Canada weakens Rio draft for sustainable development

captain morgan

Hall of Fame Member
Mar 28, 2009
28,429
148
63
A Mouse Once Bit My Sister
I heard her 'speech' on CBC radio yesterday... I was highly impressed that it came from an 11 year old (not written by Daddy of course) and not rehearsed for weeks in advance... A remarkably intelligent girl that was able to consider the complex biological interactions and ramifications of AGW (or was that suzuki's global cooling period - I can never remember). Yep, her ability to demonstrate a mid-university level of intelligence at the tender age of 11 was inspiring indeed.

It's too bad that she didn't hug a teddy bear whilst she was reciting the speech
 

mentalfloss

Prickly Curmudgeon Smiter
Jun 28, 2010
39,817
471
83
Are you saying that you'd prefer to see an economy remain depressed and solve the issue by forcing them to be dependent on foreign donations?

Yes.

That is exactly what I am saying.

 

Walter

Hall of Fame Member
Jan 28, 2007
34,889
126
63
If we could produce oil, there would be no issue. The problem is that we cannot produce it, but only extract it. That's what makes it a finite resource.
Look up abiotic oil and your concept of a finite resource with disappear.
 

mentalfloss

Prickly Curmudgeon Smiter
Jun 28, 2010
39,817
471
83
Canada’s shameful position on biodiversity puts us all in danger

Twenty years ago this month, Canada and another 192 countries signed a legally binding international agreement – the Convention on Biological Diversity – to protect biodiversity. This week, delegates from around the globe are meeting at the Rio+20 conference in Rio de Janeiro to evaluate progress made in conserving biodiversity in the interim.But at a time when we are facing economic stagnation and the need to feed 7 billion people on the planet, why should we worry about biodiversity and reduce our use of the environment?

Because life on Earth, to the best of our knowledge, is unique in the universe. It is an awe-inspiring multitude of living creatures that inhabit, but also sustain, a biosphere upon which all humans depend.

Biological diversity – or its contraction, “biodiversity” – refers to the great variety of life in all its manifestations, from genes to ecosystems and bacteria to belugas. Expansion of the human enterprise is eroding biodiversity at a rate unprecedented in human history. Already, 627 species are at risk of extinction in Canada. The rate of extinction will peak in the next 50 years because of ongoing economic expansion, climate change, pollution and habitat destruction. By then we may well be experiencing the Earth’s sixth mass extinction.

Our ecosystems are of enormous benefit to Canadian society, providing goods such as food, timber and water, and services such as flood control and fertile soils. Past research has estimated the value of such “ecosystem services” from Canadian boreal ecosystems at $93 billion per year, roughly nine per cent of Canada’s GDP.

If we view ecosystems as giant engines that transform simple inputs (such as sunlight and carbon dioxide) into useful outputs (such as oxygen, biomass and clean water), then species are the moving parts in this engine. How many of these parts can an ecosystem lose before it ceases to operate efficiently?

The last 20 years has seen an enormous scientific effort to answer this question. More than 600 experiments have examined how biodiversity loss impacts our ecosystems and showed overwhelming evidence that reducing local biodiversity results in unhealthy ecosystems.

If we do not slow the rate of biodiversity loss, our economy will begin to pay a massive ecological price for business as usual.


The widespread consequences for humankind stand in sharp contrast to the lack of current political leadership on the subject. This is particularly evident in Canada, where existing environmental legislation is already weaker than comparable laws in the U.S. and Western Europe.


Our situation has worsened at the hands of the Conservative government, with its proposed changes in the omnibus Bill C-38 currently before Senate. This bill will scale back and limit the environmental assessment process, strip most of Canada’s 71 endangered aquatic species of habitat protection, allow more dumping of waste at sea, exempt pipeline projects from environmental standards and reduce independent oversight of nuclear power.

Of course, legislation alone is not enough to protect species. We also need long-term monitoring of the changes to species and their habitat. Biodiversity research in Canada is among the best in the world, but it is being dismantled. Will Bill C-38, the government is planning to cancel some of the key programs that fund long-term and innovative biodiversity research. For example, funding has been pulled from the Experimental Lakes Area, a world-famous research facility in Ontario that provided the critical evidence that led to the ban of phosphates in detergents.

Losing our ability to monitor our ecosystems is like driving into the night without headlights – we lose the ability to see the dangers that lie in the road ahead.

In the two decades since Canada signed the Convention on Biological Diversity, we have witnessed the steady loss of biodiversity in our country, and a growing indifference by our government to keep our promise to meet international biodiversity targets.

Canada’s current position is shameful. The science is clear, and the evidence is unequivocal.

Canada

 

Machjo

Hall of Fame Member
Oct 19, 2004
17,878
61
48
Ottawa, ON
Rio draft weakened

Negotiators for Canada and more than 100 other countries have signed a draft blueprint for sustainable development, but critics say Canada was instrumental in making the plan unduly weak.

