from the already industrial countries (who can keep up their emissions by this tactic) to the ‘developing countries’ - who are exempt from emission standards, and who will build many new polluting and emitting factories. How does that help the global climate?

Kyoto is a money transference scheme, transfering billions from the industrial countries to the ‘developing countries’.

But this is not why it is being pushed by politicians in industrial countries. The chief motivation is the tremendously huge kickbacks which will be made (are being made?) from those developing countries to politicians and their cronies in industrialized countries. Developing countries are undeveloped because they are corrupt, not the other way around. It’s the CIDA scam, times Oil For Food, cubed.

Side benefits for politicians in industrialized countries are the accelerated weakening and destruction of small businesses which were until now independent of government, uh, “help”, and greater power (and hence corruption) which will accrue to governments as they determine who will be the beneficiary of the carbon credits, “green” R&D subsidies, etc. which are funded by tax money. Canadians are being fed giant watermelons by their politicians - green on the outside, red on the inside. From both ends. And after the watermelons have made them sick, the politicians can invent even more lucrative, leftist snakeoil to sell them as the “cure”. I know where the Libs, Greens, Blocheads and Dippers bread is buttered, but what about you Conservatives? Have you enough confidence in your individual and collective ability to make a good living in the free market, without becoming socialists? (or fascists) That’s the choice.

anonymous - what are you talking about?

I don’t think that developing countries are ‘undeveloped because they are corrupt’; that would mean that ‘developed countries are developed because they are not corrupt’. And we know that isn’t true; human nature is rather similar all over the world.

A robust industrial country will always promote small businesses; only the socialist agenda advocates their destruction. China, for example, is moving out of socialism and promoting private businesses of all sizes.

ET

the other angle that very few people talk about is how the emissions credits will be transferred.

It is not as simple as just going down to the emissions credit store and making a purchase.

Thinking people know that a huge bureaucracy must be set up to move the money and monitor the “transfer” of credits. Every country involved will insist on having its own people monitor the scheme and whole law firms will be created to draw up the papers. Tame scientists will be needed to “do the science” so that verification can be made possible.

Kyoto is much more than a third world money transferring scam. It is the creation of a world govt funded bureaucracy. And as we know that when large UN sponsored programs are created certain people make out like bandits. Kyoto is their treaty.

It should also be noted that the climate change conferences are never held at the HoJo in Hamilton or in some working class neighborhood in Manchester. Instead they are held in places like Lauzon Switzerland which I hear has great skiing within a one day drive. Or somewhere warm with great beaches.

The talk fests are never catered with hoagies from 7-11 or KFC buckets. No way. The climate savers need crab cakes and gourmet fare in order to think better. Human nature is funny that way.

A man like Dion loves these conferences. He gets a name tag and goes to sessions. He can take notes and discuss saving the world. Nothing actually gets done in the way of reducing anything but good food is eaten and like minded people get to mingle and try the veal. No post emission incinerators are ever sold or installed but people sure talk them up.

To my kyoto skeptics across the aisle,

Canada is the #1 emitter of carbon monoxide per capita. Even though we only contribute to 2.1% of the world’s greenhouse gas emissions we are 8th place in the world!

Out of any list of countries in the world, I do believe Canada has a responsibility to act. Even if we aren’t 1st or 2nd place, we are certainly high up there on the list.

To bza: carbon monoxide is not a greenhouse gas

Kyoto is unenforceable therefore it is voluntary. If we don’t make our targets, one of the penalties is, that we would not be allowed to play the carbon credit market. Oh gee.

OK bza show the way…!!!

You can start by turning down your thermostat 30% from say 68F to nice cosy 47.6F , then stop using your car then reduce your electricity bill by at least 30% , oh and make certain that yoy pay more for your food to simulate what would happen under Kyoto rules.

Finally check every day to make certain the temperature is going in the right direction … if you can figure out how to do that accurately.

… sweat dreams.

bza, ”Canada is the #1 emitter of carbon monoxide per capita.”
of the signators to Kyoto maybe, but that contradicts: http://www.torontosun.com/News/Columnists/Goldstein_Lorrie/2007/02/18/3642612-sun.html

6) Australia, the world’s biggest per-capita emitter of carbon dioxide due to its heavy reliance on coal, refuses to participate in Kyoto. Even if it did, it would be allowed to increase its emissions by 8%.

I find it strikingly odd , that the Liberal party would expect Canadians to believe that almost 10 years after the signing of Kyoto , with 4 years to radify, and then six years after the fact, Canada would rank 28th over 29 on the enviornment. And , while emmissions climed to 35 % above Kyoto targets , that they would now expect the Conservatives to wave a magic wand , and solve the problem in 60 days. Did anyone notice that zero provisions where addressed to finance the problem. If anything rings true when it comes to Liberals is that somehow tax payers , business’s, and the economy will be on the hook for THEIR FAILURES.

