Climate Change: Not top priority - Ambrose

[Karlin]

Declaring that air pollution, and not climate change, is Canadians top
priority, is what Rona Ambrose, Env minister, has just told us.

I wonder if she ran a poll, or just asked some of her closest friends?

Really, if Canadians were given the facts about both, and asked which
is their top priority, would we really say that Climate Change, caused
by global warming is going to be less of a concern than air pollution?
And, if given the plans to combat both, or either one, would we really want to go ahead and tackle air pollution and not do the reductions of emissions that would essentially TAKE CARE OF BOTH? But of course , such a question won't be asked.

Here is the story:
"Climate Change not top priority"
http://www.cbc.ca/canada/story/2006/10/05/ambrose-questions.html

Canadians' No. 1 priority is air quality, meaning the purity of
the air they breathe, while climate change is "another issue that
they're very concerned with," she said.

Ok, you said it, it must be true.

The real reason, I suspect, as do many experts, of the Tories introducing this new "Clean Air Act" is to delay the emissions reductions, delay legistlated action against heavy industry emissions [which accounts for 50% of global warming]. We are headed into troubled days as global warming continues to increase.
This is a priority of Canadians. It would be an even greater priority if we had been told the truth about global warming all along. Only in the past year did we, the public who reads only mainstream news, get any hint of the fact that Global Warming is real.

This is a short time to adjust our thinking,
and to see what we are facing. Its a lot to take in. The SAME
industries that were funding the "global warming denials" are the ones
who have Rona Ambrose's ear now, and they are undoubtedly the ones who
were instructing Rona Ambrose on scrapping Kyoto and putting in the new
Clean Air Act.

This is another example of government-for-corporations
and the Elites wealthy people. These Elites allready have a better
chance of defending themselves against the effects of global warming
than most of us do.

The rest of us will be fending for ourselves.

 

[BitWhys]

heh. words of wisdom from the Ministry of Truth

I've been expecting nothing less for months. Only part I haven't figured out yet is how they'll get the R&D money for carbon sequestering to the oil companies without going through the provinces

 

[Gonzo]

They say the liberals had no plan, but the conservatives cant even meet even the weak goals of Kyoto. They abandon a plan that was a step in the right direction for what? Nothing.

 

[CDNBear]

The Kyoto Accord has already been proven to be un-attainable. Even the AD's with Rick Mercer were proven impossible. The cost was prohibitive, and would have grounded opperations like the Tar Sands and somewhere in the range of 50% of the industrial mechanism in Canada alone. The US was right to opt out.

As much as it would be nice to have something to fall back on, dumping the impossible and then pulling back to re-evaluate your options, is not a bad idea. Give Harpers Government a chance to come up with something fesable. They have to fix a lot of liberal mess at the moment.

What exactly, is wrong with scrapping the impossible?

 

[BitWhys]

nothing

if you don't mind it leading to the inevitable

 

[Gonzo]

The Kyoto Accord is an amazing achievement for getting all these countries to actually agree to do something. Most scientist say Kyoto didn’t go far enough to reduce emissions. But it was a first step. Harper is taking a step backwards. Governments are notorious for dragging their heels.
Oil sands development has a direct impact on local and planetary ecosystems. In Alberta, the strip mining form of oil extraction completely destroys the boreal forest, the bogs, the rivers as well as the natural landscape. The mining industry claims to believe that the boreal forest will eventually colonize the reclaimed lands, yet 30 years after the opening of the first open pit mine near Fort McMurray, Alberta, no land is considered by the Alberta Government as having been reclaimed.

 

[Johnny Utah]

The Liberals were spending Millions and Millions of dollars buying credit from other Countries, that's F-d up..

 

[MattUK]

Ever considered that Co2 emissions are not the only thing causing Global Warming? I dont doubt that they are a contributing factor, but i refuse to believe they are the be-all and end-all.

Read some high level stuff on sun cycles. That will be an eye opener for you.

 

[BitWhys]

The Liberals were spending Millions and Millions of dollars buying credit from other Countries, that's F-d up..

