DaCommie, I'm certain other countries have carbon taxes. Did any of those economies die? Norway has a very expensive carbon tax (highest in the OECD, I believe) and they're still an oil powerhouse.
It seems that there's absolutely no evidence a carbon tax will harm the economy. Your printer anecdote means basically nothing.
[QUOTE=Zeke129;33698552]DaCommie, I'm certain other countries have carbon taxes. Did any of those economies die? Norway has a very expensive carbon tax (highest in the OECD, I believe) and they're still an oil powerhouse.
It seems that there's absolutely no evidence a carbon tax will harm the economy. Your printer anecdote means basically nothing.[/QUOTE]
Yes, what about Norway?
"What about Norway" always seems to be the argument for everything. Prison needs to be a deterrence to prevent crime. What about Norway? Gay marriage erodes the social fabric. What about Norway? High taxes prevent innovation and industry. What about Norway? A welfare state makes everyone quit their job and lay in bed all day. What about Norway?
[QUOTE=doonbugie2;33696786]Research and develop cleaner forms of fuel, or fund mainstream electrical vehicles while raising taxes on gasoline.[/QUOTE]
All that will do is poison an already fucked economy and cause pollution to skyrocket. Electric cars aren't green at all, producing that battery does far more environmental damage than whatever comes out the back of an SUV.
The solution isn't taxing gasoline and forcing everyone into impractical electric cars, the solution is finding another fuel that gasoline engines will burn without spewing HCs, CO and the like. Hydrogen gas works well, don't have to modify the engine at all internally, the only thing coming out the back that didn't get sucked in is water vapor, and you get more power.
hydrogen isnt very safe...
[editline]13th December 2011[/editline]
[QUOTE=Zeke129;33698650]"What about Norway" always seems to be the argument for everything. Prison needs to be a deterrence to prevent crime. What about Norway? Gay marriage erodes the social fabric. What about Norway? High taxes prevent innovation and industry. What about Norway? A welfare state makes everyone quit their job and lay in bed all day. What about Norway?[/QUOTE]
the thing is you need ALL of this for any of it to work
We failed hard aswell. We have no other energy sources tho.. Still, since we're so small compared to other nations, we aren't much of a trouble.. I guess.
[QUOTE=abcpea2;33698875]
the thing is you need ALL of this for any of it to work[/QUOTE]
What about Australia
[QUOTE=jA_cOp;33697040]Not cool Canada, not cool.[/QUOTE]
That better not be a global warming pun.
Fuck C02 we got more important toxics and shit to worry about.
[QUOTE=Sexy Eskimo;33699396]Fuck C02 we got more important toxics and shit to worry about.[/QUOTE]
Since you are so educated in these matters can you enlighten the rest of us please
Greenhouse gases are the largest source of air pollution and main cause of global warming
[QUOTE=Spycrabz;33699223]That better not be a global warming pun.[/QUOTE]
Am I going to be in trouble? :v:
not surprised, the protocol would cost too much
I know that this sucks, I live in Canada as well, but it seems that people aren't considering his motivation for pulling out. But it just reinforces why we elected him - he's the one that will help us the most with our economy. At least the way I see it, this was a decision that shouldnt really come as a surprise since we've never been in agreement with the protocol, anyway. I'd rather drop out then continue to disregard the target goal as much as we were doing.
Still a shitty situation all in all, though.
[QUOTE=xxdeadb0ltxx;33701372]I know that this sucks, I live in Canada as well, but it seems that people aren't considering his motivation for pulling out. But it just reinforces why we elected him - he's the one that will help us the most with our economy. At least the way I see it, this was a decision that shouldnt really come as a surprise since we've never been in agreement with the protocol, anyway. I'd rather drop out then continue to disregard the target goal as much as we were doing.
Still a shitty situation all in all, though.[/QUOTE]
help our economy? stephen harper??
[QUOTE=xxdeadb0ltxx;33701372]I know that this sucks, I live in Canada as well, but it seems that people aren't considering his motivation for pulling out. But it just reinforces why we elected him - he's the one that will help us the most with our economy. At least the way I see it, this was a decision that shouldnt really come as a surprise since we've never been in agreement with the protocol, anyway. I'd rather drop out then continue to disregard the target goal as much as we were doing.
