- Ms Kaye is a Tyee Builder. You can be, too.
- Mary Carlisle is a Tyee Builder. You can be, too.
- Prem Gill is a Tyee Builder. You can be, too.
- Nancy Flight is a Tyee Builder. You can be, too.
- Justin Everett is a Tyee Builder. You can be, too.
- John Westover is a Tyee Builder. You can be, too.
- Nora Etches is a Tyee Builder. You can be, too.
- Edward Henderson is a Tyee Builder. You can be, too.
- Bharadwaj Chandramouli is a Tyee Builder. You can be, too.
- Dean Chatterson is a Tyee Builder. You can be, too.
- Marius Scurtescu is a Tyee Builder. You can be, too.
- Robert Parkes is a Tyee Builder. You can be, too.
- James Murton is a Tyee Builder. You can be, too.
- Susan Doyle is a Tyee Builder. You can be, too.
- Vincent Strgar is a Tyee Builder. You can be, too.
- Helen Spiegelman is a Tyee Builder. You can be, too.
- Subir Guin is a Tyee Builder. You can be, too.
- Kimball Finigan is a Tyee Builder. You can be, too.
- Joanne Manley is a Tyee Builder. You can be, too.
- David Leach is a Tyee Builder. You can be, too.
Global Warming Demands Local Fixes
Half of greenhouse emissions are controlled at municipal level.
Dawson Creek's Kruk: 'Renewed optimism'
Plum in the middle of B.C.'s oil and gas boom, Dawson Creek Mayor Calvin Kruk is never far from a reminder of Canada's dependence on oil.
"I can see a flare stack from where I'm sitting right now." he said, talking by phone from his home in the city of 11,000 last Saturday. "The place is buzzing with oil and gas activity."
The working-class municipality of Dawson Creek, however, is so ahead in implementing green initiatives it's uncanny. City hall has already been fitted with solar panels and the cop shop is next in line. Green retrofits planned for public buildings are projected to cut back 43 million tonnes of greenhouse gases per year. The town is looking at adopting its own green vehicle policy, and considering building a bio-diesel plant.
Perhaps most ambitiously of all, Dawson Creek is pushing to invest, along with government and industry, in a $200-million wind energy project that will line a ridge just outside of town.
"I'll also be able to see those from where I'm sitting right now," noted Kruk, who is in his first term as mayor.
At a time when both federal and provincial leaders are falling over each other trying paint themselves green, a new book shows that when it comes to global warming, B.C.'s civic leaders are already rolling up their sleeves. Going for Green profiles a number of flinty local leaders who are well ahead of the curve -- and last week's throne speech by Gordon Campbell.
They have every chance of making a solid impact. A recent study showed that up to half of all greenhouse gas emissions have to do with decisions made in municipalities.
'Closest to the ground'
Kruk and Dawson Creek are a great example of what former Victoria school board chair Charley Beresford sees as an important -- albeit minority -- trend in the province.
Beresford is the director of the Columbia Institute, the Vancouver-based group that published Going for Green as a means of offering up real-life, home-grown examples of leading-edge community projects in B.C.
"We have a lot of innovation at the local level," she noted from the Institute's offices in downtown Vancouver. "What we'd like to be able to do is share those stories to inspire local governments to continue in that work."
From converting polluted industrial land into a model sustainable neighbourhood in Victoria to creating an unprecedented organic composting system in Ladysmith to encouraging award-winning green building practices in Ucluelet, Beresford says the province is rife with innovation and ideas.
Those ideas will be key for dealing with our expanding ecological footprint, she said, and for prodding less active communities into action. According to a recent report in the National Post, B.C. has one of the worst records for increases in carbon emissions in North America: they've jumped by 30 per cent in the province between 1990 and 2004.
Given Gordon Campbell's new and aggressive targets, that trend is slated to be reversed, and Beresford thinks civic leaders are uniquely poised to accomplish a lot of that work.
"This is the level of government that communities have the most trust in, because it's closest to the ground."
Based on his first year as mayor in Dawson Creek, Kruk agreed.
"I certainly hear from people. They're not shy about stopping me at the Safeway and saying, 'You know, what the hell gives with this?'"
"At this level people perceive us as a bit more available. We directly affect them."
Getting off the grid
In last week's throne speech, Campbell further announced that he wants B.C. to be self-sufficient in terms of electricity by 2016.
Forty minutes north of Vancouver in the 1,400-resident village of Anmore, Mayor Hal Weinberg has already been working to make that target a reality for the last five years.
Anmore is building a state-of-the-art renewable energy centre, something that might well become a feature in towns and cities across the province and around the world.
Along with a consortium of universities, federal and provincial governments and B.C. Hydro, Weinberg is spearheading a ground-breaking experiment that will combine wind, solar and hydro energy to produce electricity -- in addition to a form of hydrogen used for cleaner-burning internal combustion engines. The design of a control system to handle multiple sources of renewable energy hasn't been done in a micro-scale project like this before.
En route to a conference and speaking by phone from Salt Lake City, Weinberg described the rationale behind the project.
"The whole idea was to try to demonstrate how small municipalities can produce electricity for the purpose of decentralizing electricity production throughout the province as a whole," he said.
"Everybody talks about 'green energy,' and they're usually talking about these big huge operations. But our idea is that practically every small municipality in the province can actually produce electricity."
"If they could dump it into the grid, that could have a huge impact."
Especially when one takes into account the following target, which was also set in the throne speech: "All new and existing electricity produced in B.C. will be required to have net zero greenhouse gas emissions by 2016."
Big-picture investment
The launch of Going for Green also marks the launch of the Columbia Institute's Centre for Civic Governance, a supportive hub for people like Kruk and Weinberg that will conduct research and share best practices in an effort to enhance sustainability projects in towns across the province.
The centre will bring together experts from a wide field of expertise, including prominent land-use NGO Smart Growth B.C. and former B.C. premier Mike Harcourt, who will be an honorary chairperson.
Beresford noted that school boards are also a vital part of the push. She claimed, for example, that in Burnaby sustainable design principles have been incorporated that have boosted students' performance and school attendance.
Back in Dawson Creek, on top of his other files, Mayor Kruk is also wrapped up with solar power through his involvement with the B.C. Sustainable Energy Association, which aims to get solar water heaters into 100,000 B.C. households.
Yet when it comes to megaprojects like these, Kruk says communities can only do so much before higher levels of government need to step forward, and bring industry and investment along with them.
"If we incorporate 100,000 solar roofs across the province, who is going to produce those solar panels? We [in Canada] have an entire industry that needs to be developed."
