Skip navigation

Global warming

The New Climate Almanac

Globe and Mail Update

Curious facts, dire warnings and inspiration. ...Read the full article

This conversation is closed

  1. Michael Sharp from Victoria, crocus-aganza!, Canada writes: Page one: Planet burns up in fiery catastrophe, six billion killed.

    Page two: There is no page two.
  2. brian bishop from Brantford, Canada writes: All because Gore was burning his global warming reports to keep warm!
  3. mike h from snowland, Canada writes: try reading the entire article... maybe your ADD can't allow you to read more than the headlines or he front page.... im on page 6...gotta go.
  4. Dr. Winston O'Boogie from Liverpool, Canada writes: The cover of the Almanac is hilarious… at first glance I thought it was Harper & Baird ala Laurel & Hardy.
  5. mike h from snowland, Canada writes: Even though it was 15 pages long, it touched upon many of the issues concerning Climate Change. for those of you who want to pick up a good book, the title is Something New Under The Sun by J.R.Macneill good night!
  6. Jasper the Black Lab from Vancouver, Canada writes: Lots of good information and perspectives in this article - I will have to come back later to finish reading it. As with so many things, we have to have to separate the 'truth' from the fluff or hype. Education and intelligent thinking are so important, but are not nearly so widespread as necessary.
  7. Cut The Crap from Canada writes: This is a futurist manifesto, taking the news back to its' roots: the Circus.

    Global Warming is a real phenomenon, but the consequences of GW is pure speculation. Today the speculation is mostly doomsday nonsense with every left-wingnut marching with a sign 'The End is Near !'

    It has all the hallmarks of religious fanatacism.
  8. Normand LaBine from Winnipeg, Canada writes: Wow! That UofT Prof is going to be one popular guy here in Manitoba! Paint-On Solar? I want in on that! My home is perfectly angled to the Sun to get the maximum solar energy benefit year-round. My roof (changing to a French Mansard with 15% slope) will become a Garden Roof) with Steel laminate this year, and also angled to get the most solar energy (Air, Water and Electrical). Manitoba changed the regulations for Hydro to allow us to 'sell-back' extra energy via Net-Metering. They credit your energy 'bank-account' and debit you when you need more. Since we peak at more Sun light than even Miami Florida, it just makes sense to do it! The big plus is that Winnipeg is also one of the best Wind Corridors (most energy potential). But I'm going to pump it down from roof-top whirly-gigs into compressed air, and run my Freezer and Fridge and use the rest for my hobbies! hehe!
    That guy will save me about 40K$ in solar panels and accessories!
    The G&M out did itself on this one. Please DENIERS, don't buy into this, the rest of us will just save more bucks. Lower demand equals reasonable prices. Greenbacks in my pocket.
  9. Normand LaBine from Winnipeg, Canada writes: They should have made into a PDF to download. The Politicians don't need to study a damn thing! Okotoks goes solar? An Alberta sleepy hollow? Well, at least a Calgary 'burb. You Denier types are missing the gig. One of my neighbours is an 83-year old widow. She was paying almost a mortgage payment in gas to heat her 600 foot, single story home. If it wasn't for a WCB pension for her hubby's workplace death, she'd be on the street! We helped her reinsulate and update her furnace (just a bunch of neighbours donating time, she bought the materials) and now she's down to about 30% of what she paid before, and still as fiesty and independent as ever! She's met a 4 tonne challenge, and doesn't even drive! How many seniors go into homes, because they thought that energy would always be cheap? We either do what we need to now, or we lose all that we worked for, our freedom. AND the Environment wins too! I mean if dollars are the only hook that gets you going, think past 65. Personally, I like breathing good air, real sunshine - not smoggy, and good water. With my solar plans, I'll heat the roof top and melt the snow and harvest the rain and boil the whatever comes with it. The City charges me more for sewage, even more for administration fees (writing and mailing the bill) than the actual water I use. The bill is based on how much water I take from the City. No wa-wa, no bill! And those costs won't go DOWN. So don't buy into renewables, please. It will keep the cost low enough for those who do.
  10. mr motoc from Vancouver Island, Canada writes: If you want lies about how 'Global Warming is NOT happening, it's all a fabrication of socialists and lying scientists' all you have to do is (1) go to Faux News NOW, or (2) go to what Mr Harper and his party were saying a year ago.
  11. Normand LaBine from Winnipeg, Canada writes: The banks you prefer 25 year mortgages. People used to buy a home, work in their jobs for 20 plus years and retire in the same home. Politicians today have a lifecycle of 18 months to 24 months, kind of like some creepy-crawly things (what's that tree caterpillar that eats all the GREEN foliage), and the rest of us have to live their short-sightedness, the golf-ball photo ops, and the attack ads we found funny. Nice legacy. Here, we are being informed about what's going on across the country (a rare event, when politics are in play) about practical strategies, challenges to confront, and the economies of scale. If every G&M reader who logs on today, and for a few months reads this, maybe 1 million will act on one or two concepts, or think about it. But I'll bet that only one or two thousand will actually follow up and take advantage of them. At the end of this article's blogging life (what 2 or 3 days?) maybe 400 will post, but the savings available from paycheque to paycheque will outlast the mortgage payments.
  12. The Centrist from Canada writes: And Harper continues the LIE that Kyoto is a 'socialist plot??' What are the conservatives doing about global warming? Blaming the liberals for inaction. What are the Conservatives doing about the health care guarantee? Blaming the liberals for inaction. What are the Conservatives doing about the lie they made on income trusts? Blaming the liberals. What is Harper doing about the RCMP investigation which cleared the liberals? Blaming the liberals. What is Baird doing about climate change? Blaming the liberals... and the list goes on and on. When, if EVER will this far right Harper Conservative government start behaving like it is in government?
  13. Normand LaBine from Winnipeg, Canada writes: Centrist, whether one is oriented to vote Liberal, NDP, Conservative or Green, nothing is getting done. The Feds have a mandate to lead Canada, everyone of the 308 MPs to be a better Nation, at least, if not a better member of the Global community. Has any Political Party even started a blog, a forum, a tips site, at their expense from donations from Canadians, to help inform ourselves about ways to improve our own emissions? They're so damned passionate about the issue in the media, but do nothing! Not even the BLOC! We know the Conservatives are grooming the Oil Patch. We know all that. But what are we doing? Are we taking advantage of this higher awareness and building our own solutions, starting new fabricating shops to build our contraptions, pressing our MPs to change Patent Laws so emission-related inventions get the same fast-tracking as the Pharma/Medical/Chemical patents? Are any of the Parties? Are they giving Canadian individual ingenuity any support to improve vehicle emissions beyond Factory Standards or Factory Equipment At Date of Manufacture? Not even the NDP or the Greens. I'd expect more from them, but they tinted the Liberal economic sustainability vision with a bit more Green food-colouring. This whole thing is way beyond any Federal Party's collective intelligence. It's a grassroots solution that's needed. They don't even include a dialogue with us poor plebes to see if we've got any ideas! Protect the pet industries, placate the Board Of Trade/Commerce and life goes on. For them.
  14. meaghan franey from Seoul, Canada writes: Great article... though I wish I knew it was 15 pgs when I started reading! I like how there were so many different writers contributing to it, I thought it was quite balanced and informative. I also liked how it detailed some innovations in the field of climate change science... hopefully advances like the solar paint and MIT's 'treehouse' will soon be in regular use!
  15. J.C. Davies from Canada writes:
    'Most apocalyptic panics have been orchestrated by political elites to control the masses. The atom bomb and Joe McCarthy's Red Scare justified U.S. imperialism; the threat of AIDS is still used to control sexual activity. But the growing awareness of climate change, Mr. Graham says today, ''if anything, is not convenient to the elites, to industry and governments, but is instead a populist, grassroots movement.''

    What a crock of nonsense! Folks, the people who are peddling the 'global warming' scam are the same people who believe the Cold Wars was a fraud and that the Soviet Union really was our friend and AIDS was cooked up by the CIA... Don't believe any of it.
  16. Mr Fijne from Calgary, Canada writes: Globe and Mail you forgot about liquefaction of the brain resulting in making any catastrophic prediction a must do in the mind of Man Induced Global Warming theorists and zealots. Shame.
  17. Peter Cox from Toronto, Canada writes: What a gigantic waste of newsprint!
  18. Normand LaBine from Winnipeg, Canada writes: J.C. Davies, I don't give a rat's A$$ about the political dementia or the generalist conclusions you arrive at. I care about the fact that Lung Diseases are increasing, that I have to spend more on vitamins to supplement the lack of nutrients in my veggies, fruits, bread, fish and meats. I care about the $200 to $400 per month I save on fuel, electricity, and water costs. (Buying bottled water in Canada is a disgusting political legacy.) In Winnipeg, we should be the last ones to believe that Global Warming might have some truth behind it, since we freeze 7 to 8 months of the year, but we've seen its effects, we've heard the Aboriginals tell the stories of over 10,000 years of father-to-son changes in climate, and we've got some of the best scientists addressing climate issues, right here, funded by donations from REDNECK's in our major universities. The fact is, that just like yours and my skin replaces 2 million cells every day to protect us, Mother Nature isn't waiting for Politicians to act. She's one jealous, protective Mother, and when the sh*t, dust and smog hit the fan, poorly constructed homes will lose. If the extremes in temperature changes and weather patterns don't do us, because we didn't prepare, well the Little Red Hen may be the only one left standing. Besides, it just makes sense to save a bundle. If the OilCo's and traders can profit from shortage fears, then why shouldn't us plebes profit from securing our own resources! Waiting for a clear apolitical strategy, with a commonsense strategy is a waste of money, time and passion.
  19. Sal L. from Canada writes: Pro environment - Reduce Reuse Recycle... not so keen on Kyoto as I still have not read anywhere ( and I've read quite a bit) that explains how Kyoto reduces reductions of GHG on a world level - it seems to be just a money exchange program that is often falsely referred to as a program to reduce pollution. Aspects of the article that were most helpful was the discussion on how to sell the need for change of behaviour without going to the inflammatory rhetoric of 'climate porn' ( is Al Gore listening) and most of all, the initiatives that are being undertaken across the country... wish to read much more on this type of ingenuity. I hope pollution reduction ( smog), water and soil consumption/contamination does not get short shift because of the Kyoto GHG Co2 focus.
  20. Normand LaBine from Winnipeg, Canada writes: Sal L. from Canada. All the carbon-trading does is give governments and companies a delay tactic. They can buy time. They look good. They smell good. And richer economies can try to sell those clean little countries New Tech To Stay Clean, while ours keeps on making crud out of ours. If you recall Paul Martin's comments about Canada's Aid to the Tsunami-affected countries: Every dollar of aid, must have 70% Canadian content. There's not gift in that. The same goes in these carbon-trading deals. We buy from their clean-air, like all the other major polluters, until the clean-air country looks filthy on the books, but in fact remains clean. We get to use them as a lab for our New Tech, and use Canadian resources (tree seedlings, exported cement, straw bales, whatever) to help this poor little paper holocaust. Have a look on the NationMaster website. There's only about 30 major polluters. There's 170 others who have diddly.
  21. J.C. Davies from Canada writes:
    'we've heard the Aboriginals tell the stories of over 10,000 years of father-to-son changes in climate'