Still a shitty situation all in all, though.[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=Zeke129;33697515]except Harper has been a huge spender and is already making the country broke
only instead of spending the money on something useful like reducing carbon emissions he's spending it on giant prisons to put pot smokers in and planes without engines[/QUOTE]
Don't forget anti-privacy legislation and stupid anti-piracy bullshit!
[QUOTE=DarkMonkey;33693588]Except that's a perfectly legitimate course of action when it's actually impossible to pass/meet the goals?[/QUOTE]
Sure it is.
Doesn't mean that Canada hasn't fucked up hugely on the paper they signed.
[QUOTE=Lambeth;33693108]
Bummer. Guess canada as a whole actually wasn't trying very hard though[/QUOTE]
Trying very hard? Buddy I'm from Windsor, do not get me started on shit you yanks are putting in our fucking lungs.
Why on Earth would you fine countries for not complying? That just gives them even less money to put towards making things greener
[QUOTE=Zeke129;33698552]DaCommie, I'm certain other countries have carbon taxes. Did any of those economies die? Norway has a very expensive carbon tax (highest in the OECD, I believe) and they're still an oil powerhouse.
It seems that there's absolutely no evidence a carbon tax will harm the economy. Your printer anecdote means basically nothing.[/QUOTE]
Like I said, you can't be sure that what works elsewhere will work everywhere else. Also, isn't Norway in the middle of some kind of food shortage, and doesn't the state own a lot of strategic things in Norway's economy? We don't have much, if any, state ownership here, hell, even Ontario Hydro is a greedy-ass corporation. If the stare owns a company, they'll be thinking of the people before the profit, but there are very few, if any, examples of this happening in a privately owned corporation in North America.
Both political and economic atmospheres are different between here and Norway, which is also a much smaller, both in terms of landmass and population, country than Canada. As I said, you can't be sure something that works somewhere else very different from our own country will also work here, Norway is a very different country, with much more socialist beliefs and more state control over parts of the economy, their government has the ability to ensure that corporations don't act like greedy motherfuckers, we don't really have that luxury, and thanks to the grits, we don't even have control over oil prices here, and a carbon tax would likely send those through the roof, because petrol companies especially love to gouge the wallets of Canadians now that they can.
[editline]13th December 2011[/editline]
[QUOTE=Zeke129;33699137]What about Australia[/QUOTE]
As far as I know most people in Australia think the country is going to shit and all the politicians are retarded, and when they enacted the carbon tax, many of the Aussies here said now is not the time for something like it.
You know, i'm all for reducing the carbon footprint, but why the fuck do we have to be in a club just to do so. Does a country not have the capability of reducing it's own industries footprint without the looming taxation if they fail?
The kyoto protocol has good intentions but it is kind of stupid how it goes about enforcing. It makes me think that it's just a cash grab.
[QUOTE=DaCommie1;33705020]As far as I know most people in Australia think the country is going to shit and all the politicians are retarded, and when they enacted the carbon tax, many of the Aussies here said now is not the time for something like it.[/QUOTE]
That's anecdotal at best, saying "the australians here don't like it" means fuck all compared to, you know, evidence that the economy got worse.
Oh no, Stephane Dion won't be very happy. Nor will his dog.
[QUOTE=Megafanx13;33706430]That's anecdotal at best, saying "the australians here don't like it" means fuck all compared to, you know, evidence that the economy got worse.[/QUOTE]
Well considering it was instated there about a month ago, there hasn't been enough time to gather evidence of its effects on the economy or society there, where things already tend to cost more. In order to get appropriate evidence, we'll have to wait and see what happens over there in the next few years.
[QUOTE=DaCommie1;33705020]Also, isn't Norway in the middle of some kind of food shortage[/QUOTE]
Try reading [I]more than the headline of the thread.[/I]
[QUOTE=Megafanx13;33706430]That's anecdotal at best, saying "the australians here don't like it" means fuck all compared to, you know, evidence that the economy got worse.[/QUOTE]
I dunno, I think there's scientific proof that aussies feel oncoming economic flux like old people feel the coming rain in their bones.
[QUOTE=Gundevil;33703903]Trying very hard? Buddy I'm from Windsor, do not get me started on shit you yanks are putting in our fucking lungs.[/QUOTE]
What do you mean you yanks
People need to realise that the world is expanding and it's extremely difficult to maintain the co2 production levels of 1990.
