[Newsbot]

Title: Canadians Want Climate Action. So What Are the Conservatives Waiting For'
Category: Environmental
Posted By: DrCaleb
Date: 2015-04-24 08:27:07
Canadian

[andyt]

Now if I disagreed with the article, wouldn't I just be able to dismiss it as a blog and have won the argument?

Not just Canadians, even the oil industry is saying they want some sort of scheme that will make it less difficult to sell their product.

Canada is an outlier here among developed nations. Harper's excuse was always that he wouldn't move until the US does - well, it has.

I don't get the attraction for cap and trade. Just seems to allow for far too many scams. In BC we have companies buying up productive farmland and wanting to plant trees for carbon credits. What bullshit, BC is mostly land only suitable for growing trees - plant that. Plenty of NSR land around.

[BartSimpson]

Far too much of what calls itself Environmentalism these days is just a scam. Or it ends up becoming a scam.

Buy an electric car to avoid fuel taxes? Then you get taxed on the miles you drive and the advantage of your pricey electric car is lost.

Buy solar panels for your house and you get assessed higher property taxes for your trouble and many jurisdictions tax the savings you get from solar panels as income.

Carbon credits are just another trick for banks and financiers to fleece working people.

Al Gore tells everyone to conserve on Earth Day and he used an estimated 10,000 pounds of carbon in just that one day. Meanwhile he's the first politician to make himself into a billionaire after serving as VPOTUS. How? By leveraging the 'green' industry and using regulations to force people to buy products from his companies.

It's just a scam.

[andyt]

That's what makes carbon taxes such a good deal. If set up properly, they are hard to escape or monkey with. Set them high enough and they reduce carbon output. And the money can be put toward developing non-carbon sources of energy or other green initiatives.

[PublicAnimalNo9]

andyt andyt:

Now if I disagreed with the article, wouldn't I just be able to dismiss it as a blog and have won the argument?

Not just Canadians, even the oil industry is saying they want some sort of scheme that will make it less difficult to sell their product.

Canada is an outlier here among developed nations. Harper's excuse was always that he wouldn't move until the US does - well, it has.

It has? So installing Natgas wellheads and pads smack in the middle of residential neighbourhoods is moving forward? Fracking like it's going out of style is "moving forward"? Trillions of gallons of water being forever lost to us every year is moving forward?
O'Bummer is a fucking putz and the morons who actually think he's doing something positive for the environment are even fucking dumber than he is.

[andyt]

$1:

The United States' Climate Action Plan lays out the steps the Administration will take to address climate change, and the coming months and years will be crucial for taking ambitious steps to reduce carbon pollution from power plants, methane from natural gas systems, and HFCs from refrigeration and cooling systems. WRI is well positioned to inform the debate as to what those agencies can do under the law, and what they need to do for the U.S. to meet its 2020 commitment – namely, enact “go-getter” level emissions standards across all major emitting sources and the full suite of greenhouse gases.

http://www.wri.org/our-work/project/us- ... initiative


This should be right up Harper's alley - he loves action plans.

[andyt]

PublicAnimalNo9 PublicAnimalNo9:

It has? So installing Natgas wellheads and pads smack in the middle of residential neighbourhoods is moving forward? Fracking like it's going out of style is "moving forward"? Trillions of gallons of water being forever lost to us every year is moving forward?
O'Bummer is a fucking putz and the morons who actually think he's doing something positive for the environment are even fucking dumber than he is.

So you're against natural gas and fracking? What else would you like Canada to do to reduce ghg?

[Thanos]

Get the United States to drop coal altogether and do a full-spectrum switch-over to natural gas and nuclear power, and their GHG emissions would fall by at least 35 to 40%. Alberta too, because in a place where natural gas is literally bursting out of the ground, using coal for anything anymore is literally the most atavistic bit of stupidity that's being allowed to continue in operation. Natural gas and nuclear power are the 'natural' fill-in fuel sources for the next hundred years to power things like electrical plants until the new tech like solar and microwave-gathering can finally hit it's stride.

[andyt]

Nobody is going to take drastic steps overnight. You can't expect the Americans to do so, you can't expect it of Canada. The difference is that at least the US, and even China, have committed to a plan. We don't even have a plan in Canada. The provinces are calling on Harper to come up with a plan, even industry wants him to put forth something. Step up for God's sake.

[Thanos]

China can force a plan because they're a dictatorship and the government can simply steamroll any dissenters. The US plan will be derailed for two reasons. One, it was created by the Obama Admin and by default the GOP will automatically try to destroy anything Obama does. Two, the coal industry is one of the major huge donors to the GOP, especially for Mitch McConnell. Those two factors alone will ensure that Big Coal will maintain some kind of hegemony in the US political system for a considerable amount of time to come and that any American reductions in GHG emissions will come from other sectors of the economy and will occur at a much slower rate than has happened in much more enlightened places like Germany. It's not a conspiracy, it's just the way business is done.