    I missed these 'stories', tell me more.
  22. Normand LaBine from Winnipeg, Canada writes: Thanks G&M, I'm going to run some serious web searches beyond google to get up to speed on these new, more economical renewable techologies. Heck if I can paint my own solar generation, how easy can it get? Keep denying folks but don't come a knockin' if you see that's its rockin'. ;))
  23. Normand LaBine from Winnipeg, Canada writes: J.C. Davies, we've got a rich resource here of Aboriginal historical and mostly graphic carvings and parchments describing the changes in climate. The University of Wyoming has appointed itself as the chief archivist of the migrations and developments, cross-referenced with our own archeologists in Western Canada, recording their equivalent of our modern-day history books. The Museum Of Humanity, in Monterrey Mexico, is almost totally dedicated to the history of the major South American, Central American and North American tribal developments for the past 10,000 years, including a detailed graphical display of all 3 continents detailing the migratory patterns. The one we're all familiar with is the Mayan Calendar/Clock. The evidence of cooperation among these migratory tribes, from the Bering Straight down to the southern tip of Chile, is that the 2/10,000 of a second precision would not have been possible without knowing what the other tribes conveyed about their parts of the continents. The US NIST clock is less precise. The University Of Wyoming sells these archives on CDs. The Canadian National Library or maybe our Film Board may have copies you can order to view from your local library.
  24. hsub si eht lived murtinez from Canada writes: Hey maybe newyork flooding would be a good thing for the world. Ok new orleans flooded, president bush doesn't care about black people, newyork flood and president bush ares. enough said
  25. Normand LaBine from Winnipeg, Canada writes: J.C. Davies, here's a broader link to both Canadian and US Aboriginal resources: http://www.thepeoplespaths.net/centersedu.html and this is the Museum of Mexican History in Monterrey, Mexico. not Humanities (I goofed). It's a worthwhile adventure, walking through there. My wife is from Monterrey, and I took advantage of the 2 weeks before my wedding, while she was leaving her exec job, to see the nuts and bolts of the Mexican roots and cultures. Sorry its not in Spanish, but Aboriginal, Inca, Maya, Aztec are good search words in both languages.

    http://www.museohistoriamexicana.org.mx/
  26. Normand LaBine from Winnipeg, Canada writes: J.C. Davies, here's the Museum's Prehispanic virtual room link:
    http://www.museohistoriamexicana.org.mx/museovirtual/rvprehisp1.html
  27. A A from Small Town Canada, Canada writes: Like LaBine I was impressed with the broad coverage of this almanac and want some of this solar paint stuff, too. I'm really impressed with knowing that they are tackling the emissions from making cement. There is a lot of good news in the piece and I needed that. Just when will any federal party put out an intelligent blog on what's available to help us consumers know the best products to purchase that have lower ecological footprints. I'm serious about this; I don't want to know I have to buy a carbon credit card before all of us have a handle on what's really going on. I also want to know really good ways to pressure manufacturers to change their packaging practices. Is there a group already doing this (other than those of us who refuse to buy stuff and stay away from overpackaged products)? I really want the obscene packaging gone. When they were talking about the pee print I immediately wanted to know about work being done on toilet tissue. Anybody know if the G&M is going to update this article? Don't know about you but my family of four is spending at least 20 minutes a day recycling and composting. What's everybody else out there doing? Has anybody visited a recycle operation? What percentage is actually diverted from landfill and how can recycle plants be improved?
  28. Normand LaBine from Winnipeg, Canada writes: A A from Small Town Canada, right on! Why should the politicians steal our time when we need to find the solutions they won't encourage us to share and co-invent in the public domain? Recycling plants haven't been on my touring shcedule. What I have noticed is that not enough people use the Recycle bins. Regardless, the old adages work: One man's garbage is another man's gold. While Bush is encouraging corn producers to make ethanol from it, the fact is that dry weeds and grass make a cleaner burning ethanol fuel. Mother Earth News Magazine had a 1980 article on making your own, from newsprint. But there's a major downside. The sealants and gaskets weren't up to it, back then. Today, we've got RTV sealants (new synthetic rubber) from DOW Chemicals, et al. Storage is acheived in the certified Fuel Oil tanks still used by farmers today. Keeps neighbours and Insurance companies happy. One ingenious Ontario company makes insulation from the recycled plastic beverage bottles. Mexico made synthetic diapers illegal nationally, because they don't decay quickly, and they retain water and air. We don't recycle them into any useable material, either. Maybe our low birthrate is helpful at 1.2 babies per 100 vs 2.8 in Mexico. But the rest of it, we just don't buy. We reuse the shopping bags in the waste baskets, rather than buy new ones. Eggshells go in the compost bin. Metal tins seem like they'll always be recycled because metal prices push the value up, kind of like guys stealing Catalytic converters off hondas for the platinum content or reselling to the owners. ;)) The only way I know of changing the packaging mess is to not buy the products. Nowadays, everything is so fragile, that the styrofoam is in every electronic or vitreous thing you buy. I used it to insulate my basement walls on the outside, binding them with PL300. I've run out of walls to insulate, no electronics for about 5 years. http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel_library/ethanol_motherearth/me1.html
  29. Ed Martin from Montreal, Canada writes: The earth is actually cooling but no one wants to listen.
    Go to: www.numberwatch.co.uk/tenfactsaboutglobal warming.htm - www.iceagenow.com/Growing_Glaciers.htm
    http://science.netscape.com/story/2007/02/02/russi
    and dozens of other sites. If Al Gore would read these sites, I don't think that he would continue his tour.
  30. Normand LaBine from Winnipeg, Canada writes: Ed Martin from Montreal, are you pointing this out because you finally got some winter weather? Its generic name is Climate Change, up or down. Global Warming is just one aspect caused by the envelope of GHG's. Air Conditioners work on heat exchange principles, just like a fridge or freezer. Hydro Carbon gasses are the vehicle for the conversion from heat to cooler. What surprises me is that even Gore is not drawing much attention to Sulfur Dioxides from Coal, NG, and Petroleum fuels or methanes. I worked at Dofasco decades ago, and walked on those coke oven furnaces as part of my new employee orientation. Man! The heat loss and the emissions throughout the metallurgical industry is immense! For Spaceship Earth, the Heat Sink, the absorbant is the Ocean and Forests and Concrete and burnt fields (normal in spring here in the Prairies) and forests (getting worse every year in BC, Sask, MB and Ontario.) Here, this winter, we got our December/January deep freeze 6 weeks late and about 40% colder, and some Weather Scientists speculated that it was coming from Siberia, rather than going normally down through North Eastern Asia.
  31. Normand LaBine from Winnipeg, Canada writes: If the GHG's continue to envelope Spaceship Earth, and make the Ozone layer worse, then we should expect extremes. If the Earth's core is molten (to wit Volcanic eruptions), and the Sun can't get through with all of its infrareds, and Space is usually closer to abolute Zero (-454F), then why wouldn't we have some spots freezing more than others. Ottawa, Washington, London, Bagdhad, Moscow, Beijing sound like good spots to me. :())
  32. Normand LaBine from Winnipeg, Canada writes: A A from Small Town Canada, my wife and I work at making every meal. No packaged food, no premixed recipes. We actually built an old-tyme cool-cellar for our veggies and canning. Yeah, we still do it! We've never had the flu, not even a cold. We've noticed that even local carrots don't have much flavour anymore. You almost have to add carrot-flavouring to a carrot cake. We're planning on building a small green house off the Master Bedroom to grow lettuce and greens during the winter, because it makes no sense to buy US produce, laden with fuel costs. We can buy a 100 lb. of spuds and store them. We bought a 17 cu. ft. freezerless Fridge and a 17 cu. ft. freezer for less than an 18 cu. ft. fridge with freezer, made by a 100% Canadian company, costing less than 20% of it to run both. Get our meat and poultry from a mennonite colony, cut and frozen in paper wrappers at a whole lot less and far more flavourful than the big chains. We think a home should be more than a black hole. It should save and earn its keep. We think we'll be on the receiving end in about 2 more years. That is it will generate income from energy credits. Its paid for, so why not?
  33. G Seyler from Waterloo, Canada writes: That's it, I am now a believer and I will act immediately - I will now call my dog Kyoto. And working on getting all of my wife's 4 cats renamed as well. If I accomplish this feat by 2012 I will have done many times better on the environment file than Citoyen Dion - Dr. Did Little.

