In any case, TILMA won't let

In any case, TILMA won't let anything happen unless the Albertan multinational mafia permit it.

Campbell can promise anything, these so called "free trade" treaties will cancel out anything that may cut into corporate profits.

Ed Deak.

If you really want to reduce emissions?

As I said before, if you really want to reduce emissions, you must have a viable alternative to the car. We don't and much of what the premier's statement are mere stuff and nonsense.

We need a minimum network of 300 km. of 'rail' transit, no metro like SkyTrain, RAV/Canada line (which will force more people into cars), and Evergreen Line (a Glenn Leicester special which costs about four time more than it should).

We can do it, build 300 km. affordably (for the same cost as Gateway) but there is no political will to do so.

Even Campbell good buddy the Terminator understands the role of cheap light rail and has quietly authorized a building program.

As for 'Green' BC, we are at 'Amber', but it's turning to 'Red' real soon.

Dead Horse?

Grumpy, isn't that horse your're beating dead yet?

Its all spin

Campbell can promise the moon over the next 20 years. People only remember the next two weeks. Its nothing more than spin.

What is Campbell doing this years budget? 40 million for the environment. 40 million worth of dead trees and ink for more spin and TV ads saying they are doings great things for the environment. Meanwhile, the liberal cronies in BC are getting fat directorships from a biotech vaccine for STD's and the continued deregulation and privatization of Canadian assets for the sake of U.S. multinationals and bribed Republicans and everyone's happy.

Campbell's got it down pat. Say one thing, and quietly do another. I'm sure it won't be long before we hear all the wonderful praise by others with Campbells tough talk for the sake of the environment.

How often do we hear "its not this generations problem, won't effect me in my lifetime" or "there's nothing we can do about it" or "China will spit out more CO2 in terms of increases alone from Jan to May of this year then Canada will burn in a year, it doesn't matter what we do." Clean examples and tech for others to follow, somehow just isn't worth pursuing. It pays to be dirty. Lets all just minimize the responsibility, shit on the example we could set for others to follow, wreck the environment for the sake of a dollar, leave our coming generations bankrupt in every way, and call it functional. Won't be long before the YES men show for more spin saying were doing all we can.

I trust this bunch of MLA liars as much as I trust theives. Is there a difference? Exxon profited what, 37 billion last quarter and we think a congress or whitehouse, including Campbell and Co's can't be bought along with the media? Take my word for it... its all spin.

use less, save more

As noted in an article in the Globe and Mail this weekend, the cheapest, most efficient way to help the environment is thru conservation initiatives.

Gateway won't conserve anything, and neither will a reliance on new technologies.

Hot air from government when we least need it won't do it either.

Stump absolutely not

Transit is not being beaten to death, in fact the public have never been allowed fair comment.

There was no or ever has been a public debate in the region with metro and light rail. The result you are and will be paying much higher taxes to support a metro philosophy rather than light rail.

Do not complain about any tax with TransLink and the GVRD is you think our transit problems are not worthy of debate!

We are paying huge amounts of money, which would have been better spent elsewhere, on costly SkyTrain and RAV/Canada Line metro.

Oops my dementia is kicking in

Sorry should have said Working Man not Stump, my apologies.

If the government can't tell

If the government can't tell us how theres no point in trying really.

car culture

Our cities have been built around "The Car", so much so that people living in the outbacks are going to be quite resistent to the whole idea. Even in a small town I live in, people jump into a car to go four blocks. We are the rich in the world and the rich do not like to be inconvienced. I agree with Grumpy in the need for more and better mass transit. We also need to stop building huge houses--but look around--new houses going up have five bedrooms. The rich like their comforts. I know one couple who have just installed TWO dishwashers because one isn't quite enough when one has guests---what the hell's the matter with the group pitching in? I have two dishwashers as well--me and my husband and perhaps that is what is missing in our society--the social factor--and determining the difference between what we want and what we truly need. In a culture that has prized gluttonous consumption for so long, I am somewhat skeptical that people will make a great enough change in a small enough time, on their own volition without exceptional motivating factors. Similar, in fact, to the oil companies we so love to trash. There are gluttons at both ends of the scale.

Well Grumpy.... ...simply

Well Grumpy....

...simply postulating, but maybe they can somehow integrate LRT with the RAV....who knows ? Ie old archival info makes mention of LRT right up into the Fraser Valley...seem to recall even up to Chilliwack.

Maybe LRT on- grade feeder routes? ... I can't see elevated SkyTrain / RAV line going 50 + miles up into the Valley....(oops..... they might have read this and gotten ideas ... sh!te ! )

Of course, FORMAL ridership numbers are key...and actual numbers must be tallied so the FACTS can buttress any/all credibility issues.

Maybe the media should have "professional counters" at each station and give reasonable approximations of ridership.

Then compare notes.

If the "Queen Bee" of B.C....ie Vancouver is the epicentre of Skytrain ie all "white elephants aka elevated tracks "roads" lead to Vancouver" keeps displacing jobs via residential conversions...this could get even more interesting.

THUS, Why go to Vancouver , what's THERE that isn't elsewhere AND closer, and of course people will use there cars to access what is closer in their own communities.

Also punitive Parking Fees, both private and public, ...kill small businesses...is there any long term cohesive policy integrating all the variables? ....OR simply little feudal bureaucracies nurturing these white elephants like they are some endangered species? ...NOT!

