Friday, June 27, 2008, 02:46 PM - Environment
Chicken Little and Global Warming
by Rod Taylor, CHP Environmental Critic
Do you remember the children’s story about Chicken Little? The tiny chick was struck on the head by a falling acorn and decided that the sky must be falling. The little bird kept repeating the story so convincingly that soon all the other barnyard fowl were in a panic and they ran off to warn the king. In the earliest version of this fable, they met a fox on the way who took advantage of their hysterical state and gobbled them up. In the more modern versions, (revisionism everywhere) they managed to escape the fox and Chicken Little received an umbrella from the king to prevent being struck by another acorn.
Today this fairytale has come to life. Many well-meaning people, including NDP Environment critic Nathan Cullen have been taken in by Al Gore’s powerful propaganda movie “An Inconvenient Truth”. Politicians of all stripes are hurriedly implementing carbon taxes and “cap and trade” schemes to soothe the afflicted consciences of Canadians who desperately want to help save Planet Earth. These carbon taxes will never be “revenue neutral” but are already playing a role in the skyrocketing price of oil and gasoline. “Cap and trade” and “carbon offsets” do nothing to solve environmental problems but do add another level of taxpayer-funded bureaucracy, leaving even less money in the hands of Canadians to pay for their transportation and heating needs.
MP Cullen continues to promote this outlandish fairytale in spite of the growing mountain of data that conflicts with the “Global Warming” hoax. To date, over 31,000 scientists have signed a petition to “cease and desist” from aggressive carbon-focused policies and treaties like Kyoto, which they say will damage our economy and impede our efforts to curb real pollution.
Every responsible citizen wants to reduce man-made chemical toxins in our environment but water vapour and carbon dioxide are not toxins. They are beneficial gases needed for life and plant growth. There is NO evidence that miniscule increases in CO2 levels are contributing to global warming. Natural cycles have always existed and sunspot activity is most likely at the core of any real climate change. Unlike Al Gore’s “hockeystick” graph, historical evidence suggests that increases in CO2 levels follow periods of global warming, rather than preceding them. There is also evidence today that the planet may be entering a cooling phase.
Fear and panic are tools used to manipulate and control people and to wring more money out of them for ever-expanding government. Chicken Little and the alarmist flock may be making a flap in Parliament but it’s taxpayers who will have to pay when the chickens come home to roost. Let’s take our finger off the panic button and focus on the things we can change: reducing real pollution, ensuring clean drinking water for ourselves and our children (that includes protecting the Sacred Headwaters, something Nathan and I agree on) and pursuing realistic energy alternatives for the future.
source
| permalink
Monday, December 10, 2007, 07:57 PM - Environment
Opposition Leader Stéphane Dion has criticized PM Harper for standing firm, in Bali, requiring that major greenhouse gas emitters such as India and China should be included in requirements for binding g-h-g emission targets.
Mr Dion has charged that the Harper government is deliberately sabotaging attempts to forge a new climate change agreement at the United Nations conference in Bali.
"To be asking countries with hundreds of millions of people in poverty (to accept binding targets) is not a position that is going to move along things here in Bali. It is going to derail everything." said Dale Marshall, a representative of the David Suzuki Foundation.
We must always remember that, with our limited understanding of our planet, we can only guess what are the causes of global warming. What we do know, without a doubt, is that this planet has been warming since the last ice age.
Supporting another Kyoto type deal does nothing to deal with pollution which we can, and must, deal with. It makes our elected government subordinate to an unelected world government. Should we agree to a plan which allows unequal responsibility for 'global warming' action, we are damaging our own economic prospects while allowing other countries to develop their economy.
Environment Minister John Baird has said, "Eliminating emissions in one country but allowing them to skyrocket in another does nothing to reduce the global burden of harmful substances that contribute to climate change and pollute the air we breathe,"
I do not believe that global warming is anthropogenic. But for those people who do believe it's anthropogenic, to allow the global emissions of g-h-g to continue as long as it's somebody else polluting makes no sense. Thank you Mr. Baird for making sense and standing firm on this!
Mr. Dion seems to want any deal, good or bad for Canadians, just to say we've reached agreement. That's not good enough! Our government is elected to look out for the best interests of Canadians first, then we can look at other countries to see where we can work together.
Mr. Marshall seems to of the same opinion. We must reduce the burden of controlled g-h-g emissions on other countries but increase the burden sustained by our own children.
We need to deal with the pollutants we produce in this country, but on our terms. We do not need to be placed under the thumb of an unelected body. We elect our leaders. If we don't like what they are doing, we don't elect them again.
That's a whole different mind-set from countries where someone assumes a leadership role and subordinates everyone else to their will. That type of subordination is what Kyoto-ites want Canada to accept.
I will not agree to submit to a dictatorship. We have responsibilities in Canada and we have freedoms.
As Benjamin Franklin said, "Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both."
| permalink
Tuesday, April 17, 2007, 10:14 PM - Environment
Stefan Jetchick (CHP, Louis-Hebert, Quebec)and I have entered a discussion on Kyoto. You will find the ongoing dialogue at
Canadian Viewpoints
or
Jesus-eucharistie
Hopefully this will provide some new information for all of us.