  34. Old blue from Canada, Canada writes: What a waste of bytes loading this article onto my computer!
  35. Catch 22 from Vancouver, Canada writes: Thanks Globe and Mail for a very interesting article. Carbon credit cards seem like a promising idea.
  36. David Muller from Cambridge, ON, Canada writes: governement should legislate that the car manufacturers stop making fossil fuel burning cars
    technology is here
    If they want to keep making money selling cars they should change with the times and not this hybrid crap cause is isnt gonna stop the fossil fuel generation from draining the planet

    i love the solar paint and the tesla car and i think government should spend more money researching innovative renewable sources like that

    those two products have the capacity to change the world if we allow it
  37. J Luft from Calgary, Canada writes: mr motoc once again is showing his profound ignorance. He doesn't understand that he has swallowed the UN propaganda in such great volumes that he doesn't even realize that the science of the matter is very much in dispute. He probably doesn't even realize that the nonsensical 'report' that came out from the UN a couple weeks ago has already been shot full of holes by critics......some of whom were even scientists who contributed the science to the UN. The bureaucrats have always taken the science and twisted it beyond belief. They should actually be thrown in jail for such misrepresentation.
  38. David Muller from Cambridge, ON, Canada writes: somehow i beleive global warming will have a more profond affect on us then say the iraq war in which trillions of dollars have been mis spent on misrepresentation of the facts, when they could have been spent on curbing our consuption of fossil fuels

    i dont see anyone (yet hopefully) carting bush and his cronies to jail for obviously lying to his country and destroying his own economy

    the only scientists arguing that GW is a hoax are the ones in the back pockets of the corporations that only care about $$$ sucking iraq dry to keep us from ever changing our ways
  39. A A from Small Town Canada, Canada writes: It's the contrails that GW will have to sign onto on his carbon credit card that will ground his ways long before he's done messing around in other people's business. Can't wait for the day.
  40. Alexander Dryden from Ottawa, Canada writes: Wow! The G&M finally realizes -- through, at long last, the recent comment of most of its highest-paid folk (i.e., most, not all, of its columnists -- i.e., what you pay for w/G&M is 'comment' not 'news' [maybe something to do with G&M's notion of being agenda-setter rather than 'newspaper']) -- that the Kyoto propaganda (provided in large part by its own so-called reporter[s]) has been not only 'propaganda' but unutterable crap. Please let me ask this question: When will the G&M 'question' not only the present but the future employment of its so-called 'environment' 'reporter' (i.e., Kyoto propagandist), but also its rather loose way of assuming that anything from the now-ludicrous CP (almost as awful as it was in the mid-late-'70s [is there a relationship in re. CP with the so-called boss's desire/willingness to show off his/her political bias/stupidity/'incompetence-as-journalist' on CBC or any other TV camera available?]) and anything provided by AP is as God's Word (or whatever marxist equivalent marks as same)?
  41. Bart Farquart from Calgary, Canada writes: Author Micael Crichton in a 2003 speech described environmentalism as 'the religion of choice for urban atheists'

    In that vein it is unclear whether this article constitutes a 'Bible'. Perhaps more of 'Catechism'.

    At any rate I must go now. Pope Suzuki is about to issue an edict.
  42. james cyr from Balmertown, Ontario, Canada writes: I live in northern Ontario, and I am still waiting for the palm trees to appear!
  43. Frosty The Snowman from Great America, United States writes: 'Bart Farquart from Calgary, Canada writes: Author Micael Crichton in a 2003 speech described environmentalism as 'the religion of choice for urban atheists'
    He also wrote a fantastic article on climate change called 'Aliens Cause Global Warming', debunking all the myths surrounding this contentious subject - http://www.michaelcrichton.net/speeches/index.html
  44. robert quinn from Japan writes: Good lines from B. Farquart. The enthusiasm some posters display for the putative demise of the planet and all who reside here is less curious than frightening. And that observation about 'urban atheists' is telling as well. People who lack spiritual grounding will swallow whatever they can to fill that need for compelling emotional involvement in their surroundings.
    From what I've read, if you really want to decrease global warming (such as it might be) try eliminating water vapour, by far the most significant heat trap in our atmosphere. Of course, the true believing eco-warriors might still a march on us and, Raelian-like, hie themselves off to a new, purer plane of existence rather than stick it out to the grim end. Who among us wouldn't admire, nay, encourage that kind of adherence to principles?
  45. ken g from mississauga, writes: Fear sells. Remember the Y2K Fear.
  46. robert quinn from Japan writes: Arrrgh. How annoying. That should be 'blah, blah, blah 'steal' a march, deny, deny, deny.' Bloody editor.
  47. Frosty The Snowman from Great America, United States writes: Another great Michael Crichtion quote:
    'Nobody believes a weather prediction twelve hours ahead. Now we're asked to believe a prediction that goes out 100 years into the future? And make financial investments based on that prediction? Has everybody lost their minds?'
    So true!
  48. Bill H from London, Canada writes: James Cyr - I live in southern Ontario, currently surrounded by frigid temperatures and lake-effect snow. I assume the palm trees will get here first!

    Re the first entry in the almanac - acid seas: the Royal Society must be short on chemists. The atmospheric CO2, dissolved CO2, bicarbonate, carbonate system is an excellent example of chemical equilibrium. If there is excess CO2 dissolving in the oceans it will be precipitated as carbonate rock, eventually, of course, to be harvested by future generations to make cement. Cement manufacturing, by the way, is one of our largests sources of atmospheic CO2, so if we stop pouring fouindation walls for our big subD houses and stop building office towers in TO we would markedly reduce our GG emissions.
  49. Terry H from Moncton, Canada writes: Some points on some of the posters here.
    Cut the Crap your a moron.
    Mr Fijne from Calgary your an idiot. Go back to the tar pits.
    J.C. Davies from Canada, I am ashamed to say I am from the same country as you.
    Alexander Dryden from Ottawa, Canada you are a neocon of the worst type.
    Frosty The Snowman from Great America, United States, you must be someone hired by George Bush and Dick Cheney.
    And to the rest of the non-believers who can't make the connection between hottest years on record and 6 billion people spewing garbage and CO2 in the atmosphere, I hope you live long enough to hear your grandchildren ask you why the earth is dying. I would love to hear who your going to blame this one on.
  50. Clive Gingell from Canada writes: Terry H: The Met Office in Britain has been recording weather since 1854....153 years.

    The National Climatic Data Center in the US has been keeping records since 1895....112 years. Other places, I believe, have been keeping records since 1880......127 years.

    The Earth is around 4,500,000,000 years old, and temperature measuring equipment 100 years, or so, ago was probably not quite as accurate as that which is used today, and could skew earlier figures.

    (BTW: When you say to someone, quote: 'your an idiot', do try and use the correct 'you're', (i.e. 'You are'); otherwise you identify yourself as a semi-literate which tends to diminish the impact of your, (correct usage, i.e 'Belonging to you'), statements).
  51. john meissner from ottawa, Canada writes: Your wide ranging compendium hit most of the notes. For apocalyptic ferver you missed the scientific modelling of (Calgary based, I think) geologists who state that the reshifting of the earth's weight with the melting icecaps will result in significantly more earthquakes. The insurance companies -who have been decades ahead of the curve on this - compared to other businesses, will surely want to diversify. The neocon guardians
    don't want to be fooled by people who would want them to change (witness the letters in this commentary file). Wouldn't it be great if they were not wrong. Still, as we break temperature records every year its hard not to see what is directly in front of us. We certainly need more of Amory Lovins to combine the health of the planet with more imediate economic self interest. I too loved the paint on solar paint. I would refer do-it-yourself affectionados to paper-crete, a home made mix of newspaper and concrete which has good structural compression values, high r-values, and good fire retardent properties. JM
  52. B Littmann from Cantopia, Canada writes: The current Climate Change debate bears all the hallmarks of group think: the purges following marginalization in the IPCC and on campuses; angry attacks as opposed to calm rebuttals (“are you a denier paid by Big Oil?”); key source code unpublished even after being challenged; inability to model the climate retrospectively; etc.

    It sort of reminds me of the months leading up to the Irak invasion: no warning heeded from within or without the government; angry attacks on anyone questioning the “proofs” (“are you with us or with the terrorists?”); claims that key intelligence could not be published for security reasons; etc.

    The wages of group think are always the same: Ca. 2010: welcome to the Climate Sunni Triangle….
  53. J.C. Davies from Canada writes:
    'And to the rest of the non-believers who can't make the connection between hottest years on record'

    The assertion that the past decade has seen the 'hottest years on record' is false. Our planet is approximately 4.6 billion years old, during that time there have been eras when it was colder than today and other eras when it was much warmer. The fact is our planet is always changing, even evolving.

    For some perspective consider that while man (homo sapiens) have been around for approximately 50,000 years, dinosaurs walked the Earth for at least 100 million years.
  54. Cut The Crap from Canada writes: Terry H., alias self-righteous apocalyptic freak, maybe you should hide in your bomb shelter when you’re not marching with your 'repent, the end is near' sign.

    How did you miss your ride on Applewhite's space ship on the other side of Haley’s comet? Maybe you can hitch a ride on the next one and avoid GW.