Its meant to reflect the cost of allowing more industrial development than actually controlling greenhouse gas emmisions would allow. Nothing says "I'm sorry" like cold hard cash. From there the government would have the choice of eating the loss on our behalf (subsidize) or forcing industry to pony up its share in a way that would make the worst offenders pay the highest price (since market competition would prevent them from making the consumer take the full hit for them - unless its the consumer that's being gluttonous - think SUV).

 

[elevennevele]

Whatever they want to say about the Liberals on the environment is one thing. The Liberal Party can try to defend themselves as to their approach when they were in power. The real issue is now what are the Conservatives going to do about the environment?

What they ARE doing is falling terribly short. They threw out measures and have yet to replace them with something substantial, and there is nothing more I dislike than having to wait on a politician for promises.

The Conservative Party are in the leadership position. It is up to them to take responsibility. I don’t care who’s fault ‘this’, and who’s fault ‘that’. They are leading, they should lead. It’s in their court, they are the ones that now have to show responsibility and I can’t stand listening to excuses.

The issue of Global Warming is hardly refuted at this point. Only by those who continue to keep their heads in the sand because even the old detractors that were used as sources to dismiss Global Warming have now come around. The reason being is that even the rich corporate elite are not that dumb to not recognize that it would effect them too.

Conservative Mags like the Economist who were on the reluctant camp have now come around like many others because the consequence to our very survival is a very real threat.

What I see is a party that is not only reneging on promises, but dragging it’s feet and on top of that throwing blame around when it’s up to them at this point to lead. So lead stupid!

 

[MattUK]

If I was a betting man, I would say that the rate of growth of Global Warming will start to decline within the next two years, and it will continue to decline for about a decade after that WITH NO HUMAN HELP AT ALL.

We are contributing factors, of that there is no doubt, but we seem to be blaming it all on ourselves when that is an unlikely scenario. There are other factors in the Universe that affect the Earth. And these are also massive contributing factors to Global Warming.

If governments were really serious, they would have Solar Panells fitted on every house. A small thing that goes a LONG way.

 

[MattUK]

"By Steve Long, Wokingham
"Global warming" or "climate change" (I gather that the name was changed because it was noticed that the globe wasn't actually getting much warmer) as a result of pollution from human endeavour is an interesting idea, but doesn't fit with the historical record. Right now the UK is a lot colder than it was during the Roman occupation, when Dartmoor wasn't a moorland, but had some of the best real estate in Europe (farmlands and vineyards). This century will see Britannia become an important wine producer again, but do we have "global warming" to thank for this?

No - it's a cycle that repeats over a very long period, It could be likened to a wave pattern that has another wave superimposed on it, so you get major trends but with their own peaks and troughs. I recall the winters of the 1960s, where deep snow was common. Not so today, but neither was it common 1600 years ago.

Pollution is not good, but keep it in perspective; Mount St Helens dumped more CO2 and particulate matter into the atmosphere in one eruption than we puny humans could do in many years of trying. We do create pollution, but much of it is localised.

For example, have you ever seen Algeciras Bay in Spain? What a mess the Spanish have made of that, dredging gravel and trashing the fishing grounds. They wonder why they no longer have good fishing, but only a few miles away, Gibraltar now has some of the best seafood in the Med. Funny that.

Watch the nasty chemical pollutants - nature can't get rid of them so easily. There is a valid argument that catalytic converters may be poisoning the atmosphere in a much nastier way than before, because they produce nasty stuff like Hydrogen Sulphide until they get warmed up (you have to drive 25 miles to warm one up!), and H2S is lethal in a few parts per 10 million - ouch! CO2 is something the earth has been absorbing and releasing for millions of years, and is easier to handle.

Look at the evidence on a larger scale, and with a viewpoint in time, and it looks a lot less like humanity is changing climate; the earth does it naturally! Sea levels have been rising in fits and starts for - oh - about 11,000 years - what's the big surprise that it is still happening?

We should certainly make efforts to reduce our own pollution, because that would make things a lot more comfortable all round. Metal pollution is a serious problem (from what I saw of Time Team the Romans discovered that one with Arsenic!), so recycling is an excellent idea. If we're going to improve our environment, I rather think that we should do it with common sense rather than the the slightly loopy "cars kill the planet" mentality.

