Canada, Harper need a 'reality check' on global warming: report

mentalfloss

Prickly Curmudgeon Smiter
Jun 28, 2010
39,817
471
83
Except that most people will dismiss the report however correct or not as simply sour grapes and move on.

Proof?

More like the blame game.

Nope. It's based on factual, measurable information.

Canada falling well short of its emissions targets: report

Canada is on track to achieve only half of its 2020 target to reduce greenhouse gases by 17 per cent below 2005 levels, the report says.

"Canada will not achieve its 2020 GHG emissions reduction target unless significant new, additional measures are taken. More will have to be done. No other conclusion is possible," it concludes.
Indeed, the federal environment commissioner and many analysts have reached the same conclusion.

This report, however, is the first full accounting to add every initiative on the books and project emissions out to 2020 and 2030.

The federal government, after several false starts, has decided to regulate each carbon-producing sector one by one, implementing the rules gradually over the coming years.

Provinces have taken their own paths, with British Columbia implementing a carbon tax and Quebec heading toward a cap-and-trade system.

"The history of this file has been fragmented, uneven, uncertain and therefore uncontrollable in terms of saying here's what the outcomes are going to be," the round table's president, David McLaughlin, said in an interview.

So far, provinces are more effective than the federal government in reducing emissions. They are collectively responsible for 75 per cent of the reductions in the pipeline so far -- although that may change as the federal government's regulations fall into place.

Even so, the report warns that since each province is acting alone, and the federal government rarely acts in concert with provincial provisions, overlap and policy gaps are a certainty.

"Governments have talked, have acted to some degree, but sustained progress that Canadians can count on is not yet taking place," says McLaughlin in an introduction to the report.

"We need to move beyond current approaches and have a truly pan-Canadian dialogue on how to do this better. If not, Canada's 2020 target will remain a hope, not a reality."

It is possible to catch up and meet the emissions reduction target -- but only at a high cost, and with unprecedented federal-provincial co-operation, McLaughlin says.

The provinces have all told him they want more certainty in federal policy, and they also want Ottawa to at least consider additional measures that would put a price on carbon, he added.
Key to making progress is Alberta.

Since most of Canada's future emissions will be coming from the oil and gas sector, emission reductions from Alberta will need to make up at least half of the country's total, if the target is to be met.

All other provinces will need to increase their efforts too, even though Nova Scotia and Saskatchewan are on track to achieve their internal targets, and Ontario is close.

"Put succinctly, Canada's target cannot be achieved without emissions reductions in Alberta, but Alberta alone cannot achieve Canada's target," the report says.

The federal government needs to take the lead, and collaborate with provinces in a formal forum that allows all jurisdictions to make serious commitments, McLaughlin said.

Canada falling well short of its emissions targets: report | CTV Ottawa | CTV News
 

petros

The Central Scrutinizer
Nov 21, 2008
118,621
14,563
113
Low Earth Orbit
Can we legislate winter away? Unless winter goes away Canadians are going to be using lots and lots of hydrocarbons.
 

petros

The Central Scrutinizer
Nov 21, 2008
118,621
14,563
113
Low Earth Orbit
Canada’s Secondary Energy Use by Sector, End-Use and Sub-Sector in metric tonnes of CO2

RESIDENTIAL
Total Energy Use (PJ)
8,192.5

Residential (PJ)

1,380.0

Space Heating


845.3

Water Heating

257.8

Appliances

187.6

Major Appliances


134.1

Other Appliances


53.5

Lighting

61.0

Space Cooling


28.3
 
Last edited:

Cabbagesandking

Council Member
Apr 24, 2012
1,041
0
36
Ontario
Info that geologists all laugh about.
Have you tried looking at the statements of the American Geophysical Union. You will not find any geologists laughing. You will, in fact, find that the vast majority of geologists are as concerned as anyone posting here or anything that is posted here. One or two American gelogists who have taken the position that you think gelogists hold have been laughed out of communication within that body.

Not that geologists really know much about climate. Climate scientists are generally those who mentor and teach or are the superiors of geologists. Geophysicists and geochemists.
 

Kakato

Time Out
Jun 10, 2009
4,929
21
38
Alberta/N.W.T./Sask/B.C
Have you tried looking at the statements of the American Geophysical Union. You will not find any geologists laughing. You will, in fact, find that the vast majority of geologists are as concerned as anyone posting here or anything that is posted here. One or two American gelogists who have taken the position that you think gelogists hold have been laughed out of communication within that body.

Not that geologists really know much about climate. Climate scientists are generally those who mentor and teach or are the superiors of geologists. Geophysicists and geochemists.
Ya right,climate scientists are gods.
 

Cabbagesandking

Council Member
Apr 24, 2012
1,041
0
36
Ontario
With respect, I can just as easily turn that comment around and suggest that you have not proven that the document/activities of the panel have (or have ever had) any merit that would justify its ongoing existence.
The credibility comes from the professional stature of the members and from the sources, grounded in science, that they draw their conclusions from.