Beresford agreed. "Leaders on the ground," she said, "need some other help."
Reshaping car culture
Much of this has to do with infrastructure for crucial projects such as transit. To put things in perspective, 40 per cent of B.C.'s carbon emissions come from transportation, mainly cars.
"Those are such big dollars that funds have to come from other levels of government."
Nevertheless, Kruk is glad to be hearing a different tune being sung in Ottawa and Victoria.
"I applaud the throne speech," he said. "It's an ambitious project that they've got going."
Whether or not governments will put their money where their mouth is remains to be seen, but regardless Kruk says that since his city started taking matters of climate change into its own hands, things have been changing.
"It's been building our sense of community and that's something I think is vitally important," he said. "I think there's a renewed optimism, and enthusiasm and confidence in our future."
To order or find out more about the book Going for Green click here.
Related Tyee stories:
- Premier's Shaky Global Warming Pitch
- Global Warming's Threat to BC: Seeking Solutions
- For Tories, Cities Aren't Sexy
![[Tyee]](http://thetyee.cachefly.net/ui/img/ico_fishie.png){kind=small}
- The Gem of Canadian Science that Harper Killed
- Who Mowed Down the Premier?
- Canada's Economy, Deconstructed (by a 12 year-old)
- Death in Remand: a Tyee Inquiry
- Now Is the Time to Talk up Big Ideas
- Bill C-38: the Environmental Destruction Act
- 'A Gut Feeling'
- Sexism Tinges Criticism of Teachers' Job Action
- Bias in BC's Pesticide Decision? Follow the Bouncing Verbs
- Why Blackberry's Embrace of HTML5 Is Good Karma
- The Gem of Canadian Science that Harper Killed
- Sexism Tinges Criticism of Teachers' Job Action
- Now Is the Time to Talk up Big Ideas
- The Ethics of Addiction Studies
- Bill C-38: the Environmental Destruction Act
- Alberta Fills Pipes with Corrosive Denial
- Does BC Stand for Ban Clotheslines?
- BC biotech company seeks approval for GM apple
- Bias in BC's Pesticide Decision? Follow the Bouncing Verbs
- What's Behind BC's Doors?
- Tyee Builders Tally: Amazing!
- From Financial Advisor to Occupier
- 'Storage Wars'
- How Our Immune Systems Exaggerate Fear
- Does Simon Fraser University Need a Men's Centre?
- Now Is the Time to Talk up Big Ideas
- Why Blackberry's Embrace of HTML5 Is Good Karma
- Bias in BC's Pesticide Decision? Follow the Bouncing Verbs
- Death in Remand: A Jail Crammed with Risk
- The Ethics of Addiction Studies
59
Login or register to post comments
tedward
5 years ago
Not Credible
Excuse me, but how can we take this article seriously when the author is clearly a propagandist? Describing the Dockside Green project in Victoria as "a model sustainable neighbourhood" while linking directly to the developers site demonstrates that journalistic integrity has been usurped by product placement. Is the Tyee filled with advertorials? Am I deluded in thinking this is an indpendant source of news?
Dockside Green is yet another over-priced over-hyped boondoggle. Token "affordable" units and a lot of hype over what shoud be basic environmental protection in no way detracts from the obscene amounts of profit this project will generate while doing nothing for the community but driving up housing prices to the point where families with children will be effectively banned within Victoria city limits.
A truly sustainable community would include working class families with kids. No working class family could ever dream of affording a place in Dockside Green.
Grumpy
5 years ago
It's all rubbish
All this nonsense about global warming and solutions. The major contributer to global warming is auto pollution and fossil fuel electricity production.
As the majority of out electricity production is hydro generated, is is auto pollution that must concern us. To stop people from using their car, one must provide a viable transit alternative. In Vancouver and its environs, we have not!
We need a minimum of 300 km. of rail route in the region to provide a viable alternative. With out current metro construction, we could not afford such a 'rail' network. Example:
RAV/Canada Line metro - over $125 million/km. to build - 300 km. would cost over $37.5 billion!
SkyTrain elevated light metro - over $80 million/km. to build - 300 km. would cost over $24 billion!
Hybrid light rail/metro (Evergreen Line) - over $90 million km. to build - 300 km. would cost over $27 billion!
The failed Ottawa LRT (killed by the Fed. conservatives) - under $30 million/km. to build - 300 km. would cost under $9 billion.
Karlsruhe Zwei-System LRT (includes track sharing with mainline railways) - under $15 million/km. to build - 300 km. would cost under $4.5 billion.
French on-street LRT - over $11 million/km. to build - 300 km. would cost $3.3 billion.
Spanish economy (no frills) LRT - under $6 million/km. - 300 km. would cost under 1.8 billion!
COST RAV/CANADA LINE - 19 KM. $2.3 BILLION!
We can provide a viable and affordable 300 km. LRT public transit service for the GVRD for about $4.5 billion or the total cost of the Gateway highways project. One thing that is for certain we can not afford a metro (SkyTrain/RAV) solution for reducing auto emission.
rac
5 years ago
$10 Billion a Year for Automobiles
Grumpy, you are right about Gateway. How about focusing on that instead of always trashing transit projects that can't be stopped. Trashing SkyTrain and the Canada Line is counter productive and will not result in more money for transit.
We can certainly afford high-quality rapid transit such as SkyTrain and the Canada Line as well as LRT
The real problem is the $10 billion a year people spend in the region on the automobile. It is a matter of pooling our resources and spending much more on transit.
How about trashing the Golden Ears Bridge which will carry fewer people for money than even the Canada Line.
G West
5 years ago
Dockside Green
tedward
Re: Dockside Green
It may be sustainable, even cutting edge - but it sure ain't community. The people I know who've pre-bought units there are 'investors' who'll never live in the place.
They're mostly after a something called 'sustainable streams of passive income'; community and affordability? - not so much. Or, if the market will bear, a quick flip and a nice profit taxed at 50% of what they should pay because it'll be a capital gain.
The press in Victoria has been totally sucked in by the promos...as is city hall.
rac
5 years ago
Funding for Transit not Highways
Another great opportunity to tell Premier Campbell and your MLA to spend a lot more on transit and cancel costly ineffective highway expansion projects such as Gateway. Funding the Evergreen Line would be a great start as well as providing funding for 400 more buses. The Millennium Line extension and LRT south of the Fraser would be great as well.
Premier Campbell
premier@gov.bc.ca
http://www.leg.bc.ca/mla/38thParl/campbell.htm
BC MLA's can be found here:
http://www.leg.bc.ca/mla/3-1-1.htm
maestro
5 years ago
Grumpy's right to discuss SkyTrain RAV to his hearts' content
Everyone has a pet peeve and often the forte' and the info to support it. Also the right to free speech.