Kyoto needs updating.
Canada has a very high per capita CO2 emissions rate. Most Canadians are actually aware of this. Most also don't give a shit. Allow me to explain:
IT'S FUCKING COLD 6 MONTHS OF THE YEAR.
Yes, that's right my friends, Canada actually gets pretty fucking cold for half the year. In the most populated areas of Canada (between Toronto and Montreal) it can go as low as -40 celcius in the winter. Funny thing is, it can also get as high as +40 celcius during the summer, with humidity all year round making the weather even more extreme. To put it simply... we need heat half the year and air conditioning for about a quarter of it. That is a LOT of power consumption. Now, Quebec is on top of that shit: we use Natural Gas and Hydroelectric power to keep shit going here, which has really cut down on it.
Ontario, on the other hand, has been run by the fucking retarded Liberal party for so long they've forgotten how to tie their own shoes, let alone build useful power generation facilities. The fuckers are still running coal plants, smogging up the whole damn Toronto-Montreal corridor because it's all on the same jetstream... fucking idiots.
Also, another thing most people don't factor in: it can take you 2-6 hours to get to the next Canadian city by car. This isn't Europe, travel takes a long time here and public transit is... lacking, to say the least. So our vehicles burn a lot of gas, which does not help the CO2 emission situation. That and the recent move of many manufacturing industries to Canada (we recently scooped up a lot of automotive stuff from the Americans... sorry bros). As you probably know, industry, especially manufacturing, produces a LOT of pollution.
So there you have it, a short explanation of why Canada has one of the highest per capita CO2 emissions rates in the world. I'm not saying it's fully excused by this explanation and we can certainly do more, but it really isn't as big a deal as people say it is, and frankly, I'm not willing to freeze so some asshat who gets off sucking David Suzuki's dick can feel good about themselves.
Although victoria and vancouver are pretty mild. And we(BC) get most of our electricity from hydro anyway.
[QUOTE=DaCommie1;33705020]Like I said, you can't be sure that what works elsewhere will work everywhere else. Also, isn't Norway in the middle of some kind of food shortage, and doesn't the state own a lot of strategic things in Norway's economy? We don't have much, if any, state ownership here, hell, even Ontario Hydro is a greedy-ass corporation. If the stare owns a company, they'll be thinking of the people before the profit, but there are very few, if any, examples of this happening in a privately owned corporation in North America.[/quote]
One, it's a butter shortage because low-carb dieters had a run on butter, and two, you don't need state ownership to have effective regulation. We weathered the recession better than the United States because our private banks were more strictly regulated. Industry also needs to be more strictly regulated.
[QUOTE=DaCommie1;33705020]As far as I know most people in Australia think the country is going to shit and all the politicians are retarded, and when they enacted the carbon tax, many of the Aussies here said now is not the time for something like it.[/QUOTE]
But how is their economy doing? Isn't the Australian dollar currently above the US dollar?
[editline]14th December 2011[/editline]
[QUOTE=FlakAttack;33714332]Canada has a very high per capita CO2 emissions rate. Most Canadians are actually aware of this. Most also don't give a shit. Allow me to explain:
IT'S FUCKING COLD 6 MONTHS OF THE YEAR.
Yes, that's right my friends, Canada actually gets pretty fucking cold for half the year. In the most populated areas of Canada (between Toronto and Montreal) it can go as low as -40 celcius in the winter. Funny thing is, it can also get as high as +40 celcius during the summer, with humidity all year round making the weather even more extreme. To put it simply... we need heat half the year and air conditioning for about a quarter of it. That is a LOT of power consumption. Now, Quebec is on top of that shit: we use Natural Gas and Hydroelectric power to keep shit going here, which has really cut down on it.
Ontario, on the other hand, has been run by the fucking retarded Liberal party for so long they've forgotten how to tie their own shoes, let alone build useful power generation facilities. The fuckers are still running coal plants, smogging up the whole damn Toronto-Montreal corridor because it's all on the same jetstream... fucking idiots.