The discussion points will be available in French at Jesus Eucaristie
The email discussions will not be translated.
I hope we all enjoy this discussion.
Vicki
| permalink
Wednesday, March 21, 2007, 06:22 PM - Environment
What areas of the industrial sector will be affected in the next 1-5 years if we meet our Kyoto targets?
If we check out this government graph on sources of green house gas emissions in 2004, then we have a good idea who will be affected and how.
Manufacturing of oil, gas and coal:
This represents 20% of our greenhouse gas production. In Canada heating is not an option. If it costs more to produce, we will pay more for the finished product.
Solution 1) Are we prepared to pay more for home heating? Or we could drop our heating and air conditioning use to balance this? I don’t have airconditioning and my heat is set at 20C (68F) in the winter. Should I lower my thermostat by 1/3? I would need to decrease my usage from 6,123 Litres per year to 4,041 Litres per year. What about you? By how much would you need to decrease your fuel use?
Solution 2) How much more will we be paying when companies have to install a system which will decrease their emissions by 1/3? This will be offset somewhat by employment increases to manufacture and install the new system. However, this would be temporary, because the jobs created will be gone at completion of the installation, approximately 2 years from now. When Canadian Taxpayers have paid the increased costs to the companies manufacturing the oil, gas and coal, will the price of the product decrease? I’m not betting that it will!!!
Road Transportation:
For areas such as York-Simcoe, this is something very important to consider. Many of us commute to work each day. We drive our children to hockey, figure skating, soccer, baseball etc. We drive to the grocery store to purchase our food. We drive to attend movies or other entertainment.
Our cars produce 19% of our carbon dioxide emissions.
Option 1) Are you able to decrease your car usage by 1/3? We would be paying higher prices at the pump to cover increased production costs, but Canada would need to purchase Carbon Credits if we don’t decrease our CO2 emissions by 1/3.
Option 2) Or do we perhaps want some other sector to pick up the slack and decrease their ghg emissions by more than 1/3. Perhaps we can ask oil and gas manufacturers to decrease their emissions by 2/3 to cover our inability to decrease. But then again.... that’ll put the price up further in fines, cost of Carbon Credits, and changes to the manufacturing sector.
Electricity Generation:
Electricity generation makes up 17% of our green house gas emissions.
Option 1) Turning off lights will help decrease the electricity needed but certainly not by 1/3. Perhaps we will have to give up airconditioning in the summer. But I don’t have airconditioning, what must I give up to decrease my usage by 1/3?
Option 2) Or we could ask the Hydro Producers to find a cheaper form of electricity production. Nuclear power is cheaper. The consumer will have to pay the costs but could we build enough nuclear reactors in 2 years? I sincerely doubt that! It will increase our hydro bills to build the nuclear plants, as a short or long term solution. When the reactors are paid for, sometime in the distant future, will the price of electricity decrease again? Many people object to nuclear power, would they be willing to accept it because it’s cheaper energy?
As you can see by these simple scenarios, there are no easy answers. The opposition has committed us to having the reductions in place by 2008.
We have 2 years to devise and implement a plan for reducing our green house gas emissions. Have you come up with a method of decreasing your production of green house gases by 1/3? Today, the oil/gas/electricity producers are providing the amount that we’re using. If they cover the cost of manufacturing changes, we pay. If we decrease our usage we all benefit. But... is it possible?
| permalink
Wednesday, March 21, 2007, 06:06 PM - Environment
In 1998, when Kyoto was signed by the Liberal government, the reduction of green house gas emissions was set for 6 % below 1990 levels by the target period 2008-2012. This meant reducing from 599 metric tonnes to 563 metric tonnes. Instead, under the Liberal government, by 2004, green house gas emissions were up 26.6%, that is up to 758 metric tonnes.
The Liberal government lost ground over 7 years putting Canadians 32.6% behind our Kyoto goals.
We have to wonder what they’ve accomplished in forcing the Conservative government to meet Kyoto targets, which now involves decreasing emissions by 1/3.
The Liberals have engineered the defeat of the Conservative government with regards to a matter so important to us all... our environment. The track record of the Liberals is dismal and yet it is left to the Conservatives to make up for 7 years of increased emissions.
Liberal Leader Stéphane Dion is calling for each sector of Canadian Industry to meet Kyoto targets, with financial penalties for those companies which do not.
Who does Mr. Dion think will be paying for this? If the cost of manufacturing a car goes up because of the need to meet Kyoto targets, Canadians will face inflationary prices on autos. The building and installation of systems to decrease green house gas emissions in manufacturing plants across Canada will be passed on to the Canadian consumer thus causing inflation.
If the price of autos increases, then those businesses which rely on vehicles to run their business will need to increase prices to compensate. Thus Canadians will pay an increased price for their own vehicles. We will also pay an increased price for all other products. We are talking inflation in all areas of Canadian business because there are few businesses which do not use vehicles. Any increase in business is passed on to the Canadian consumer. That’s you and me!