I have a family member who was quite high up in the BC Transit system hierarchy, the dam thing changed names 3- 4 times before they retired. The whole damn Transit thing is so uber political, it should thus have light shone on every crevasse, nook and cranny.
When the first SkyTrain was built, it was already the start of a bad decision...accordng to the well -informed family member. The temptation is obviously to continually expand it...and add more debt to something that is a volatile brew of politics and less bang for the buck
All SkyTrain will do is create a " Me Too " attitude to outlying regions. This is likley the plan...creating political addicts and brass plaque ribbon cutting craving. SkyTrain is effectively dictating OCPs in a wham bam fashion which results in poor planning decisions made more and more expeditiously .
SkyTrain stations at night ? Ugghhh!
My God, what if Star Trek is proven right and we can teleport people...talk about white elephants re RAV and Skytrain....we can then do a trial run and teleport the "SkyTrain RAV -istas" to Uranus where they belong.
PS Go for it Grumpy.....the more exposure the better.
Truman Green
5 years ago
numbers are good, but...
Canada contributes 2% of the world's total CO2 output, so if our entire nation disappeared it would have no effect on global warming attributed to CO2 emissions.
Yes, Grump, autos do huge pollution and contribute to respiratory disease, (a sufficient cause for concern and good transit) but--at least as far as I can see by doing comparison googling--from 11 to 20 percent of the our total CO2 output, so if every single car and light or heavy truck was destroyed,(in Canada) there would be no significant effect on CO2 output or total anthropogenic global warming. (11 to 20% of 2%, eh)
Btw, water vapour is the serious greenhouse gas. It does--depending upon who you believe--from 70 to 95% of the greenhouse effect.
maestro
5 years ago
Try this:
Try this..it's more politically correct and keeps both Rednecks and Red Lefties happy.
http://paultan.org/archives/2006/09/14/smart-forfun2/
Who could ask for more ?
mopled
5 years ago
Flare stack
The Mayor says "I can see a flare stack from where I'm sitting right now" Anybody know what is being burned and why it is not being utilized?
The Mayor hits the nail on the head in terms of BC needing a new industry. I'd love to be able to purchase a wind/solar system with net metering for instalation on my house for $10-15,000 which would pay for itself in under 10 years.
I also want a bio-diesel-hydrogen... whatever... electric car with a solar panel on the roof for under $20,000.
Think of what the bilions being spent in Afghanistan could buy. And if you had any doubt about who the biggest user of petroleum is, see:
http://www.energybulletin.net/26194.html
zalm
5 years ago
Good boondoggie....
Good numbers Grumpy, but I think the numbers on the Karlsruhe system are about 6 years old, so I think they need to be updated a bit. Certainly it won't come out to the price of one of the grade-separated routes.
Rac, I'm not sure where you're coming from - is it that you like the sexiness of the Skytrain-type lines? Because Grumpy and others have pointed out that there isn't the money to do what you want. If we spent all the available property taxes collected by the whole Lower Mainland for three years, we wouldn't be able to fund 300 km of ALRT of any sort, never mind roads, sewers, police, water or services. And 300 km (or 6 routes) will never carry more than 20% of the people in the region, as shown on a Translink planning study from 1995 (links given in the fall of 2006 last time we had this conversation).
What are the other 80% of the people to do?
I know it's really sexy to have a Cadillac monorail to whisk you wherever you want, but it's like buying an SUV - it swallows huge resources and returns little.
So please don't say it's a fait-accompli - it isn't, because even the municipalities themselves recognize that they will never be able to afford to build and operate more than 4 lines in the next 20 years, which is why they're all fighting about who gets the fourth one - Evergreen extension or Broadway extension.
Interestingly, this April will be the first full year of operating costs for the Millennium line showing up on Translink's budget. At the end of 2005, the province's agreement to pay the interest on the Millennium line ran out, and Translink took over. For the first time, we'll be able to see how much interest we're paying on that line - will it be $80 million a year or $120 million? How good a job did the money-managers do? What percentage of Translink's total budget will the interest on this one line alone cost? 6%? 9%?
No wonder transit users are pissed off.
zalm
5 years ago
Truman
Our 2% could be the "tipping point". It's neither ethical nor accurate to say we're insignificant. Never mind the marginal cost of our oil use is what keeps the price closer to $100 per bbl than $10.
It's also a bit embarrassing that our 2% is consumed by less than 0.5% of the global population. Let's not forget that number either.
freebear
5 years ago
No Talk of Limits to Growth
Why is it that the article does not discuss how we plan and design our settlements/cities/towns/neighbourhoods.
Does this mean we will talk sustainability but still build unsustainable communities?
Why isn't the urban growth machine questioned?
Without recognizing limits to growth, how serious can we take any green initiative with, besides some 'tweaks', will not be sustainable in the long run?
BC Mary
5 years ago
Anmore. Run of the Wild Rivers being given away, Anmore.
Anmore is building a state-of-the-art renewable energy centre, something that might well become a feature in towns and cities across the province and around the world, it says here.
Oh. Right. Anmore. Rings a bell. Something about "Run of the Rivers" and how every small municipality can actually produce electricity ... but first they sign away their river, then a private, for-profit corporation takes over with plans to charge the people extra for future electricity. That Anmore.
School District 43 Coquitlam describes the Anmore district of BC as serving the combined communities of Coquitlam, Port Coquitlam, Port Moody, Belcarra and Anmore with 72 schools, 31,700 students, and their families.
The District uses primarily natural gas for heating (97.5%) and BCHydro electric service. In 1996/97 the District consumed approximately 233,531 GJ of natural gas and 22.3 GWh of electric energy. The electricity from BCHydro is 85% hydroelectric.
There's handwriting on this wall, probably done by the 185 spin doctors hired by the Campbell government in September '06 under Order in Council #656.
Doesn't it make the giveaway of B.C.'s rivers to private corporations seem as benign and comfy as Mom's spicy cinnamon apple pie?
This story gets a 0 rating on a scale of 1 (poor) to 5 (best) because in my opinion its purpose is to lull the public rather than alert us to another public asset being stripped away from B.C.
woody
5 years ago
Time to get off the pot
On the news today, car drivers in B.C. were bitching about the gas prices being higher here then else where in the country. What’s all the bitching about? The gas companies are only trying to encourage consumers to conserve, this is the green way .All the polls say that we won’t mind paying more to save the environment. Well start saving. This is where the rubber meets the road. Love it, love it.