    I’m sure all this is rational to you. If you have any further questions ask your dog, it worked for you last time.
  55. The Original Pragmatic Pundit from Canada writes: Strange... the climate-change-deniers claim that CC and GW are lefist, socialist conspiracies brought upon us by the UN, feminist groups, and self-righteous apocalyptic freaks in tin-foil hats.... geeez, makes me wonder who the loonies really are. You gotta hand it to these climate-change-deniers I guess, they don't let silly things like education, science, and facts get in the way of their empty rhetoric. You guys are absolutely right, that one scientist from Exxon is obviously correct, climate-change is not happening.
  56. The Original Pragmatic Pundit from Canada writes: Frosty The Snowman: The author of fictional work, Michael Crichiton, is also considered a laughing stock today thanks to his 'quotes' that you bring up. His books used to be very scientific-based and he had a big following due to this, but his last piece of propaganda cost him a huge chunk of this due to his obvious ignorance of science thanks the book you quote.
  57. Frosty The Snowman from Great America, United States writes: Orignal Pramatic Pundit:
    Oh, and I suppose you follow the teaching of that great Towering Intellect, Albert Gore. Sheesh.
  58. Cut The Crap from Canada writes: Such a simple concept yet the apocalypse preachers just can't seem to grasp this....

    GW is real. But predictions about the effects of GW is pure speculation, loaded to the gills with rhetoric and fear mongering to serve political ends.

    I worked research in the chemical industry for many years, and I've been deeply involved with environmental groups in the past. To be honest, researchers in the chemical industry are by far the more trustworthy group.
  59. D A from Canada writes: J.C. Davies:

    'The assertion that the past decade has seen the 'hottest years on record' is false.'

    Not true. The 'record' in this instance refers to the instrumental record of climate measured in the last century and a half (roughly) - thus the original statement is, in fact, correct. You simply chose to take it out of context.

    'Our planet is approximately 4.6 billion years old, during that time there have been eras when it was colder than today and other eras when it was much warmer.'

    Absolutely true. But, during the periods when the earth was much warmer than today, were humans present on the planet? Or in such large numbers, or in such complex societies that depended on environmental complacency? The earth will be just fine regardless of its climate. But, being somewhat egotistical, I am more concerned about the earth I know - that is, one on which humans can prosper.

    'For some perspective consider that while man (homo sapiens) have been around for approximately 50,000 years, dinosaurs walked the Earth for at least 100 million years.'

    I'm unclear why the relative longevity of humans and dinosaurs brings any perspective to this debate. However perhaps this aspect will: dinosaurs are extinct (i.e., they're all dead, excepting birds) because their environment became sufficiently inhospitable that they all died.
  60. Sal L. from Canada writes: Just a thought - anti Kyoto does not equate to anti environment. Reading diverse opinion ( MIT scientist's and others ) is a good thing. I don't quite get why people who think research supporting those with the ' human causing global warming' as being more valid than those finding 'global warming is an evolutionary event of the earth and the human contribution can not be proven to significantly changing the outcome. I have practiced what are now being advocated as 'correct' environmental practices all of my adult life. I resent the 'hype' and money wasted on trying to 'manipulate' the masses vs. 'educate' on a broad base of opinions, and trust that people will do the 'right' things. It amazes me that some expects spend so much time trying to shut down the discussion by promotion of 'fear' vs. facts ( Dr Suzuki you were a childhood hero to me - today you disappoint) . Pollution on the other had has a proven direct links to cancer and other health issues.... Many still believe that the support of Kyoto is about reducing pollution - it is not.
  61. B Littmann from Cantopia, Canada writes: The Original Pragmatic Pundit, nice to see you around.

    The correct term, I believe, is Climate Holocaust Denier.

    During the '70s you probably would have been a fan of the Club of Rome. As you may (or may not) recall, they were the world’s brain trust, laden with Nobel Laureates. Extrapolating trends, they had all the evidence on their side, until, that is, the trends reversed. Just as today all the elites and bona fide scientists were on side.

    It’s not really shocking that they were off here and there. The hammer is that a group of chimps on type writers (or ignorant laughingstock right wingers if you prefer) would have done so much better: 50% correct vs. 0%.

    The supreme self confidence is the surest sign of group think. Just like the Necons bringing Democracy to the Middle East.
  62. Patrick Rioux from Ottawa, Canada writes: Environmentalism has turned into a religion, one with the support of both governments and of men in white coats working in labs. The hunt is on for 'deniers' and 'heretics' who will be silenced by cuts in benefits, state funding and eventually charged under hate speech laws.
  63. bert bert from tor, Canada writes: A lot of all this is just not getting to the root of the problem, and Goverment in using it as a way to get votes from histeria. and we are rightfully histeric. we can quote what happened to this earth in pevious global warming states of thousands of years ago and ice ages but its 'irrelevant' for us now, what is relevant is the fact that this is more about 'global DIMMING' than global arming. when weather temperature research was done during the time after 911 when all the aircraft were grounded for just three days, amazingly the skies went blue and the temperature rose by 1 deg. what that showed was that the effect of the aircraft flying in the sky causing contrails and depositing all the polution for water to collect on acted like one giant mirror from the droplets to reflect a great portion of the sunlight outwards. so we now have global dimming. UP until 911 there was never a chance to evaluate that theory , now there was because all the aircraft were grounded for 3 days. combine all that with the green house gases and we have one heck of a problem,because if we follow the present thinking of trying to remove all the CO2 and greenhouse gases by acting too quickly we are going to make the problem even more severe and possibly raise the temperature of the earth by 10 degrees in a relatively short time...this will be disastrous for food and water and trying to stay alive, the ethiopian famine comes to mind due to displacement of the normal weather patterns due to global dimming. we better be very careful and do this at the proper pace or our children and their children havnt got a chance or if they do its gonna be really really difficult. we don't have till 2020, 2030 or 2050 to find answers to this. too much rhetoric, not enough science or action. This should have been started prior to 1986 its urgent, NOW, we must act very wisely in all this, reduce the dimming and greenhouse gases and let nature and the earth do its thing.
  64. Sal L. from Canada writes: Bert -'A lot of all this is just not getting to the root of the problem, and Goverment in using it as a way to get votes from histeria' - one of the historic patterns of diverting attention is to create a crisis and then claim to be the hero to solve the problem.... my point -Sign Kyoto - 'crisis with a deadline' - then spend huge money selling the crisis and claiming to be the hero with all the answers.... but no results. The problem here is the environment has been the ignored victim. All the time/ money spent justifying a 'document' has meant that time/money has not been spent to change anything. An observation - hysteria paralyzes action.
  65. Sal L. from Canada writes: B Littmann from Cantopia, Canada writes: 'The current Climate Change debate bears all the hallmarks of group think: the purges following marginalization in the IPCC and on campuses; angry attacks as opposed to calm rebuttals (“are you a denier paid by Big Oil?”); key source code unpublished even after being challenged; inability to model the climate retrospectively; etc.'

    - agree with you on this: - to be 'educated' used to mean spending an equal or more amount of time reading and studying the work of those who held a different or opposing view from the direction you were currently leaning - today it appears to be read only what supports your position, you might find something that questions your conclusions otherwise. It is unforgivable that only the summary UN sponsored IPCC document was issued but not the full reports ( the actual scientists studies) and that those reports will be further edited before the UN releases them so that there are no conflicts with the summary. Great damage to credibility of all.
  66. Some Guy from Canada writes: Sal, re the IPCC report - the 'the actual scientists studies', as you put it, are all available, already published in peer-reviewed, scientific journals around the world. Neither the IPCC summary report nor the forthcoming volumes contain any new scientific research - they are syntheses of the existing scientific data.

    I would guess that the time difference in releasing these studies is due to the fact that it is much easier to write and edit a short summary than to finalize a document of thousands of pages. The summary is exactly that - a summary of what is already known to be in the full report. It's not as if the full report is now being edited to conform to the summary, rather that the summary was drawn from the report itself.

    There really is no credibility problem here.
  67. J Luft from Calgary, Canada writes: Of course, the recent revelation that the computer models being used to 'prove' man made global warming are not predicting what is actually currently happening seems to be getting little air time. Could it be that the models are not accurate? Could it actually be that the IPCC is lying? The UN lied, science died!
  68. Sal L. from Canada writes: Some Guy - I will reserve some judgment, it will be an interesting comparision - of the individually published scientific reports and the UN released doucments - to see what the UN has chosen to edit out.
  69. B Littmann from Cantopia, Canada writes: Some Guy, you make a good point on the summary vs. full report. That was one thing that seemed odd to me. Glad you cleared it up.

    Peer-review is meaningful if the 'peers' in question span the whole spectrum of scientific views. If contrarian views were removed, peer-review simply becomes another brick in the wall of group-think. I wonder how many contrarians remain, and of those who do, how many still dare to speak up?

    The credibility problem arises when scientists state that they have to manage the release of their findings to the public, in essence trading off science vs. policy expediency. It is only natural to start second guessing these individuals.
  70. Sal L. from Canada writes: Some Guy - sorry did not finish my thought... all the scientiest did not agree on all interpretations of the data, and some I understand had conflicting data.... is it not in the publics interest to understand what interpretations were excluded from the 'summary' and why?
  71. B Littmann from Cantopia, Canada writes: Hugh Campbell, thx for illustrating my previous point about intimidation. Be careful: in the current climate people might think you're a plant and induct your name in said hall of fame...

    My lefty high-school teacher taught me a valuable lesson: question authority.
  72. J Luft from Calgary, Canada writes: And so Hugh Campbell posts the names of those who he deems to be 'Global Warming Denialists'. So, are we to be marched off to re-education camps, Hugh?

    The IPCC is a scam organization pure and simple. This nonsense about the IPCC being the epitome of honesty in the scientific world is laughable. But Hugh believes them.....bow down to the IPCC, Suzuki and Gore. Hugh Campbell, you are a joke.....and a brainwashed one at that.