I hope the Conservatives are successful to put a realistic price tag on Kyoto to hang over the head of the Liberals for their failure to truthful to Canadians , and enact upon realistic targets and goals .

The Liberals are playing the Pontius Pilate of politics , trying to wash their hands of known criminality. Lets hope Canadians clue in to their dillusional misrepresentations on Kyoto and what would become the unsustainable economy.

Mark,

Carbon monoxide does contribute to greenhouse gases: http://www.ghgonline.org/otherco.htm. And we are still 8th place in the world in terms of producing greenhouse gases, remeber that.

Wilson,

Thanks for that. You are correct, Australia just beat us for first place, we are now 2nd, they beat us by a few percentage points.

bza: I stand partially corrected. While the NOAA says “Carbon monoxide (CO) is not considered a direct greenhouse gas, mostly because it does not absorb terrestrial thermal IR energy strongly enough.”, it also says that CO can have an indirect impact on methane, which is a GHG. The NOAA makes it clear that CO is not a major part of the whole GHG issue, especially since its concentration in the atmosphere has been descreasing.

No worries Mark, a friend of mine at Environment Canada told me about our high carbon monixide per capita rate lately and I think I got too excited about that statistic. ;)

Yes, carbon dioxide is the bigger of the carbon pollutants to worry about, its true.

A blind ideologue, or a conniving political predator?

Probably the first. He should go back to teaching.

more pine beetle infestations

Bullshit - not a climate change issue. The pine beetle infestation in BC could have been controlled when it started years ago, but the pro-enviro people in government wanted nature to take its course. The beetles survived enough winters to migrate south to latitudes which rarely have winters cold enough to kill the beetles and here we are today.

more forest fires

More bullshit. Many forest fires are accidentally or intentionally set by people, and it is only the severity which is occasionally unusual due to our tendency to restrain the natural cycle of burning and reforestation.

A little truth from the climate change alarmists would be refreshing.

It doesn’t matter where Canada ranks in GHG emissions per capita. It is the developed, energy-hungry nations which have the financial and intellectual capital to move technology forward. The last thing that should be done at this point is to pay welfare to less-developed nations so that we and they can all stagnate at today’s level of technology until we start the slide back into the caves.

How ironic, the Liberals have two crusades right now , one is to keep Politics out of the Courts so Judges aren’t seen a Politically bias , and the other is to force a Judge to make Harper respect a Liberal deal on Kyoto which they themselves did nothing about. Just ask Svend Robinson how he liked the Political bias in the Courts, any one of us caught stealing a $60’000.00 ring would have been locked up until we proved we were innocent . BTW, Dion now has 3 failed platforms because he also announced a gender balance for candidates while he announce 3 men ( Trudeau,Rae,Kennedy) would be assured a ridding to parachute into as part of taking back the power to Rule Canada .

If Dion can name his dog Kyoto as a effort to fight GHG’s , then Honda should market a ‘Kyoto Accord” hybrid that comes in Earth tones and shades of Green , that should solve the problem and stop the Global warming.

Question re: ‘accept the penalties under Kyoto’. What penalties? I understand there is no such thing.

Question re: ‘accept the penalties under Kyoto’. What penalties? I understand there is no such thing.

My understanding is if we fail to make the Kyoto targets we will face even stiffer targets in round two.

“My understanding is if we fail to make the Kyoto targets we will face even stiffer targets in round two. ” That makes complete sense - the targets that we agreed to where far too difficult to reach so the obviously solution is to make them even harder the next time around.

Check out today’s cartoon in the Calgary Sun.

http://www.calgarysun.com/comment/index.shtml

All PM Harper has to do is tell each Canadian what they have to do in order to meet the Kyoto targets and Canadians will think differently. I believe that the reason any Canadian likes the Kyoto plan is because they think it involves only the industries having to change, that “let someone else do it” philosophy.

Then PM Harper should break down the money we’d pay to buy carbon credits, per person , and tell each person how much money it’s costing each one of us.

Bring it home to an individual level.

What I have realized over these past weeks and months is that most MP’s (especially Liberals) don’t have a clue about what they are saying. I would venture to say that most of them have never even read the IPCC summary, nor have they read much on climate change (pro and con) science. They get their “talking points” and regurgitate it for the cameras. Just watch Pablo Rodriguez and Ruby Dhalla next time they appear on CBC or CTV and listen to how “ineffective” they are in answering any specific question put to them.

However, it’s a fault of the media to not pursue a line of questioning further when they can tell that the MP doesn’t have a clue what they’re saying. That would only be good journalism, wouldn’t it? To get to the truth?

Not smart.

I can’t find anything in the Kyoto Protocol addressing the issue of penalties. Is there a corollary agreement, or is this just another conventional wisdom?