G West
5 years ago
Yep, bring on the $3/litre gas
We need it. Now. With the extra tax to go to real affordable transit that works...
Which party supports that option, wood?
Percy
5 years ago
Percy
...and to honestly address global warming, we need a population control policy. Sorry, if we are serious about Kyoto, mass immigration is not a sustainable policy.
Just one of those unpleasant little truths that everyone runs from!
G West
5 years ago
Especially if the most important value is standard of living
I don't think immigration policy is the problem at all Percy. Last time I looked, we weren't even reproducing at replacement.
Different strokes for different folks I guess. Just another of those unpleasant little truths that everyone runs from. Nice of you to tell other people, with less than one percent of our GDP (per capita) how they should spend their free time.
Truman Green
5 years ago
are you sure, zalm?
Zalm, if it is true, as I claim, that Canada does only 2% of the global CO2 contribution, and I claim that the 2% is somewhat insignificant, am I being unethical to mention it?
Since when did it become unethical to mention the truth?
Do you think it's unethical to mention the United Nations study which concludes that meat production is a bigger anthropogenic cause of global warming than automobiles?
I think we need to be aware of all the numbers, not just the ones that support our point of view.
maestro
5 years ago
G West: No Peeking
G West:
Quote:
" Last time I looked, we weren't even reproducing at replacement " .
Sh!te, besides the Spellink and Grummer po-lice, we now need to cuff the Peeping Toms for visually auditing reproduction...naughty -naughty for looking.
Even P Herr Trudeau agreed with that, didn't he ?.
woody
5 years ago
no gonads, no back bone
Why is it there are only a few who are willing to face up to this fact that Truman Green has brought up?
Ill tell why, its because they lack back bone and gonads
maestro
5 years ago
Truman:
The United Nations is like the IOC, its crookeder than a dog's hind leg.
skeptikool
5 years ago
A Monumental Environmental Crime
The obscenely huge distances that garbage is trucked from many cities across N. America is a crime that is readily, resolvable, in my opinion, but one that will probably remain since it serves too many vested interests.
Much garbage can be burned to produce power. The 'released toxins" argument doesn't hold. The process would be tightly controlled and use scrubbers in the exhast systems.
In the case of much of the Lower Mainland's garbage, what toxins are given off by a large convoy of diesel trucks making their 700 kilometre-plus round trips at great financial cost, also?
G West
5 years ago
Because it's just not relevant woody
In fact, according to the WWF 2006 report, Canada has, on a per capita basis, the 4th largest ecological footprint of all countries in the world. Behind the UAE, the USA and Finland.
You can look it up here:
http://assets.panda.org/downloads/living_planet_report.pdf
rac
5 years ago
Sure Grumpy has the right to
Sure Grumpy has the right to complain but if the goal is to get better transit and reduce GHG emmissions, he would be much better off sticking to railing against unbuilt highway projects. You can't really reallocate money from a rapid transit line that has already been built.
By the way, the SkyTrain gets much greater ridership than LRT lines. Only Calgary is close but there are 3 LRT lines in Calgary as opposed to 1.5 SkyTrain lines in Vancouver so the ridership per line is significantly more.
As shown with the LRT fiasco in Ottawa, a lot of devision in the community can result in nothing getting built.
zalm
5 years ago
Truman
Your claim that it is insignificant is unethical. Not the facts. Don't try to set up a meat (straw?) man for us. That's a problem too. All the accumulated small problems add up to a big one. Dismissing any of them as insignificant is unethical. Just keep digging up the facts like you do so well.
Til we know where the tipping point is....
zalm
5 years ago
Rac
The RAV line has not been built. Only about 1/3 of the money has been spent on the "fiasco". The cars have not been ordered for final delivery, and so there is no "maintenance and parts" budget to hide cost overruns in. We could cancel the project now, put everything back together the way it was, put the rest of the money into alternative forms of transit, move more people and save money. And as a bonus, the City of Vancouver would have had a bunch of its old sewers and water mains replaced ahead of schedule for half the cost. (cost shared)
I'm not sure where you're getting ridership figures from. Skytrain figures aren't audited, and Translink's revenue figures from Skytrain have never matched what they say their ridership is - sometimes with more than a 30% shortfall.
Skytrain got its passengers from buses that formerly went direct to destination. When Skytrain opened, Translink cancelled the direct bus routes, forced the remaining routes to run to the Skytrain station and made everybody transfer, sometimes twice, when previously they didn't have to transfer at all. As transit planers know, transit ridership goes down the more times you have to transfer.
Captive ridership isn't new ridership. Again there are no audited figures, but transit planners estimate that fewer than 10% of Millennium line ridership is actual new riders attracted by the line. The rest used to ride the bus. Now they get transferred.
Do you or Grumpy have any more figures on this, or on Calgary's lines?
Grumpy
5 years ago
Not quite true RAC
Calgary's ridership is quite stunning and is carrying today over 222,000 passengers (counted boardings) a day. The total length of the Calgary LRT is about equal to that of the Expo Line, which carries about 140,000 passengers a day (TransLink does not count actual boardings but extrapolates ridership from train loadings at key stations, which is far less accurate!) at about 60% higher operating costs!
SkyTrain's ridership is on par with many LRT routes around the world, so, for up to tens time more to install than LRT and much more to operate than LRT, we are getting ridership that a light rail line can easily handle.
God help us, because of cost savings and truncated stations on the RAV/Canada Line, maximum capacity of the line is about 15,000 pphpd!, which is less than what could have been accommodated with LRT, operating on the Arbutus route, for about one quarter the cost! The extremely poorly planned RAV/Canada Line will come back to haunt us for decades!
The first Karlsruhe zwei-system LRT, to Bretton, opened in the early 1993, cost about $7.5 million/km. to install, but it is the ridership figures that are astounding.
By replacing the commuter trains to Bretton, with a direct light rail service, providing a downtown to downtown tram trip, omitting one transfer, ridership on the route went from 533,600 a week to 2,554,976 a staggering 479% increase in ridership in 6 months!
A planning expert in Europe conveyed to me in an email that she thought we had gone too far installing metro and that the region will have traffic chaos and gridlock for decades to come, let alone higher taxes to subsidize under utilized metro. As well she thought politicians will try to compel the populace to use badly planned for metro lines with equally disastrous results for them and the region!
netscaper2
5 years ago
bc budget and being green
I guess all the stuff above is relevant but .....
Isn't it amazing that Gordo, in the throne speech turned green, and already
we are starting to pay.
The biggest green house gas producer is
natural gas.