Not only will the price of manufacturing increase but, should Canadian Industry fail to meet their required target, businesses will be forced to pay fines. Where is the money coming from to pay the fines? We all know that businesses will increase the price of their product to compensate for higher expenses. Therefore, the increase is passed on to the Canadian consumer. That’s you and me!
According to Mr. Dion’s plan, this fine could be reclaimed. Is anyone expecting that the company will contact them and refund the portion of the fine which the consumer paid? I wouldn’t hold my breath waiting for the cheque to arrive.
In the end. Mr. Dion’s plan, and the forcing through of legislation by all the opposition parties last month, will cost the Canadian tax payer. That’s you and me!
Politically speaking, who wins? Certainly not the Canadian taxpayer. That’s you and me! The only ones who have won anything will be the opposition parties who can tout the failure of the Conservatives on the environment. A failure which they engineered at the expense of the Canadian taxpayer. That’s you and me!
The CHP does not support Kyoto! We support environmental initiatives which deal with all areas of air, land and water pollution.
Yes! Let’s decrease green house gas emissions ... plus all other pollutants which we are pouring into the air we breathe. Those of us who know and love asthmatics know very well that we must deal with more than just one or two gases to solve the problem with our air. We must have a balanced approach which will involve government, industry, environmentalists, economists, and the Canadian taxpayer, because ultimately we’re the one’s who foot the bill.
| permalink
Saturday, February 24, 2007, 12:28 PM - Environment
How Does Kyoto affect National Sovereignty?
You won’t find submissions to the United Nations on this.
In 2000, when Sovereignty International requested to present to the U.N. at the Hague, the effects of Kyoto on National Sovereignty they were denied the opportunity. They were 69th, out of 110 Non Governmental Organisations (NGOs), in requesting to make a presentation. They were told there wasn’t time to hear from them.
Sovereignty International asked for a booth, at the same time, along with over 100 NGOs. The other booths, in favour of Kyoto, were around the main hall. Sovereignty International was down a long hall, down a flight of stairs, out of sight.
I wonder why that was. What was there about the only voice of dissent that could not be shared with delegates at The Hague?
At the Conference on the Parties 5(COP5), in Bonn Germany. Sovereignty International was given a booth on a balcony overlooking the exhibit area where everyone else was gathered.
At Conference on the Parties 4 (COP4), in Buenos Aires, there was no space granted them. It took the UN 4 days to come up with a location for the Sovereignty International Booth.
One has to wonder why dissent must be hidden so far away! We do know that socialism promotes the control of information to the masses.
Are you feeling controlled by Kyoto yet?
Are you feeling that prick of concern over how long you’ll be able to voice dissent on any politically incorrect matter?
Approximately 3% of the countries are Annex 1 countries and bound by Kyoto’s restrictive provisions. We are an Annex 1 country. The other approximately 97% countries are not bound by Kyoto’s restrictions.
The non-Annex 1 nations are free to use as much fossil fuels as they wish, and are designated recipients of the wealth transfer required of the Annex 1 countries. (Carbon Credits spoken of here)
A country may not stand against an international treaty, such as Kyoto, without facing sanctions, sanctions from the predominantly ‘left’ international community and from the predominantly ‘left’ media. They control the dissemination of news. The opposing viewpoint is silenced.
In any debate where only one side is heard, it is impossible to make an informed decision. We can only make a decision based on the biassed information we are given.
If a dissenting country proclaims, to the U.N. that it is sovereign and able to make their own laws regarding their approach to green house gases, then they are disciplined like a wayward child. If they come into the fold and don’t follow through on the commitment set by the UN, they are disciplined like wayward children. If they come in and obey international law, then they are ‘approved’. This is true whether or not the decisions of the U.N. are well thought out or knee jerk reactions.
The political left has ways of making us agree, including the controlling of information released!
Canada is a democratic country. Democracy is rule by the people. I know I didn’t have the option to vote myself submissive to these UN bureaucrats, did you?
Our Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms guarantees us the right of dissent. The UN has silenced the voice of dissent.
Kyoto makes the U.N., rather than our elected government, authority over: how we use our natural resources; our nations finances; our approach to pollution.
Please remember that we are polluting our environment in other ways which Kyoto does not address. Land, water, and air pollution remain a health concern but Kyoto targets only green house gases. Even if our planet never warms another degree, if we’re all dying from asthma and other environmental health problems, we are really no better off. Canada needs to address all of these areas of pollution.
The UN has shown they will not allow voices of dissent to be heard. If there is no free exchange of ideas, if there is no right of dissent, what happens to our democracy? We will be living under the dictatorship of one world government. An unelected government which the Canadian Legislature is submissive to.
Canada will no longer be a sovereign country.
Does Kyoto affect Canada’s sovereignty? You bet it does!
The opposition forced through a motion weakening Canadian’s voices in this country. It’s time we told the political left that we are not a socialist country and have no desire to be a socialist country.
Vote for a free Canada! Vote for a Canada where public dissent is accepted. Vote for the heritage of freedom which we have historically lived under! Vote for the Christian Heritage Party!
| permalink
Next