    Tell me Hugh, what is your position on the fact that the models the IPCC is using do not work when put to real life? You probably spent a fortune on generators for Y2K as well. Hahahahahahahahahahaha.....Moron!
  73. Hugh Campbell from Canada writes: I apologize to all 'pantheon' members. I wrote that message in anger, and have asked that it be removed. I do know better.
  74. B Littmann from Cantopia, Canada writes: Thanks, Hugh, no damage done.
  75. Clive Gingell from Canada writes: Hugh Campbell: I was once 'arrested' at submachinegun point, by the Iraqi military in Basra, and detained for 12 hours; having my name on a list isn't THAT intimidating.
  76. John L. Murlowe from Colony of Vancouver Island, Canada writes: Carbon trading and buying carbon credits are where Kyoto becomes a fallacy.
  77. John L. Murlowe from Colony of Vancouver Island, Canada writes: I am reminded of the story of the committee of blind men asked to describe an elephant. Each one feels a different part and opines that an elephant is only that which he touches, i.e.: a trunk, a leg, an ear, etc. None sees the larger picture.

    The committee of scientists does not see the full picture.
  78. KEN CAMPBELL from kamloops, Canada writes: In any language Kyoto is a dream it may indeed be true we can look to differences in temperature in many places and suedo scientists can locate their models to produce whatever they wish insuch places. What puzzles me is the sudden rush to tell us the earth is going to disolve if we do not do something. Where were all these guys in the past five years. The doom sayers have been able to scare a lot of people and even if there is some truth in what they say this is producing a fear in some people far any visible effect.
  79. robert taylor from west coast, Canada writes: If Canada wants to reduce ghg then stop immigration. Most immigrants come here from countries where the individual does not produce much ghgs however as soon as they get here they strive to attain the same standard of living as every one that lives here. An other way to look at is if I were to reduce my ghg production by one half you only need to bring one immigrant here that uses only half what I use today and all the good I would have done will be undone.
  80. Cut The Crap from Canada writes: Global Warming is not new to a great many of us who are dismayed at the sudden explosion in the number of enviro-zealots screaming for immediate action. Human activity is changing the face of the earth in virtually every sphere. Even the rate of rotation of the earth has measurably increased as a result of damns which increase the amount of water away from the equator (and hence close to the axis of rotation). The days are indeed shorter than they once were. The issue is not whether human activity is changing the planet. The issue is that the predictions about the effect are ALL ABOUT FEAR, and the hope of political gain through the manipulation of fear. The furious cry for immediate and, in all likelihood, ineffective ‘action’ is not only annoying, it is potentially more damaging than a measured and concerted global effort. Mr. Harper, for all his faults, is by far the clearest thinking, most stable, and most effective leader Canada has seen in a full generation. I hope he can hold out against the fanatics long enough to allow clear heads to prevail. In the words of Rudyard Kipling: 'If you can keep your head when all about you Are losing theirs and blaming it on you,' … … 'you'll be a Man, my son!' It seems that Harper is the only man on Parliament Hill.
  81. Cut The Crap from Canada writes: PS ... anything that comes from the UN should be regarded as crap!

    The UN is too corrupt to salvage and should be dissolved.
  82. Rick Jones from The Island, Canada writes: robert taylor from west coast, Canada: Wow! That is an awesome thesis. I wonder if anyone has ever factored-in immigration to the equation on our rising emissions? For Canadians to decrease any of their household pollution by 50% (energy consumption, car exhaust, waste-water, garbage, etc.) would be significant. But if Canada allowed in the same amount of immigrants, who polluted the same amount, that still would be nil benefit. And before anyone laughs at my analysis, I'm no economist...
  83. Rick and T.C. from Canada writes: The concept of climate change has been around for a while now, at least at an academic level. Now there is this sudden upsurge in interest and passion with regards to CC. I think a real opportunity to make lasting change in our energy use was lost back in the 90s. Now everyone seems to be in panic mode and to tackle this we will need to plan years ahead in order to avoid massive upheaval in our economy. Changing our habits at the grassroots level seems to be the only real option in dealing with this immediately. There are also a host of things government can do to encourage less consumtion (and SAVE MONEY TOO!!), what about new homes, they all come with hot water tanks, what about hot water on demand like in Europe? what about pulling cool air from basements to redistribute to the upper floors in summer to reduce air conditioning, what about heat pumps instead of A/C? Compact fluorescent lighting? the list goes on and on...who will have the political will to take this on??
  84. Brian Klappstein from North Bay, Canada writes: Hugh Campbell:

    I am disappointed I failed to make the 'Denialist Pantheon' list. I can see I'll have to re-invigorate my anti-AGW campaign.

    Regards, BRK
  85. V ADS from North Vancouver, Canada writes: T
  86. Andrew H from Vancovuver, Canada writes: R Taylor,
    Why not stop making silly suggestions that would cause econmic despair for the entire country. Maybe if you cut you emission in half there would be room for another imigrant that I am sure on average use much less than the rest of us when they first move here.
  87. Clem Brown from Metcalfe, On., Canada writes: If I release 5 tons of carbon and buy 5 tons of credits from someone who didn't, where is the net reduction? The only thing that changes is that they (and the broker and exchange) are now richer. They'll probably go out and buy a big car with the money, God knows the brokers will. The Suzuki's and Gore's have no problem flying around the world first class spewing thousands of tons of pollutants into the atmosphere in the name of "Climate change". Soon they will be timing their speeches to co-inside with solar eclipses in the hope the quivering masses will fall to their knees at their feet and beg forgiveness. We need an "Institute for the prevention of Kyoto". The next thing we know they will be asking all their followers to line up for purple cool-aid. It seems to me that these same tactics were used by cultists and snake oil salesmen for centuries. These guys totally ignore the fact that the sun's output is increasing and the direct correlation between climate change and the sun's output. They also fail to mention that as the C02 levels were increasing in the 1900's there was a period when the average temperatures were falling. The ice cap in Greenland is increasing except at the shoreline. There is no measurable rise in the sea level in spite of all model forecasts. By all means, reduce your consumption on all levels but don't join the cult.
  88. Geoff Haskell from Canada writes: Clem brown, Your point is correct - there would be no reduction. But the point is that countries won't want to pay anyone money for releasing GHG so they'll reduce it. That's the hope anyways...
  89. Michael Sharp from Daffodil City, Canada writes: Every generation has it's, "The end of the world is coming!" crowd.

    Funny thing is, every generation is right.
  90. Bob Crowe from Saskatoon, Canada writes: Your writer states: "In Richmond, B.C., residents may need dikes within several decades..." Growing up in Richmond, BC, my wife used to love her daily run on the dikes surrounding the city. So did they disappear under a flood of biblical proportions? Nope. Still there. Richmond's dikes are two feet higher than the highest recorded water level in 1894. Dikes are inspected and upgraded regularly, vegetation removed and river levels monitored.
    http://www.richmond-news.com/issues05/091105/news/091105nn3.html
  91. David Rouleau from Canada writes: I find it totally amazing that a lot of you have the gall to assume that we (Homo sapiens sapiens) are the climax species which was intended to inherit the Earth. We will eventually kill ourselves off and then Mother Earth will resume her natural state of affairs. It is hilarious (and somewhat egotistical) to think that we carry enough weight to alter the natural state of things, especially with our rather feeble knowledge of the Universe. Remember fellow Earthlings...we only know what we THINK we know. All we really have is educated guesses. Cheers!!
  92. Sean Kelly from New Glasgow, Canada writes: Umm, are you serious about that? Maybe Mother Earth will resume her affairs after we obliterate ourselves, but I think we'll be able to do a significant amount of damage before we leave. And then, the sun will swell and earth will be no more.

    That part doesn't really matter. The important thing is that we'll all be long dead by then so we have to do something while we can. Mother Earth is a heckuva lot slower than us.
  93. Joe Osborne from Toronto, Canada writes: Robert taylor is bang on. But for some reason, probably a politcially correct one, no one ever discusses immigration or population control. Eventually, the west will have to tackle this issue and it only makes sense--if you want to control emmisions, at some point in time you are going to have to limit the number of people producing them. As for the economy, we are going to have to come up with an alternative to the longstanding equation of population growth endless consumption = a vibrant economy. This has served us well, but we all knew that it couldn't be sustained forever.
  94. The Loyal Canadian Work Farce from Canada writes: Folks, please, forget about the scientists, socialists, conspiracists, environmentalists, etc. Let's stick to the tried and true scapegoatism that's worked for us these last 40 years - let's blame the weather on the hippies.
  95. Sam Courtney from Canada writes: Ed Martin from Montreal, Canada writes: The earth is actually cooling but no one wants to listen.

    Sorry, but these are not scientific organizations stating these "facts" These are produced by people with a vested interest in ensuring we all bake in hell.

    If you want to do a little research on such sites, look and see how many are supported by the Ultra Orthodox Christians or the Oil industry. It makes for some very scary reading.

    But since the ice age is not mentioned in the Bible, I guess such events can't happen. Same with global warming- returning us to the time of Eden. I guess Adam was a T-Rex, and Eve some sort of sultry Dino.
  96. Sam Courtney from Canada writes: CUT The Crap wrote.
    "Mr. Harper, for all his faults, is by far the clearest thinking, most stable, and most effective leader Canada has seen in a full generation"

    Yeah, the same could be said about Germany in the 1930's and that turned out really well. Harper is NOT a leader in any sense of the word. His style could be called NeoFascist. He knows best on every issue. He has such a great respect for our form of governement. You have no idea what his cadre are capable.
  97. Joe Osborne from Toronto, Canada writes: Sam Courtney, do you know how ridiculous you sound whenever people like yourself compare right wing politicians to Hitler? The stupidity of your statement is only exceeded by your historical ignorance. I am no fan of Harper, or for that matter any of the current crop of federal leaders, but if Harper is a neo-facist, then I guess Dion or Layton can be compared to left wing facists--Stalin perhaps? Cut the crap.
  98. von foopendorf from Canada writes: oh my.. run for your lives! if the terrorists don't get us then our guns or the environment will! would some leftwing hippy party please show me the way and lead me to safety and security? bah! more crap from the fear industry on the left.
  99. Mr Fijne from Calgary, Canada writes: Sadly the Globe fails to mention that Chinese companies are now increasing their production of HCF-23 in order to make huge amount of money through the Kyoto loophole by reducing them later. Funny how you have to check European newspapers to get real information in this country...
  100. Hugh Campbell from Canada writes: Joe Osborne: "Eventually, the west will have to tackle this issue and it only makes sense--if you want to control emmisions, at some point in time you are going to have to limit the number of people producing them."