So, Gordo wants all of us to go electric.
To do that, he will raise the the price
nat. gas so high that we can't afford to use it.
But first, lets boost the price of electricity to make sure we pay for all the changes
And I'll be damned if the lovely and gracious Carol Taylor didn't do that in her budget speech today.
That shoul make all you socred happy !
Grumpy
5 years ago
dead on zalm
I'm afraid we are stuck with RAV, but here is the killer. TransLink, through Glen Leicester, their chief planner, have always planned for the big-bang metro, where the one line will carry all the ridership - hence TransLink's and the GVRD's Transit corridors. Instead looking at each route individually, they have in effect, put all their eggs in one transit basket. This means for the vast majority of customers a trip by bus must be taken to connect to the metro. In TransLink's and the GVRD's planners minds, metro is just a very fast bus route not a transit system unto itself.
Most efficient transit systems have a network with many tram or light rail lines, serving many destinations and offering many services.
A E
+ +
+ +
+ +
D+ + + + + + + + +B
+ +
+ +
+ F
C
Say the above is a map of a city with LRT with three lines, we can run a service A>C; or A>B; or A>D or A to the centre, without forcing the customers to transfer. Now the same is true for line B, C and D.
We can also operate a service from the parallel line E>F or from A>F or A>E. The same is true for lines B, C & D. Here with this simple diagram is why LRT is so successful many routes can be had for a few rail lines; routes that service where people want to go, without transfer.
I hope this is clear and it shows up in the proper manner when posted.
For the cost of RAV, we could have built two North south rail lines in Vancouver to Richmond as far as Steveston and service the airport, as well, LRT from BCIT to UBC. Just look at the above diagram and picture it.
Which would be better? A RAV metro that the majority of potential users must take a bus to, or LRT, which both services where people live and to where they want to go!
Truman Green
5 years ago
percapita footprint, eh...okay
Global warming, if it is anthropogenically derived, is an aggregate of all the CO2 emissions on the planet.
Canada has a huge percapita use of energy, because we're really spoiled and rich here. GRANTED! I think it's the largest in the world.
However, the greenhouse effect, whereby CO2 is said to absorb rebounding radiation, depends on the overall global emissions, and doesn't depend a rat's ass on per capita contributions.
So, if you're going to do political and economical assessment of what we should be doing to control global warming it's important to know what our national footprint is--per capita AND as a percentage of the total global effect.
Per capita emissions reflect a political reality; not a scientific reality.
Therefore, Canada's contribution to the global effect, contributed by autos and trucks (15% of Canada's total CO2 emissions) is not only neglible, but almost non-existent--
even if individual Canadians are CO2 pigs.
Also, water vapour is the number one greenhouse gas, not methane-derived CO2. (natural gas).
Simple to find out. Just google: Water vapour greenhouse gas!!!!!
With all due respect, zalm, you think it's not significant that Canada only produces 2% of the world's anthropogenic greenhouse effect, because you don't understand that the greenhouse effect is globally cumulative, not nationally.
Incidentally, IT WAS ALSO WARMER DURING THE MIDDLE AGES THAN IT IS NOW.
In order for anthropogenic greenhoue C02 emissions to be significant regarding global warming, the effect has to be beyond the parameters of average warming and coooling experienced by humans in the last thousand years or so.
The middle ages were warmer. Then we had the little ice age. (Get it?) Humans do just fine if the atmosphere's either 5 degrees cooler or 5 degrees warmer. And so do polar bears, which survived the middle ages, just fine.
(The extinction of the polar bears due to a degree or two of warming in a hundred year period is one of the funnier jokes associated with this stupid temporary hype).
I noticed not even the goofy Suzuki is mentioning polar bears lately.
rac
5 years ago
LRT Cost
Grump, yes LRT is less expensive than metro but not as much as you say.
A while ago you said LRT to Richmond along Arbutus was $1 billion or so which seems a bit low. Say $200 million for the bridge across the North Arm of the fraser and $75 million for the middle arm bridge. The airport section of RAV is at grade and is costing $230 million so LRT would be $175 million. So far we have $450 million. Add $200 million to purchase the Arbutus Cooridor. CP would demand top dollar as they know there would be money there. So you have $650 million. Add $100 million for trains. We are now at $750 million. Now add $300 million for the 15km of track at $20 per km. Add $30 million for stations, $40 million for the maintence yard. We are over $1.1 billion now with probably some other costs not included.
The cost for LRT down Cambie would even be greater as the station at Waterfront would need to be elevated and the station at Broadway needs to be elevated or underground due to the steep grade on Cambie.
Back in 2000, the cost of LRT to UBC was estimated to be $800 million. With cost escalation, it would be at least $1.2 billion.
It sure doesn't look like you could built two north-south LRT's and LRT to UBC for $2 billion. Maybe street cars, but not LRT.
You would be taken much more seriously if you did not overstate the case for LRT. There are many places in the region where it does make sence. South of the Fraser for example.
SharingIsGood
5 years ago
Quote:Canada contributes 2%
I would like to know where you get your numbers on CO2 emissions, Truman, because we live in a cold northern industrialized nation that must transport goods (even raw materials for export) huge distances. Many of the raw materials we export have fuel to retrieve, process and ship as the single greatest cost factor. (Think of mining and smelting copper and aluminum; think of the tar sands; think of burning slash after logging, and CO2 from cogeneration and beehive burners.)
Even 2%, that is 4 times the world's average (per capita) production of CO2, as Canada's population is less than 0.5% of the world's population. If everyone in the world produced as much CO2 as Canadians, the world would have 4 times the pollution. Something to think about...
Grumpy
5 years ago
RAC LRT is a lot cheaper
RAC, if Vancouver politicians were serious they could have the Arbutus for scrap value (as low as $1 million) as Federal law allows an abandoned railway to be sold for scrap if it is to used again as a railway. Vancouver wants the Arbutus corridor, but not to run a railway, but to develop for commercial & residential use.
LRT is as expensive as one wants it to be and as far as one gold-plates it. In Spain, a newly opened light rail line cost under $6 million/km. to build and in France the cost for an on-street light rail line costs about $11 million/ km. including vehicles!
What has happened in Vancouver is that TransLink, like BC Transit before, hired consultants with no experience building light rail to plan and design LRT to TransLink's or BC Transit's specifications (both agencies do not have experience with light rail and treat it as a poor mans skyTrain) - not what was the most cost effective or what is best for the customer! They have now played the same game with the 'rail' transit in the Fraser Valley, operating on the former interurban line.