Not that I'll defend Harper on much of anything anymore. I have no personal stake remaining in any of this bullshit so there's no self-interest on my part to keep playing the game. Given that the typical Canadian response to anything is to do it in the most convoluted, fucked up, heavily-layered, overly-bureaucratized, graft-ridden, illogical, and inefficient manner possible, foot-dragging on GHG emissions actually costs much, much less than doing something. I'll go with the sad reality that whatever Canadian plan is eventually put forward will merely be a repeat of the debacle that McGuinty and Wynne did in Ontario, except it'll be a fiscal disaster on a national level instead of just an affliction for one province. If there are governments and a citizenry that literally proves "we gotta do something!" is the absolute worst emotional impulse to have, and that it should be contained and controlled by pure ruthless reason & logic, it's Canada, all our levels of governments, and Canadians in general. By default the priority would become to make sure that the envelopes full of cash keep changing hands among the properly-connected out there and that the plum jobs are occupied by those who are supposed to get them. Actually fixing the situation or laying a positive groundwork for the future typically comes in last place as far as desirable outcomes are concerned.

[N_Fiddledog]

andyt andyt:

Now if I disagreed with the article, wouldn't I just be able to dismiss it as a blog and have won the argument?

I doubt that, but it is a point.

Actually the complaint of blogs being acceptable for one side, but not the other isn't necessary here.

In this case I would say; doesn't this Agnus Reid Poll conflict with this other one they did from I don't know when?

$1:

Increasing uncertainty shows up in yesterday's poll numbers. Angus Reid surveyed people in all three countries in November and December, before and after Copenhagen. The drop off in public support for the idea that global warming is a fact mostly caused by human activity looks most pronounced in Canada. In November, 63% of Canadians supported global warming as a man-made phenomenon. By Dec. 23, that support had fallen 52%. Among Canadians, 13% are now not sure.

http://www.nationalpost.com/opinion/col ... 6656414605

Also this is interesting. It's a critique on a previous Angus Reid poll on the abortion issue from a pro-choice activist.

$1:

Angus Reid asked two misleading and inaccurately-worded questions, rendering the results invalid. The false dilemma fallacy occurs when someone is asked to choose between only two options when other options are available. The poll provided only two possible answers for each question – to have, or not to have, laws restricting abortion (question 1) or laws restricting sex selection abortion (question 2). In both cases, third options were missing.

http://www.arcc-cdac.ca/presentations/a ... sides.html

Isn`t that what they did here? Basically it looks almost like they gave their paid, online, forum members a choice of cap and trade or carbon tax.

Where`s the option for "no tax"? Show me that poll, then we'll talk.

[DrCaleb]

N_Fiddledog N_Fiddledog:

Where`s the option for "no tax"? Show me that poll, then we'll talk.

It's linked in the article. The questions are:

$1:

Do you support or oppose Canada as a whole joining or forming a cap and trade
system?

Do you support or oppose Canada as a whole adopting carbon tax?

http://angusreid.org/wp-content/uploads ... Trade1.pdf

[BartSimpson]

Thanos Thanos:

Get the United States to drop coal altogether and do a full-spectrum switch-over to natural gas and nuclear power, and their GHG emissions would fall by at least 35 to 40%. Alberta too, because in a place where natural gas is literally bursting out of the ground, using coal for anything anymore is literally the most atavistic bit of stupidity that's being allowed to continue in operation. Natural gas and nuclear power are the 'natural' fill-in fuel sources for the next hundred years to power things like electrical plants until the new tech like solar and microwave-gathering can finally hit it's stride.

Tell you what: How about Canada lead the way by ending the export of coal to China? Start there and then get back to me on your other ideas.

[Thanos]

How about your Tea Party coal baron heroes like Don Blankenship quit doing things like full mountaintop removal to get at coal, or underpaying and taking away all safety measures for the miners that are unlucky enough to be employed by him, before you get all smarmy with me?

[N_Fiddledog]

DrCaleb DrCaleb:

N_Fiddledog N_Fiddledog:

Where`s the option for "no tax"? Show me that poll, then we'll talk.

It's linked in the article. The questions are:

$1:

Do you support or oppose Canada as a whole joining or forming a cap and trade
system?

Do you support or oppose Canada as a whole adopting carbon tax?

http://angusreid.org/wp-content/uploads ... Trade1.pdf

You mean this?

0:

carbon tax or cap n trade.JPG [ 19 KiB | Viewed 492 times ]

I see the option to vote for cap n trade. I see the option to vote for a carbon tax. Where is the option to vote for neither?

What you have there is a preference amongst the paid, online, forum members of Angus Reid for Cap n Trade over Carbon Tax.