    Humanity faces the population issue, not just the west, and it is on the radar. It's just not widely discussed yet. From a presentation given 15 Feb 2007 by John P. Holdren, President, American Association for the Advancement of Science:

    Emissions arise from a 4-fold product:

    C = P x GDP / P x E / GDP x C / E

    where C = carbon content of emitted CO2 (kilograms), and the four contributing factors are:

    P = population, persons
    GDP / P = economic activity per person, $/pers
    E / GDP = energy intensity of economic activity, GJ/$
    C / E = carbon intensity of energy supply, kg/GJ

    For example, in the year 2000, the world figures were 6,100,000,000 pers x $7400/pers x 0.01 GJ/$ x 14 kgC/GJ = 6.4x1012 kgC = 6.4 billion tonnes C

    Leverage on the four factors:

    World population: lower is better for many reasons
    GDP/person: not a good lever, insofar as most people think higher is better
    Energy/GDP: can be lowered by increasing efficiency in power plants, vehicles, buildings, industry
    CO2/energy: can be lowered mainly by 1) substituting renewable (hydro, solar, wind, biomass, geothermal) and/or nuclear for fossil energy, or 2) deploying advanced fossil-fuel technology that can capture & store CO2 rather than emitting it.
  101. J Luft from Calgary, Canada writes: The insane comments of Sam Courtney are very typical of radical leftists. His comment about "Newfascists" really smoke out where he is on the political spectrum and that he probably belongs to some wacko Marxist group (a redundant statement there). There is no one more "capable" of horrific abuses than Marxists....not by a long shot.
  102. J Luft from Calgary, Canada writes: Mr Fijne hits the nail on the head. He says "Sadly the Globe fails to mention that Chinese companies are now increasing their production of HCF-23 in order to make huge amount of money through the Kyoto loophole by reducing them later. Funny how you have to check European newspapers to get real information in this country... " Right you are Mr. Fijne.....you sure won't get the real or the whole picture from the G&M, or the Red Star or the CBC. I wonder how much Maurice Strong stands to gain from this Kyoto debacle.....probably will make the money he scammed on the Iraq oil for food program look like small potatoes.
  103. Cecilia Firth from New Westminster, Canada writes: Forget the political grand-standing and gesturing....you can even forget about the spectre of Global Warming. You don't need to believe it.....the question should be, don't you all want clean air, water and food? Bring it down to the most selfish level, don't you want that? That gets you thinking about issues that aren't under question and endless speculation and coincidently, if demanded, starts things in the right direction.
  104. V ADS from North Vancouver, Canada writes: The G&M special was disappointingly shallow and biased. It would have been much more interesting to have heard from scientists with opposing views to the doom-and-gloom scenarios put forward by Gore, Stern, Strong and Suzuki.

    There are plenty of them, including some former IPCC scientists, such as Dr. Landsea, who challenged the IPCC statement linking recent warming to increased hurricane activity. Debate is good.
  105. Cut The Crap from Canada writes: Sam Courtney and other left-wingnuts... Even labeling Harper 'Right of Center' is a stretch.

    Canada doesn't have a true Right Wing party anymore than the US has a viable left-wing party. The only meaningful North American left-right division is:

    Canada = Left
    USA = Right
  106. Alester Crowely from NorthBay, Canada writes: Whether climate change even exists is immaterial. This is about not polluting the air we breath, the water we drink and the ground we plants crops in. According to the logic that many use, it's okay to crap in your own pants since you can clean it up later, and it's okay to throw those pants in the broom closet because people rarely go in there. I'm sure that everyone will agree that while you could still live there after months of this behaviour, would you want to?
  107. Alester Crowely from NorthBay, Canada writes: Cut The Crap from Canada writes: "Sam Courtney and other left-wingnuts... Even labeling Harper 'Right of Center' is a stretch..." While the comment is ostensibly true, I can't help but think it would be more credible if you weren't guilty of the same hyperbole.
  108. Cut The Crap from Canada writes: Frosty the Snowman and Patrick Rioux,

    I agree, ...Environmentalism is a new religion, and maybe that's a good thing if we can hold that perspective. After all man as integral with the earth, and the interconnectedness of all life is a far better starting point for moral and theological discussions than 'we are not of this earth,' and 'heaven is elsewhere.'

    GW is a reality, but the problem continues to be the apocalyptic predictions which are preached with insane fanatical certainty. That part is not science, but a result of media frenzy and political opportunism. The predictions are pure speculation. It is prudent to take action to combat all forms of polution, including those which cause GW, regardless of the 'possible' effects on climate. I don't like garbage on the streets, plastic wrap at the beach, broken glass in the park, smog, or sunburns, ... just to mention a few.

    But spreading paranoia and panic solves nothing, it just creates more problems. That's the Left today... all panic and paranoia, eager to waste our resources in order to have the appearance of action.
  109. Sal L. from Canada writes: Alester Crowely from NorthBay, Canada writes: ...This is about not polluting the air we breath, the water we drink and the ground we plants crops in."

    I'm sorry you are wrong. Kyoto is only about GHG reductions it is not about reduction of "pollutants" that you describe. It is why anti Kyoto does not equaluate to anti Environment and also why many oppose Kyoto.
  110. Cut The Crap from Canada writes: Alester Crowely ... point well taken! ... I do shoot my mouth off from time to time. . .
  111. Cecilia Firth from New Westminster, Canada writes: Thank you, Alester Crowley, for driving my point home....
  112. James Cyr from Balmertown, Canada writes: Alester Crowely is totally correct. Climate change is a metaphysical fact of nature; it has occurred in the past, and will occur in the future many times. The issue is not to "reverse climate change" it is to clean up all forms of pollution. Pollution is not good for any form of life, and every attempt should be made to eliminate or reduce it. This is applicable both on an individual are corporate basis. In addition, it is time for alternate energy sources to come on stream. After all, evolution does not just apply to life forms!
  113. Tim Rutkevich from Toronto, Canada writes: Thank you G&M for comedic relieve. I did not want to comment before actually reading it. But after skimming through about half of it, I had enough of good mood to drop it. I am wondering how many people know what ................ (insert one of these: dramatic, cataclysmic, catastrophic, apocalyptic, etc) Climate Change/formerly know as Global Warming is? What were the methods used by scientists to come to this conclusion?
  114. agent sixtynine from Calgary, Canada writes: A few back of the envelope calculations:
    Canada is currently 220 million tons/year over our Kyoto commitment. As an aside, oil sands activity accounts for 27.5 million tons/year. Even if we were to cease all oil sands activity in Alberta, we still wouldn’t be close to meeting targets. But I digress, CO2 emissions credits were trading at roughly $30/ton in 2005. Likely higher now but I&8217;m not sure. The current cost of meeting our Kyoto obligations should cost Canada $6.6 billion/year. Please feel free to correct my numbers if erroneous.
    Perhaps some socialist out there think that this is a small number but in reality it would totally decimate our economy and infrastructure within a few years as spending from other programs is diverted to the latest socialist cause. Hope nobody gets sick because there goes our health care system and pension plans.
    The best solution would be to increase taxes on personal fuel consumption and just purchase the $6.6 billion in emissions credits. The cost of achieving physical reductions will be much greater in the long run.
    http://www.separationalberta.com/
  115. Christine Best from Toronto, Canada writes: Any of you people would have more credibility if you had ever read a scientific article in a peer reviewed publication. By the questions ("how do these scientists come up with this stuff?") you clearly demonstrate your lack of understanding of the basic - and very rigid - rules of credible scientific discourse.

    I realize that in this age of the internet and mass television media everyone feels each and every word carries equal weight. This is not the case! A little critical thinking and fact checking goes a long way to help you know what you're talking about.

    I'm sure I could find "scientists" (or other "authorities") that would demonstrate the the world is flat, smoking is good for you and seat belts are dangerous. Just being able to find the statements doesn't make them true.

    So please - if you are really interested, read the IPCC reports and double-check anything stated there. If you find an error or flaw that indicates we don't have any problems, the authors would be overjoyed. They have families with futures, too.

    And for those of you who agree we may have a problem but humans didn't cause it - mother nature has....does it really matter how the hole got in the boat? Standing around arguing about it isn't going to help the situation one bit!