After months of trying to boil down proposals, environmental officials at the Rio+20 conference in Brazil finally compromised and delivered a 283-point "vision" for leaders to ratify later this week.

The plan would commit countries to fight climate change with "urgent and ambitious action," increase their aid for developing countries and work out a global set of long-term sustainable development goals to alleviate poverty and prevent global warming.

In the draft, the countries pledge to work with civil society to "renew our commitment to sustainable development, and to ensure the promotion of economically, socially and environmentally sustainable future for our planet and for present and future generations."

Critics say the draft is weak on time-lines, and lacks heft on overseeing the state of the world's oceans.

"It represents a sellout of people and the planet," Cameron Fenton of the Canadian Youth Climate Coalition said in an email from Rio.

"Canada's role has been at its best not engaging in the process, and at worst acting to weaken ambitious language and delete commitments."

Environment Minister Peter Kent, who arrived in Rio late Tuesday afternoon, said the environmentalists' criticism was "unwarranted" and "trivializes" the enormity of the task before negotiators.

"The non-governmental organizations....they know better," Kent said in an interview with The Canadian Press. "Canada takes these things very seriously."

The Rio conference is meant to kickstart action and discussion down the road, not come up with "snap" agreements that are not properly thought out and could well have unintended consequences on sovereignty and domestic policy if adopted without proper scrutiny, Kent said.

About 50,000 delegates and activists have descended on the Brazilian city for the week. Dozens of heads of state will meet today and Thursday, although many industrialized countries sent ministers instead of leaders.

"It's a big failure of Rio, especially since this was talked about as the 'summit of the seas,'" said Susanna Fuller, marine conservation co-ordinator for the Ecology Action Centre in Halifax who was in the negotiating room in Rio.

While regional agreements and fishing accords do control some aspects of biodiversity in some parts of the world's oceans, there are many gaps that beg a global agreement in order to prevent destruction of habitat and ocean pollution, she said.

But Fuller said Canada, the United States, Russia and Venezuela worked together to make sure there would be no new agreement.

Rio draft weakened

If the government doesn't care, then it's time for us to do something about it. buy a bicycle, eat vegetarian (uses less land and water, etc.), install better insulation, solar panels, etc. recycle your bags, compost. Let's do something about this.
 

mentalfloss

Prickly Curmudgeon Smiter
Jun 28, 2010
39,817
471
83
If the government doesn't care, then it's time for us to do something about it. buy a bicycle, eat vegetarian (uses less land and water, etc.), install better insulation, solar panels, etc. recycle your bags, compost. Let's do something about this.

There is also a clear benefit in raising awareness.
 

EagleSmack

Hall of Fame Member
Feb 16, 2005
44,168
96
48
USA
If the government doesn't care, then it's time for us to do something about it. buy a bicycle, eat vegetarian (uses less land and water, etc.), install better insulation, solar panels, etc. recycle your bags, compost. Let's do something about this.

Oh no... us Greenies can't do that on our own... our government must make us do these things.

About right MF?
 

damngrumpy

Executive Branch Member
Mar 16, 2005
9,949
21
38
kelowna bc
The whole problem is no one really knows the state of the environment.
Is it human caused that things are changing? Is it more likely that we
have been seeing change that is natural and now its in a more pronounced
stage? The answer is we don't know for sure.
The other problem is Environmentalists chose to over dramatize the problems
turning the movement into a new religion sold and packaged to the youth.
On the other side instead of delving into the potential seriousness of the issues,
those from industry and skepticism set to discredit everything that might be a
problem.
Now we have two problems and one answer. Instead of using real science both
chose a more voodoo form of facts and figures to discredit each other instead of
addressing the problems that might or do exist.
The way to rectify the problem? Sit down and tell the truth on both sides and
maybe even work together to determine where we are but the truth is difficult for
these people who are intent on spending money to make more money confusing
the hell out of people in the general public. Wouldn't want that no way.
I don't support doing nothing if something can be done, I don't support turning a
movement into a religion. I do support a joint effort at finding the truth and then
addressing what problems really exist. I am also not holding my breathe.
 

Machjo

Hall of Fame Member
Oct 19, 2004
17,878
61
48
Ottawa, ON
Oh no... us Greenies can't do that on our own... our government must make us do these things.

About right MF?

The government could help. but if it refuses to, then instead of complaining and protesting endlessly, let's start looking to non-political solutions.
 

taxslave

Hall of Fame Member
Nov 25, 2008
36,362
4,340
113
Vancouver Island
Perhaps you missed the part where an agreement was shot down by Canada, U.S., Russia and Venezuela while the rest of the world was on board.

Gee.. I wonder why?

So there are four countries that are concerned about their economies. The rest just want our money.
How is it that all those who profess to be concerned about climate change and GHG can jet around the world to protest without leaving a carbon foot print?

Oh no... us Greenies can't do that on our own... our government must make us do these things.

About right MF?

Anything that creates jobs for bureaucraps is fine with MF. It is the ordinary working people that pay the taxes and contribute to the economy he doesn't like.