Also, another thing most people don't factor in: it can take you 2-6 hours to get to the next Canadian city by car. This isn't Europe, travel takes a long time here and public transit is... lacking, to say the least. So our vehicles burn a lot of gas, which does not help the CO2 emission situation. That and the recent move of many manufacturing industries to Canada (we recently scooped up a lot of automotive stuff from the Americans... sorry bros). As you probably know, industry, especially manufacturing, produces a LOT of pollution.
So there you have it, a short explanation of why Canada has one of the highest per capita CO2 emissions rates in the world. I'm not saying it's fully excused by this explanation and we can certainly do more, but it really isn't as big a deal as people say it is, and frankly, I'm not willing to freeze so some asshat who gets off sucking David Suzuki's dick can feel good about themselves.[/QUOTE]
I'm really sorry, but a lot of this post is off.
Residential buildings only account for 7% of Canada's GHG emissions, and electricity generation 16%. Passenger cars and trucks, 11%. [url=http://www.pembina.org/pub/1966]Source[/url]
About your Ontario comments, half of ALL electricity in Ontario comes from nuclear and wind generation in the province accounts for 1/3 of all wind power in Canada. Also, McGuinty's targets for phasing out coal power generation are ahead of any targets the conservatives ever set. Ontario's total GHG emissions are LESS THAN HALF of that of Alberta's. [url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electricity_sector_in_Canada#Ontario]Source[/url]
[QUOTE=Zeke129;33714484]About your Ontario comments, half of ALL electricity in Ontario comes from nuclear and wind generation in the province accounts for 1/3 of all wind power in Canada. Also, McGuinty's targets for phasing out coal power generation are ahead of any targets the conservatives ever set. Ontario's total GHG emissions are LESS THAN HALF of that of Alberta's. [URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electricity_sector_in_Canada#Ontario"]Source[/URL][/QUOTE]
That's great and all, but it doesn't change the fact that they're paying 10 times more for wind/solar power than any other form of power available to them. Especially dumb when they could be buying hydroelectricity from Quebec. Also if you read the Auditor General's report, the Liberals straight up made bad deals to get all this wind/solar going in the first place. Shitty, corrupt deals that cost more than they save and only sort of fix the problem are not the kind of thing I'd include as proof of a job well done.
As for the point about percentages of GHG emissions: passenger cars and freight trucks (transportation problem) represent a total of 20%. Residential homes are 6%, bringing us to 26%. Now this isn't a perfect number because it doesn't account for the cost of generating electricity for homes (why your source divided it up this way puzzles me), so I'm going to low ball it and out of the 16% there, take 5%. Brings us to 31%. Agriculture is not an optional thing and though I imagine improvements could be made there, it accounts for 10%, bringing us to 41%. Lastly is the big debatable one, oil and gas production, transmission and distribution. 22%... now, do we consider this a vital service or is this one way Canada should be reducing emissions? This is a big export for us. With it, we're at 63%, without it at 41%. If you think the oil and gas production is important for economic reasons, that leaves 37% of emissions really open to debate. If not, 59%. I believe this is where a lot of Canada stands divided.
My stance is simple: working on lowering per capita emissions should always be an important goal and companies in emission-heavy industries should have to put forward at least some money towards the research and development of methods to help with this problem. That said, I think people really do need to understand that the reality of Canada means we're going to have a harder time lowering emissions that most other places, due both to climate and size. People shouldn't look at other countries and say "THEY LOWERED IT BY 2%, WHY CAN'T WE?" because it's really not that easy.
On that note, Kyoto was just a money funnel to eco companies and third world nations. It was bullshit from the very beginning and the Liberals knew it. They signed it to shut the green folks up but never did a damn thing about it. At least the Conservatives don't pretend they're doing anything about it while doing nothing, they say it's not a priority at the moment and treat it that way. Not exactly my ideal solution either but it's still better than being lied to. Besides, at some point people have to understand that our economy really isn't in a state where we can throw money at this. It's unfortunate that a global economic meltdown (caused by one of the biggest GHG producing countries in the world of course) had to happen around the same time people decided we need to stop shitting into the earth's atmosphere, but it is what it is.
Also, I should have clarified for the non-Canadians: Britich Columbia is generally warmer, Alberta/Saskatchewan/Manitoba are less humid. The parts hit hardest are Ontario and everything east of it, with a terrible mix of cold/heat and humidity that makes it necessary for us to even have special asphalt recipes so the roads will last longer than a year.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