    And as for "agendas", I can't begin to think of what would motivate thousands of the worlds scientists to perpetrate a fraud like this. I can, however, easily see why people who are dedicated to quarterly profits (not even longterm sustainability) might be very bothered about any possible blips in their plans. How can we search for "hidden" agendas and ignore the agendas sitting out for all to see?
  116. Tim Rutkevich from Toronto, Canada writes: Agent Sixtynine: actually now emission credits prices are down significantly. I have heard the 1$/Metric Ton. I would still not want Canadian government to buy them. First it would raise the prices, second, there are oversupply of credits because EU especially issued way too many of them, thus it is rewording bad behavior. Christine Best: I am waiting for scientific IPCC third draft. I have read the second. What I see is that Thirds Scientific IPCC draft is getting edited to support political Executive Summary that you are referring to. Just because you have read the Summary for a couple of articles does not make you educated on the subject. From your written opinion it I can observe that you do not have much of science background. As for 'agendas', if you would invest 20 years of your life into cause that is faulty, you would not want to admit that you are wrong. This is the case with paleoclimatologist's. Scientists are people like us, common folks. They are not gods. Money is the fuel of science. If you admit that you are wrong, no one will give you grants. There is much more at stakes for scientists than for oil companies. It is funny that fraud is happening in the areas of most visible science. Just remember the former Supreme Scientist of Korea who did publish in peer reviewed Nature and Science. I could continue on and on. The science is called science as long as there are skeptics that questions everything even biggest authorities. When questions stop being asked, it becomes religion. That is why I have problems with "science of climate change". There are real observations of interesting things going on in the lower atmosphere that we don't have explanations yet. We don't know full thing of cloud formations, hurricane formations, we can not predicts weather more than couple of days in advance. Suddenly there are people who predict bad things well in advance. It is not science.
  117. Sal L. from Canada writes: Trying to understand - for those in the "know" how is the value of the new to be developed CDN technology determined in relation to acknowledged CDN GHG quota - i.e.: if the efficiency of the new technology costs equate to a reduction of GHG at say a $40 a tonne rate ( determined by a depreciation of investment costs over a 10 yr period) and foreign carbon credits are then traded at $20 / $30 a tonne -is the technology worth the capital cost to develop - if not valued at the $40 rate why would anyone put dollars into development?

    (Supply of fuel in Ontario today is not a pretty picture at the pumps - immediate reduction in GHG yes - good, not so)
  118. Sal L. from Canada writes: How does one recover the cost of developing new technology at Cdn labour rates (vs. China's labour rates) when there is an inability to pass those cost on to the consuming person / country?
    This is where I cannot follow the arguments of "there will be new industry in Canada" - it will be too expensive to manufacture the "product" for years to come until 3rd world labour is as expensive as ours. Seems that anything beyond the "ideas of the intellectual property" development ( that is then not well protected /enforced in the world arena) just doesn't seem to be a realistic expectation. How much of the displaced “labour” can be absorbed in a re-educated (takes time - 4 yrs to upgrade) pool.

    Canada should be allowed to pass to foreign buyers the GHG "factor" on a unit of product along with the products; and Canada should be allowed a clean credit for the exported product that is generated in Canada without GHG emission when that product displaces GHG producing product within that country i.e. : electrical power from Quebec to the USA> ruling of Kyoto - no credit allowed to Canada.
  119. Christine Best from Toronto, Canada writes: Tim Rutkevich, you are incorrect about my scientific background and what materials I am using to form my opinions. I would also like to point out that many of the scientists involved in the IPCC work are not dependent on grants, so that motivation doesn't hold true.

    Because of the IPCC multi-layered peer-review process, by your theory we would have to accept that there is a conspiracy (with weak motive) rather than a consensus of understanding.

    Clearly the science gets summarized and simplified in the course of creating a executive summary. The scientific documents and data on which it is based don't get changed.

    Admittedly, peer reviewed journals can make mistakes. They are quite rare and tend to come as a result of fairly ambitious fraud. With a multi-layered review process such as the IPCC is using, any existing fraudulent articles would have also been included, reviewed, and compared with others. This would have most likely exposed them as being far off base from others, prompted further investigation and conclusions would be drawn from there. Maybe they would be proven right, maybe not.

    And as you pointed out, scientists are people too. Often they are quite a competitive bunch. Wouldn't you think that any scientist that could finally and credibly prove an accepted scientific position to be false would jump at the chance? Joining the "group think" won't get you a Nobel.

    We just may have to accept that a credible, scientific argument to do nothing just hasn't come forward and survived the test of scrutiny.

    As for your statement that there is more at stake for the scientists than for the oil companies - you don't really believe that, do you? I'd almost believe that the oncologists have almost as much at stake as the tobacco industry. But there will always be climate science as long as there is a climate, there will not always be oil companies if we move quickly away from fossil fuels.
  120. Normand LaBine from Winnipeg, Canada writes: I love the Antique Road Show. People used to create incredibly complex things and finishes that lasted 100 or more years. Today, we have a disposable range of cars, radios, tv , appliances, made of materials that don't decompose or can't be recycled, so they get buried or burned. The political game is a sideshow. The reality is we can and need to make better choices. I've got new Bosch Appliances and recently updated a 1946 GE/Moffat Dual Oven range, with new commercial Rockwool insulation. It cooks faster than our new Jenn Air Gas wall oven. I've was given a near-mint 1934 Speed Queen Ringer Washer, that saves more water than my very miserly Bosch unit. Our car-makers keep adding complexity to their offerings, yet they aren't user-upgradeable, unless you want to add more Horsepower. You can't tweak them to be less polluting. I've tweaked my 1979 Fairmont Wagon to go from 20 mpg to 40 mpg, and I'm planning to switch it to a diesel engine that was made for 1996 Ranger, getting 55 mpg. Then I can make my own ethanol from newspapers and paper packaging. The politicians are playing our strings, and none, NONE of them want this to go away. While we navel-gaze their Green motherhoods, others are wondering about the Global Marketplace and Global Water shortages, and Global Health. We started the UN as the League Of Nations, and now we're not even a 3rd row fiddler! We should be grabbing the tips in this Almanac and inventing our own better ideas and Green Industries. Let the Politicians play their self-agrandizing games and become Legends in their own minds. Meanwhile lets clean up our little corner of Canada. I said earlier that maybe 400 would post after 3 or 4 days. Not even 30% of that have posted. We're tired of the Politics. Lets share our tips, while its still here!
  121. Sal L. from Canada writes: Normand LaBine from Winnipeg, Canada writes:share our tips - done all the little things of filling all the air leak gaps in the house, drive a 92 4 cylinder car that has less than 120,000 km. planted as many trees as I can fit on my lot, grow own veggies in summer. Biggest commitment was cancelled warm winter vacation for 3 years to save to buy LowE/Argon windows. Would like more info on how Composting - locally ie my back yard is any different than the same process happening at the dump and what do I do with the extra dirt... can raise the grade only so much, also like to hear more on "grey water" recycling from house to garden... safety / chemical/ logistics.
  122. ivan more from Canada writes: Christine Best from Toronto, Canada: Take a look at the Kyoto Protocol and ask yourselves how creating a carbon emission trading bureaucracy makes this planet even one degree cooler. Koyoto will accelerate globalization by encouraging companies to move from our highly - regulated Canada to India, China , Russia ; thus lowering our standart of living. In effect it's socialism disquised as science by our environistas. In 1988, the UN's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) was formed, wich issues periodic Summaries for Policy Makers(SPM) - wich tend to be more political than scientific, and advances the myths of Kyoto. Wellcome to the New World Order !!!!!!!!!!!!! This treaty is actually a giant wealth redistribution scheme, socialism on a global scale that taxes wealthy, industrialized countries by forcing them to by carbon emission credits from poorer countries through a virtual (PHONY) carbon market, while not reducing the world's pollution by one single molecule. And the traders(somebody friends) will become multy millioners over night !!! No wonder Dion,Duceppe, and Jack love it(socialists) Or you just ignore the man behind the curtain, name your dog Kyoto, your cat Emission, and pretend you are doing something.
  123. Normand LaBine from Winnipeg, Canada writes: Sal L. Grey water solutions are easier to find if you use the American spelling GRAY Water. There's some really neat stuff coming out of Oregon on that and composting techniques. Our home was built before 1911. It was one of the few houses that the Feds never touched with their Urethane Foam campaign, but it had an insulation value of R-5, when we had it tested, in 2000. I wasn't about to buy commercial windows, because I knew how simple it was to build my own. So I built my own QUAD-Pane casement windows and made the exterior panes using a new acrylic with a bonded glass coating, to make them snowball-resistant. I used my own glass, cutting it to size, I made my own spacers (5/8" on the outermost, and smaller spacing for the remainder to cut street noise.) The big companies wanted $1500 each. I buit 6 double casement units and two half-width units, for less than $1000. I have R-2 on my Windows, R-33 walls (3" foam slabs on the outside and 6" Rockwool on the newly firred walls). I moved all my plumbing in the basement to one side of the house length to reduce heat loss and simplify my Rain Harvesting and solar heated water recovery plumbing (next stage). With the roof garden this year, we'll have R-52 roof/attic insulation and no need for AC. There's all kinds of DIY window sites, roof-garden documentation even on the Feds' own NRC pages. You can even arrange your fencing to reduce snow-drifting and shovelling: http://irc.nrc-cnrc.gc.ca/pubs/cbd/index_e.html Water handling: http://www.ec.gc.ca/water/e_main.html So why doesn't our government send an info blurb about all the resources we already paid for?
  124. Barry Prentice from Winnipeg, Canada writes: Not-so-permafrost - why do commentators continue to reference the Hindenburg when airships are raised as a solution to environmental problems? The "Casey Jones" would not be referenced with regard to rail technology and the Hindenburg has no more relevance to modern airships than a steam locomotive has to high speed electric trains. Environmentalists seem to have a blind spot with regard to airships. Here is a technology that does not tread upon the tundra and could be the most efficient zero emission commerical frieght vehicle. Hydrogen as a fuel could be easily contained at low pressures because airships are so large. Helium, which is inert, would provide the lift. Advances in composite materials, vectored engines and engineering advances mean that no technical barriers remain to the development of large, safe, modern airships. Approximately 12 groups are pursuing this technology in 8 different countries around the world. Whether lifting natural gas from the Arctic is a good use for airships requires further study, but the materials exist to build modern freight airships that could lift 250 to 300 tonnes, or about three times the Hindenburg's lift. Airships could reduce damaging GHG emissions by replacing jet airplanes that are carrying cargo across the oceans. Air cargo is a rapidly growing area of transportation, but most freight does not need to travel at 800 kilometres per hour. Airships at 130 kilometers per hour could replace the reduce GHG emissions of jet aircraft and lower costs, too. Smaller airships could mitigate the impact of the changing climate in the north that is making ice roads unrealiable. Remote communities and resource developments could be more sustainable with year-round airship freight transport. Airships are a "green" technology that deserves a hard look. We have created a not-for-profit research institute called ISO Polar Airships to do this. For more information we invite you to visit www.isopolar.ca
  125. P T from Calgary, Canada writes: THE MEDIA HAS BEEN FULL OF STORIES ON BILL C-288 WHICH CALLS FOR ENFORCEMENT OF KYOTO. I NOTICED THEY
    SEEM TO GET THE KYOTO TARGET WRONG ALMOST EVERY TIME. A LITTLE RESEARCH CONFIRMED MY INITIAL IMPRESSION.
    AROUND 90 PER CENT INCORRECTLY REPORT THE TARGET AS A "SIX-PER-CENT EMISSIONS DROP FROM 1990 LEVELS BY
    2012." KYOTO ACTUALLY REQUIRES CANADA TO REDUCE HER AVERAGE ANNUAL GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS DURING THE
    PERIOD 2008-2012 TO SIX PER CENT BELOW THEIR LEVEL IN 1990. THAT IS A HUGE DIFFERENCE. KYOTO CALLS ON US ON TO
    REACH THE TARGET, AND HOLD TO IT, IN JUST 10 MONTHS — NOT A RELAXED SIX YEARS OFF IN THE FUTURE.
  126. Elizabeth Bartosinski from Summerland, Canada writes: Anyone has seen the movie Who Killed the Electric Car? How about space exploration? How much ozone is burnt up by rockets carrying satelite dishes? How about the 3-4000 sqft luxury homes, for two or maybe three people? How about 6 litre trucks for communting?
    Only fossil fuels add to global warming. Human breath does not, neither do animals, or burning wood or stubble. How about the 80% of forest that has been destroyed since the beginning of the 20th century?
    Instead of an article dealing with theories of doom and destruction, could we hear about solutions?
  127. Frank N. Stein from Centerville, Canada writes: FREE Mud huts and donkey carts for everyone. Who is going to give up thier lifestyle first? I'll bet no granola munchers in this group has given up thier house and car yet to save the world.