If we all do our bit, the government's "tax everyone to death" measures would show up for what they really are - a cynical ploy to extract yet more money from us by making us believe it's actually necessary.

It isn't."

 

[elevennevele]

Yes, everyone uses the argument that the planet goes through cycles, but it is now recognized that climate change has been measured as a result of our human contribution. Even glacier ice samples show frozen contaminates of human contribution. There is a direct correlation which has now become widely accepted.

You wish to talk about the planets cycles, think about this. What sort of bleak climate hurdles might we face with corresponding cycles in addition to the heightening of extremes with our added contributions? You don’t realize that these two factors could be exclusive from one another and could amount to a serious consequence combined? The human imprint can be seen from space. Also is this a situation that we wish to gamble the survival of our species on?

 

[elevennevele]

Sorry but when it comes to potentially our human survival, I’m not a betting man. I’m not interested in taking a gamble.

Humans have shown they can destroy entire environments. Environment and the climate is a relationship that works in conjunction to one another. One has to argue that we have made a great impact on our environments and our atmosphere. Even in the most natural of settings tests on people have shown a cocktail of pollutants.

If climate change wasn’t real, then it would be hard to explain why so much money is being spent on trying to figure out solutions such as pumping carbon emissions deep underground. Obviously the concern is worth the research in solutions. The problem however is accepting the hardship of an implementation of the solutions in a relatively short time frame.

What you are seeing is everyone being concerned about their bank accounts. That is the great obstacle. Anyone who has kids should definitely care.

 

[hermanntrude]

the latest edition of "Scientific American" has a very good article on the future where climate change is concerned. It rates the alternative technologies for their possibleness, their cleanliness and so on. Seems to me renewables, sequestering, and fusion are the way things will go. I personally love the fusion option. It's much safer than fission (already pretty safe in responsible hands) and a pilot plant is already being built in France. amazing

Apparently though fusion uses temperatures of 12,000,000,000 degrees C. eek.

 

[MattUK]

I cant wait for antimatter to be developed further.

 

[BitWhys]

The Liberals were spending Millions and Millions of dollars buying credit from other Countries, that's F-d up..

what's f-d up? the claim, or the lie?

dag nab Ministry of Truth

 

[Karlin]

nothing

if you don't mind it leading to the inevitable

Wow, now thats a bit wise. Good one.

It is not impossible, thats just more phooey. Reducing our use of fossil fuels is the key, and if we do not there will be more trouble than it takes to do that.

 

[BigBen]

The conservatives are just playing the hand they were dealt. I'm just glad that they're at least being honest about the whole thing. I'd much rather them follow through with what they say then tell us all what we want to hear then do nothing about it. I wouldn't be surprised if many canadians considered air pollution to be more important to them than global warming. Air pollution is alot more tangible than global warming.

 

[John Muff]

Are we been given a choice to choose from?

Hi There,

There is no doubt in my mind that a FULL PROGRAM should be created and funded... This should not be taken lightly... A well executed reduction in our usage of fossil fuel and in our constant air pollution could help our forest breath a little better. We've proven our incompetence to challenge a government on VITAL issues. The Conservatives clearely said: "Sorry, we have a plan". WE ARE SORRY, but this plan is so short of what we elected you for...

I don't believe in Kyoto as it stand. I explain: The Government should take a step back, look at what must be done IN CANADA to solve BOTH the global warming issue / Canada & and Air/Water/Noise pollution...

You quickly get to the conclusion that the current system of Government: Liberal, Cons. PQ, NDP & Green; they cannot PUSH strongly enough to be eard. There is no NEUTRAL system exising right now. Maybee one day peoples of a country will undoubtedly have their TRUE voice eard...

BTW, when I mean actions, I mean SOLVING ALL issues related with HUMAN vs. IT'S SURROUNDINGS. When talking... we keep forgetting thousand of Canadian calling for help risen by global warming effects...

I hope so much one day we'll get our voice out... We thrive for clean air while the Green party Cannot even get a chance to talk. So let's not hope too much for a logic government one day arising from Canadian ground. Even though it would technically be the best place in the world to show everyone's, what Canadian can do regarding world matters.

If it wouldn't have been from the recent Conservative flaws, we may have had chances to push for a better recognition at the UN body.

Have a good one,

Muff