Notice that TransLink never engages real experts to plan for LRT (real experts, such as LTK, are defined as those who have planned, built and operated modern LRT) and never invited Siemens, or Bombardier or Alstom to the drawing table for light rail!
Your prices for LRT are much to high for the Arbutus and I think we could have had a workable, economy LRT service from downtown Vancouver to the airport, Steveston and Ironwood Mall in Richmond for as little as $800 million. My conversations with real experts in the field confirm that this is an accurate estimate.
Grumpy
5 years ago
Streetcars are light rail
Some how people think streetcars are not light rail, they are. The only difference is that streetcars operate strictly on street, in mixed traffic with little or no priority at intersections.
Light Rail or LRT are just streetcars operating on a reserved rights-of-ways (can be as simple as an HOV lane with rails). The Arbutus Corridor is an excellent example of a reserved rights-of-way.
In Strasbourg France, their 'Jumbo' streetcar has a capacity of 350 persons, while some light rail vehicles have a capacity of only 100 persons.
One would be hard pressed in Karlsruhe to tell the difference between a streetcar (tram) LRV or a commuter train as one vehicle acts as all three!
alive
5 years ago
Vancouver garbage
For one thing that garbage should be reduced by having proper recycling facilities.
We have a convoy of empty railroad cars that carried coal to the westcoast, they are returning empty, while trucks go much the same route carrying garbage.
A little bit of ingenuity would figure a way to transport garbage on the retund trip, even if the destination may require a spurline.
Dies iræ
5 years ago
I thought Suzuki made cars?
Pigs love their SUVs.
The average global temperature during the last ice age was roughly 7 degrees Celcius cooler than the average global temperature today. That 7 degree Celcius increase resulted in a 3km thick slab of ice parked right about where I'm sitting now to melt. The International Panel on Climate Change (United Nations) recently released a report from over 2,500 leading scientific experts who guaranteed that we would experience, conservatively, a 3 degree Celcius increase over the next 90 years.
Tell me, if a 7 degree Celcius increase melts 3km of ice... what will a 3 degree Celcius increase do?
The scientific reality is that if everyone on this planet were as carelessly wasteful as Canadians I would be out buying a snorkle.
Global temperature variations
The Middle Age warming phenomenon was an increase of no more than 1 degree Celcius. The "Little Ice Age" was an equally modest drop in temperature. Neither of these phenomena can compare with the increases we're bound to experience.
There's little sense in denying climate change. Worst case scenario: the air becomes cleaner and your bacon less greasy.
Percy
5 years ago
Percy
Thanks for the comments, G West. I thini Canadians fall in love with their own virtue and at the same time can't confront necessary tradeoffs. Although Canada's natural rate of population increase is barely replacement, our mass immigration policies have resulted in a steady population increase of approximately 1% a year. Canada's population has increased by 65% within my own memory. Compare that to the flat populations of western europe, or the declining populations of eastern europe. Any anyone who lives in the Greater Vancouver area, or Ontario's golden horseshoe, will assure you that, yes, the world is full and getting fuller. Every new arrival adds to CO2 emissions, against a Kyoto cap which if flat and unchanging. It's simply not possible to argue (as does my friend Jack Layton), that Canada needs even more than the 300,000 plus immigrants who arrive every year, and at the same time demand that Canada scrpulously meet its Kyoto commitments. Sometimes you have to choose.
SharingIsGood
5 years ago
alive said: A little bit of
alive said:
A little bit of ingenuity would figure a way to transport garbage on the retund trip, even if the destination may require a spurline.
Keep your bloody garbage in Vancouver, please. We don't want it in the Interior polluting our aquifirs. Your solution, Alive, is to make your problem, a problem for someone else. We have plenty of problems of our own with the decrease in services that this government has foisted upon the Interior.
Grumpy
5 years ago
A mountain in Delta
Actually, Vancouver's garbage goes to the Delta landfill, that massive mountain along the 99.
We must rethink what we call garbage and how we must recycle it. That mountain is getting bigger and bigger!
G West
5 years ago
Aid and immigration
Percy,
Then I suggest, in fairness and solidarity, that you must be a big believer in raising Canadian foreign aid, in real dollar terms, to at least the levels than nations like Norway and Denmark have already achieved (.7% of GDP on a continuing basis), and somewhere near to the commitment we made, then promptly forgot, at the St Andrew's G8 bun toss.
Until then, we must permit more immigration, especially of refugees and particularly children. Jack Layton’s arguments about our aging population are not specious.
Canada is a foolish, selfish, nation of wasters and polluters - our immigration policies have nothing, repeat nothing, to do with that.
It's time we started to choose the high road - we've produced enough empty rhetoric, in my view.
alive
5 years ago
hey I agree!
My comment reflects a way to stop garbage trucks from making a 700 km long trip, that could be replicated by using empty coal-cars going that route anyway.
Of course the entire mountain of garbage is evidence that no planning or investment was ever made about this problem.
There are systems operating around the world,that reduce garbage to ashes and rubble. These system provide heat and power but do require capital and a willingness to actually solve problems.
Most politicians think they will be out of a job if anything ever got solved!
freebear
5 years ago
Street/Trolley Cars
Grumpy mentioned an important point: "Some how people think streetcars are not light rail, they are. The only difference is that streetcars operate strictly on street, in mixed traffic with little or no priority at intersection."
Also by being in the cars R.O.W. it may discourage car traffic. In other words take a lane away from cars.
Also trolley cars/street cars I believe will provide better routing/routes/service (similar to buses) than any LRT/Skytrain.
But hey, I would not be surprised if 'we' do nothing because we are living in a Growth is God and Consumption is good society!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
jericho
5 years ago
greenwash with natural gas
I would like to make three points in response to the recent BC Government's Throne Speech that emphasized a commitment to reduce emissions in BC.
Any initiative to reduce greenhouse gases and other harmful emissions in BC are welcome, but are the one's proposed in the legislature on Monday enough to ensure a sustainable future for our children and grandchildren?
We share a common atmosphere on this planet. And yes, all of us can think and act on ways to personally reduce our impacts on this common and extremely essential gift.
However, setting standards for the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions in BC while exporting BC natural gas at unprecented rates is like an smoker who has kicked his habit while continuing to manufacture and distribute cigarettes.
Here in BC we’ve heard how The Terminator, Gov. Schwarzenegger, has initiated strategies to reduce emissions in California by 20% by 2020. What we haven’t heard is that means emissions by 2020 will be at 2000 levels.
Scientific evidence shows that the current state of global warming and climate change brought about by human activity is due to emissions produced prior to the year 2000.