    How can cutting our CO2 emissions by 30% of our global 2% even get close to saving the world? All while USA/China/India will continue towards doubling their current CO2 levels.

    Even if the Canadian government beat every Canadian citizen into a mud hut and donkey cart, there would be no net CO2 change. Wrecking our economy will do absolutely nothing.
  128. KEN CAMPBELL from kamloops, Canada writes: I have just read my letter posted above and regret to note the full story does not appear to be as I sent it in. So what it happens. In any event the following might be of interest as it applies to the rising seas of Climate Change. I was born within 500 metres of the Moray Firth on the North Sea in Scotland and have travelled home every two years , I am now 96 years of age and in that period of time I note the the tide up or down has not deviated scarcely an inch from where my home is situated. Lucky maybe?
  129. GlynnMhor of Skywall, Azeroth from Canada writes: Some Guy from Canada writes: "Sal, re the IPCC report - the 'the actual scientists studies', as you put it, are all available... There really is no credibility problem here."

    Here's the actual public domain report, the part called 'the science basis'. In it there is not one single climate model that successfully replicates the last century of known temperature changes.

    (note that an underscore must be inserted after 'ipcc' and before 'tar', as the G&M site misuses underscores as formatting tags)

    http://www.grida.no/climate/ipcc_tar/wg1/index.htm

    This leaves a great deal of credibility problem, since it is solely on the basis of these same hopelessly inadequate models that the next century of disaster has been predicted.
  130. GlynnMhor of Skywall, Azeroth from Canada writes: Miracles! The URL I mentioned above still has its underscore in it!
  131. Ian St. John from Canada writes: "GlynnMhor of Skywall, Azeroth from Canada writes: Here's the actual public domain report, the part called 'the science basis'. In it there is not one single climate model that successfully replicates the last century of known temperature changes."

    The scientists disagree. So, believe a troll on the G&M or the scientists. Hmm. The Scientists. Yup. Not much of a dilemma actually.

    "This leaves a great deal of credibility problem,"

    Your crediblility has never been a problem. You have none.

    "since it is solely on the basis of these same hopelessly inadequate models that the next century of disaster has been predicted."

    And your posts on what you 'believe' are even less of a problem since you have no credibility. Your blanket and unsupported assertions could be made by Paris Hilton and they would have about as much authority.
  132. Ian St. John from Canada writes: "Frank N. Stein from Centerville, Canada writes: FREE Mud huts and donkey carts for everyone. Who is going to give up thier lifestyle first? I'll bet no granola munchers in this group has given up thier house and car yet to save the world."

    Non-sequitur. Nothing says that we have to give up amenities. We just have to reduce emissions(pollution) when manufacturing or using those amenities. This may require some adaptation but no deprivation.

    "How can cutting our CO2 emissions by 30% of our global 2% even get close to saving the world?"

    That is like every litterbug saying that even if he doesn't drop the wrapper litter will continue. It is true that everyone has to have the same attitude or it won't be effective but it EVERYONE HAS TO DO THEIR PART and the rest follows.
  133. Ian St. John from Canada writes: "Frank N. Stein from Centerville, Canada writes: "All while USA/China/India will continue towards doubling their current CO2 levels."

    Show that it is a major concern, penalise nations that don't conform and pretty soon, everyone will be producing less emissions. But you have to 'walk the walk' or you are just a bag of wind ( really, you are just a bag of wind).

    "Even if the Canadian government beat every Canadian citizen into a mud hut and donkey cart, there would be no net CO2 change. Wrecking our economy will do absolutely nothing. "

    Sure. But then it isn't about wrecking the economy. Another red herring non-sequitur or maybe demagoguery? Either way, it is a waste of electrons trying to communicate with a fool like you.
  134. Ian St. John from Canada writes: "KEN CAMPBELL from kamloops, Canada writes: I am now 96 years of age and in that period of time I note the the tide up or down has not deviated scarcely an inch from where my home is situated. Lucky maybe? "

    Well maybe. Other areas of England are being eroded by a meter a year or more from the rise and London had to put in barriers against the tides.

    It all depends on the specific combination of glacial rebound, the reduction of the 'gravity bump' for greenlands ice sheets and rising ocean levels. Every point of land will have a different change between land and ocean reference points. And a few inches vs several feet of tidal range may be hard to see visually.

    We do have good information on the overall sea level from precise satellite measurements of the total and sea level is rising. You will probably notice when it reaches seven meters ( in a few centuries). Lets talk when you reach your second century.. ;-)
  135. Ian St. John from Canada writes: "agent sixtynine from Calgary, Canada writes: Canada is currently 220 million tons/year over our Kyoto commitment."

    No. The last complete inventory was for 2005 ( and 2006, 2007 showed declines not increases) which was 747-563=184 Mt. (http://tinyurl.com/yrgk6n ) The major increases have been in BC/AB/SK because of oil production and coal power plants, as well as ON due to the reduction in nuclear vs coal. This last will be corrected soon.
  136. Ian St. John from Canada writes: "agent sixtynine from Calgary, Canada writes: As an aside, oil sands activity accounts for 27.5 million tons/year.

    (http://tinyurl.com/24ysqw)
    "The majority of combustion emissions from the upgrading of heavy oil and bitumen to produce synthetic crude oil are included in the Manufacture of Solid Fuels and Other Energy Industries category."

    This category has increased to 55 mts over the 1990 to 2005 period, almost all due to increases in oil sands. Note that this figure does NOT include the 'mining' of the oil sands ( a major emissions) or the electricity power generation ( mostly coal fired) to run the operations which is listed under power generation. This underestimates the contributions significantlly because it takes quite a bit of both.
  137. Ian St. John from Canada writes: "agent sixtynine from Calgary, Canada writes: "Even if we were to cease all oil sands activity in Alberta, we still wouldn’t be close to meeting targets."

    True. You cannot put it all on to one industry. The major emissions categories are oil and gas production, coal fired power plants, transportation ( big rigs) and then upgrading. After that comes home and business heating ( insulation helps).

    However, with most of the nuclear power coming back in Ontario and thus closing the four coal power plants, the remaining increase over 1990 is almost all in Alberta, Sask, and BC and almost all due to fossil fuel production or use. This is where a large part of any decrease should come, first by improving electricity generation ( new coal plants?) or replacement by some nuclear ( maybe in the oil sands?).
  138. Ian St. John from Canada writes: "agent sixtynine from Calgary, Canada writes: But I digress, CO2 emissions credits were trading at roughly $30/ton in 2005."

    Not an issue. The issue is to reduce emissions not 'pay for them'. Heck, there may not be any Annex I parties with credits to spare anyway! They all have their OWN targets to meet. This red herrring is getting to smell a LOT.

    "http://www.separationalberta.com/ "

    Ahh. Sorry. I though I was talking to someone with at least a little intelligence. Get over it. The oil and gas industry in Alberta is NOT the big moneymaker people think. It only generates a small part of Albertas wealth while generating a major part of its problems. With support from the federal level the issues can be fixed or at least reduced a lot. If you have to act like a 'banana republic' then I guess you have to but I don't believe that this is widespread.

Comments are closed

Thanks for your interest in commenting on this article, however we are no longer accepting submissions. If you would like, you may send a letter to the editor.

Report an abusive comment to our editorial staff

close

Alert us about this comment

Please let us know if this reader’s comment breaks the editor's rules and is obscene, abusive, threatening, unlawful, harassing, defamatory, profane or racially offensive by selecting the appropriate option to describe the problem.

Do not use this to complain about comments that don’t break the rules, for example those comments that you disagree with or contain spelling errors or multiple postings.

Back to top