And finally, BC imports of electrical energy are a matter of price and economics and not scarcity as Premier Campbell, "Terminator II", and Accenture, formally BC Hydro, would have us believe.
jericho
5 years ago
carbon emission trading - more green deception
Wonder why no mention of money in the Province's budget for action on climate change?
Can you say, CARBON EMISSION TRADING?
Can you say, CARBON SINKS?
Knowing Gordon Campbell's ideological bent for faux market-based initiatives, we should expect him to implement a carbon emissions trading scheme or as some groups in the UK have called it: A FRAUD!
One of the objections to carbon trading is that it requires the privatisation of the atmosphere. Right up Gordo's pinky.
Property rights in this vast new speculative market will then be allocated by those who trade fastest and those who already pollute the most.
Currently North America contributes 25% of the world's carbon based emissions. Canada supplies the US with 20% of its natural gas needs. CO2 emissions from natural gas burning in the US accounts for 21% of the total CO2 emissions.
BC exports significant quantities of natural gas to the western region of the US. As I've stated earlier, the atmosphere does not recognize political boundaries. It doesn't matter whether you burn the gas in BC or California. The resulting emissions will end up in the atmosphere and further negative climate change and extreme weather events.
While we conserve or reduce BC's emissions by 1/3, exports of gas to the US will increase much greater than that. In 5 short years production of natural gas in BC has risen by 40% and Gordo is on record wanting our oil and gas production to double by 2011.
Catch my point....it's a lovely market designed t rading stategy deception to make us here believe we are making things better when actually we are contibuting elsewhere making things worse.
ENRON's disaster didn't go to waste, Gordo's carrying its torch?
Peter Bunyard, the editor of The Ecologist writes:
"It is questionable whether carbon emissions trading will bring a certifiable reduction. As now embodied in the EU emissions trading scheme, fossil- fuel-burning companies such as power utilities, steelworks or cement factories are granted substantial carbon credits that they can sell - on the basis that they have emitted less than expected. That may provide some incentive to look to more efficient technologies, but the assumption is that someone elsewhere, even in another country, is going to buy that credit in order to pollute."
Most other solutions, eg carbon sinks, don’t attack the source, which is our dependence on fossil fuels, our inability to slow the rapid deforestation of forests that support the delicate balance in the biosphere.
There may be increased momentum behind the idea of trading carbon credits as a way to promote environmentally friendly behavior. The fact is, it doesn't promote the positive aspects so much as it merely serves to enable the negative behavior.
Even the Democrats in the US have endorsed carbon emissions trading.
Carbon emissions trading, carbon sinks, and other false solutions are being used as a way to escape full responsibility.
The proposals are based on models of small scale emissions trading that cannot be replicated. A global carbon market cannot be monitored or controlled, and the legal framework is unlikely to ever be strong enough to counter the huge incentives for cheating.
Carbon Trading is a false solution. It has undermined the tiny reductions proposed in the Kyoto Protocol. It does nothing to reduce the supply of fossil fuels, it is an inherently elitist, corporatist, technocratic solution.
jericho
5 years ago
off topic but an answer to zalm's question
IT has been announced that Translink pays about $154 million a year now for service its capital debt. They have refused to break this number down so the public who is paying for this bill can see what items are costing the most.
Many would assume that the Expo Line as well as the so called "upgrades", the Mark II SkyTrain cars it bought when the Millenium Line opened would be the majority of this capital debt annual cost.
The other difficulty is trying to ascertain the revenue that the Millenium and Expo Line's generate as there is no way of accounting for fares except the fares paid into the vending machines at each station. There are no turnstiles or counters to accurately give a sense of the boardings.
However, for the buses, there is an accurate accounting, except for those buses at various stops along Broadway and at UBC where boardings occur at all doors of the bus to expediate people getting on and off. (That's due to the poor ability of the so called automated fare collection boxes on each bus to do its job quickly. Even Toronto nixed these expensive dinosaurs).
One has to look at Chicago's Transit Agency's website to see how an agency provides transparency.
Oh what a tangled web we weave when first we practice to deceive.
Alcibiades
5 years ago
Gordo on CBC Radio Almanac at noon
jericho
Just heard the Premier making his little pitch on the radio (free time 5 mins. every Wednesday) and he certainly didn't hesitate to make the point of how he's looking forward to BC firms making profits from 'green' solutions.
I think you're absolutely right and the fact there isn't a penny in the budget for these so-called programs is very interesting. He's just opening the door for his friends to start finding ways for him to help them make those profits...carbon trading will no doubt be part of the continuing 'Enronization' of BC Hydro.
jericho
5 years ago
back on topic - and thankfully my last comment
Quoted from above posts:
"
Canada contributes 2% of the world's total CO2 output..."
"I would like to know where you get your numbers on CO2 emissions?"
The US Energy Information Administration - DOE states that Canada's CO2 emissions from natural gas consumption and flaring is 165.46 - 186.72 million metric tonnes.
This is a 100% increase since 1980.
If we were to accept responsibility for our exports of natural gas to the US and the resulting CO2 emissions then that figure above would be about 450 million metric tonnes a year.
The US currently contributes 1179.4 million metric tonnes of CO2 emissions into the atmosphere annually.
If we were to take the 186.72 m/m/t from Canada and calculate the per capita emissions and compare that to the US per capita emissions from 1179.4 m/m/t we would see that Canada's CO2 per capita emissions from natural gas is greater than the US.
Canada Kicks Ass! Hardly...
Grumpy
5 years ago
Jericho an answer
Jericho, in 1993, the GVRD found that SkyTrain (only the Expo Line then) was subsidized by over $157 million. Add the debt servicing costs of the Millennium Line the number rises to over $200 million, but that is paid by the province.
I would be very careful of any numbers presented by TransLink as much of the debt servicing is hidden away in other departments in Victoria.
One should add the $154 million to $200 million and viola debt servicing is a staggering $354 million+!!!!!!!!!!!
Grumpy
5 years ago
I write in haste
What a day, I meant to say $157 million annually! Jericho is also right when he states that TransLink has no gage in counting ridership on the metro system.
Calgary counts boardings three times year, with people counting boardings at each station, for the whole day! Their ridership counts are far more accurate than TransLink's!
Truman Green
5 years ago
Cute trick, Jericho, but not honest.
That was a cute trick Jericho, figuring out how you could get Canada's C02 emissions to look much higher than the US's by concentrating on natural gas.
CANADA GETS 66% OF IT'S ELECTRICITY FROM FALLING WATER! That's why, at first glance I knew your figures were wrong, or at least irrevelant.
And thanks for making my eyes go funny for looking at all those CO2 statistics.
Here it is: CANADA CONTRIBUTES 2% OF THE WORLD'S CO2 EMISSIONS.
Look it up. It's all over the damn web!
The per capita output of C02 emissions is almost equal for the United States and Canada--plus or minus a few points from 20 tons per capita, with almost all sites claiming that the US is slightly higher.
Wanna lay odds that in 20 years or so people will look back and laugh at how everybody left the water vapour and cloud-cooling feedback component out of the climate models?
Here's a little hint. I worked in construction for over 40 years. I've been asking carpenters and contractors for 20 years the question of why vapour barrier is used (usually polyethylene)on the warm side of exterior walls.
I've probably asked a hundred people. Not one of them has ever given me the right answer. They just think it blocks vapour, but they all think it's to block vapour from coming into the house. Even those who know it's to block vapour from leaving the house don't know why. Do you understand how this is relevant to global warming. I betcha don't. But if you do, you should investigate the effect of water vapour feedback more closely.
There's just a consensus in the construction industry that it's needed but nobody knows why! Yeah, that's how consensus is built. It's called the bandwagon effect in psyche 100!
And have a look at those 6000 year Greenland ice-core samples. Can you tell what causes the C02-temperature lag? (400 to 600 years).
Can you tell if the increases of C02 cause or are caused by increases in the temperature? I can't.
Look again at the temperature estimates for the middle ages. There all over the place from 1 degree warmer to 3 degrees warmer.
Who do you believe? And why? Do your own investigation. Don't just believe the scientists who love to be popular and in continual receipt of grant money and approval.
The real reason to cut down on pollution is because it's poisoning us, not making us all that much warmer.
Truman Green
5 years ago
too vain!
I'm too vain to ignore this error:
there should be they're.
Stump
5 years ago
It's a shame
you are wasting your obvious greenhouse gas expertise here instead of educating the thousands of scientists studying climate change as to the error of their ways.
BC Mary
5 years ago
And thanks for making my eyes go funny ...
It's midnight, Truman, and I've had a miserable 15-hour day in front of this computer, mostly trying to overcome the glitches in the new "it will be exactly the same only better" blog system all bloggers were forced to accept last week. Man, the humiliation of having one's dumbest errors published in plain view and I couldn't for the life of me find the EDIT button. Not funny.
Then somehow you made me laugh ... I'm still laughing ... nobody ever thanks somebody for making their eyes go funny ... that's so wildly hilarious ... thank you! Sheesh, I needed that.
Thanking with faint praise, I guess, eh.
Truman Green
5 years ago
I was trying to be funny, as usual, Mary
Glad you got a laugh, Mary. I know English really good, honest, (kidding) but I can't help being goofy somehow.
I hoped somebody would like, 'made my eyes go funny.' That was my finest minute.
Now you got me laughing like crazy. In fact I often laugh myself silly after reading my comments, but nobody seems to appreciate my sense of humour--until now.
Thanks, eh!
Truman Green
5 years ago
New human survival algorithm.
Human survival into the next millenium is probably dependent upon the percentage of people who are stupid enough to believe that polar bears, which share species nomenclature with grizzlies and brown bears, do better on ice than on land--as the warmers have been pretending.
If you can believe this, you can believe anything.
zalm
5 years ago
Figures
Thanks to Jericho for the enlightenment on the Translink budget. However I'm looking at an old proposed budget from 2001 which shows $89 million in interest paid to amortize capital costs, rising to $105 million throughout the years until in 2006 it skyrockets to $212 million when the funding agreement with the province runs out for the Millennium line.
This is from back when I was fighting the route of the Broadway line and the obscenely stupid False Creek Flats extension. None of the figures presented by you or Grumpy quite add up to these ones. I hope Translink is more forthcoming this April.....
Truman Green
5 years ago
Stump, what's the atomic mass of CO2?
Stump, what's the atomic mass of C02? Here's a hint: oxygen's is 16. (remember your high school chemistry?) Carbon's is 12. Can you add 36 and 12? Do you think that C02 is heavier than air?
Why do only three-atomed molecules absorb the sun's energy? So what does carbon dioxide tend to do when it is released (Sink or rise--atomic weight 44), and how does it get into the upper atmosphere where it has the best radiation absorption rate?
What effect does evaporation have on the temperature of the surface from which water is evaporated due to an increase in the air temperature? So, if the answer is that an increase in the air temperature INCREASES evaporation from the ocean,is it sensible to speculate that the evaporation of water from the oceans will offset the melting of ice due to increases in air temperature?
Have you calculated the net gain/loss of water in the ocean due to hydrologic feedback loop?
What effect does increased cloud cover have on the temperature of the surfaces which they cover?
Is it possible that increased air temperature is due to the increase in water vapour in the air?
How much biomass would be around if there was no C02?
Can C02 be considered a plant nutrient?
Does ethanol produce C02 when it is burned?
If the answer is yes, why is it said to be better than natural gas, regarding it's 'greenhoue' potential?
What percentage of natural gas is actually methane?
So stump, you should get to work understanding all of these issues instead of just jumping on the David Suzuki gas-guzzling bandwagon as it does a carnie act around Canada.
A mind is a terrible thing to waste, Stump--especially in my case. (private joke)
How many living organisms would exist on earth without the 'greenhouse' effect?
Did you examine the Greenland ice cores, yet? Did you notice the time lags between C02 increases and snowfall accumulation and temperature inceases. Were there C02 increases in the core samples dating before the industrialization of planet earth? How come?
Did you examine the information regarding the temperatures in the Middle Ages?
Do the words 'water-vapour feedback' ring a bell?
Will the polar bears really go extinct or will they just go for a walk. (Hint: which has the best nutrient gathering possibilities--ice or land?)
Is it possible that an increase in C02 will merely speed up the water vapour feedback system?
Water-vapour being the really important greenhouse gas, of course!
Truman Green
5 years ago
I blew it, Stump, 32 plus 12=44, not 36+12
I confess; I got that wrong. Two oxygen atoms weight in at 32 atomic mass-wise.
WCWC
5 years ago
Vancouver Island Ancient Forest Rally
Saturday, March 24, 2007
Vancouver Island Ancient Forest Rally
12 Noon, BC Legislative Buildings, Victoria
This will be the major mobilization by the WCWC to end old-growth
logging on Vancouver Island and to ban raw log exports.
Mark this date down - get everyone you know to commit to come
out! Numbers count! We'll need at least 500 people to form an
"aerial art image" - please let us know if you can pre-confirm to
come ...email us at