Of course, not knowing ridership doesn't allow for proper budgetting and the vast majority of the population that doesn't use SkyTrain etc. will simply see this nurtured white elephant and its inevitable massive losses snuck into their O-T-H-E-R Tax Grabs.

Another dead horse?

Every-time I hear the 'Green', 'Green' chant from politicians and so called environmentalists; could not every new house be required to have a wind and solar powered generators that would supply power to both the household or the grid, when there is no household consumption?

Certainly a kit would not cost no more than $2000 per new house and supply sufficient power. Or is this just too simple, or cut into Hydro's profits?

Maestro, a comment

Actually LRT could, in theory, operate on both RAV and SkyTrain guide-ways. The problem would be with platform heights, etc. LRT as a feeder to SkyTrain? This is exactly what the Evergreen Line is! In TransLink's minds, the Evergreen Line will feed 10's of thousands of commuters on the failing metro, trouble is, why hasn't the express bus service show large ridership?

Wonder why no other city builds with SkyTrain? Too expensive, to build and operate. Vancouver has three metro lines running into the city, yet overall ridership has stagnated at about 12% of the population.

Rumor is, that SkyTrain's ridership may be over stated by as much as 25%, so instead of a claimed 200,000 passengers a day, Ridership maybe only 150,000 a day! Bad news for the RAV Line, where TransLink predicts 110,000 passengers a day withing 3 years and 200,000 cars taken off the road per day!

Believe that, I have some Bre-X shares for you!

Grumpy:

I already cashed in the Bre- X shares I never had.(insider tip !)
Bre-X's value to society was a more expensive ....err "costly" version of the Emperor has No Clothes, and how intelligent people bereft of basic due- diligence can get sucked - in by a combination of their own greed meets stupidity. A greedy fool and their money are soon parted.

The "Go Green" and Global Warming Climate Change cult members ( usually making hourly ritual sacrifices in homage to Al Gore) are simply the flip side...except it's E-V-E-R-Y-O-N-E ELSES' money they wish to piss -away .

BTW :.....by LRT I am referring to "on grade " , at street level , sans elevated track. Then we have a shop and compare. There is such a concept as " cutting ones" losses versus hiding and burying them in creative accounting.

Good point re: BUSES .....buses are like a disposable or transferrable equivalent to SkyTrain....if the ridership doesn't show up on bus...why do they expect it to show up on Skytrain? At least you can move the bus to another route, maybe alleviate pressure that exists on routes elsewhere...this can more easily adapt to demographic changes than a fixed track. Local Gov'ts may not have the same visions as these Transit Bureacrats.

The fact that literal daily ridership numbers aren't tracked AND made public ie the TRUTH -and -NOTHING- BUT- THE -TRUTH simply indicts this white elephant.ie " if they have nothing to hide...then don't hide it ,nor insult the Public's intelligence."

They can make great (ridership) predictions all they want...they mean nothing till the given clientele shows up. If they find that say continuing the SkyTrain will cost more than what is projected to be the benefit...well...Seattles Kingdome was only 10 years old when SkyTrain was started,(look what happened to it). BC Place was only 4 years old as well at the time SkyTrain started and look what has been discussed about its future.....get the drift ?

There could be a point its such a black fiscal hole there is a TaxPayer revolt. We are talking Long Term debt and the politicians are putting many of their eggs in one basket, yet leaving the door open to NON-USER's to "Pay the Piper".

PS Buy shares in cement companies....ie " gray gold ".

Logical and obvious but it doesn't happen

Transferable vehicle insurance would be of great benefit to the vehicle owner and the environment.

Many owners of the larger, family vehicle would commute in a compact vehicle if a system of transferable license plates and insurance existed. The insurance would, of course, be paid on that vehicle requiring the higher premium.

The absence of such a logical system amounts to a further rip-off by I.C.B.C., which has also benefitted much from reduced vehicle use, resulting from higher fuel prices, and permit applications associated with AirCare, in my opinion.

Pop Quiz: Which Gov't

Pop Quiz:

Which Gov't brought us ICBC ?.

Why is it S-T-I-L-L around ?

PS You all get two guesses.

How is it that environmental

How is it that environmental protection and denial is divided strictly on ideological terms?

Which shows that our "wealth creators" know it very well that "wealth taking" can not happen without environmental destruction.

The biggest part of the problem is caused by top down, collectivized and concentrated economic systems, demanding huge distances of unnecessary travel and transport by commuters and goods.

They call this "economic efficiency and growth".

The governments and scientists can jump up and down and foam at the mouth, until we return to locally based, small economic systems, without commuting and less transport, the problem will grow, without any possible solution.

But then the economists and big business will jump up and down and demand more collectivization and commuting, so they can keep on making ever growing profits.

Look at the planned NAFTA superhighway and what that will mean to the ecology.

Remember when thousands of miles of railways were torn up in Canada, especially on the Praeries, because "road transport is now more efficient" ? How did that help the situation and who was behind it ?

Ed Deak.

Logical and obvious *can* happen!

Transferable vehicle insurance would be of great benefit to the vehicle owner and the environment."

I'm not sure what you mean here. Do you mean multiple parties using one vehicle?

Certainly ICBC currently allows a 67% "fleet discount" for five or more vehicles owned by a single entity. This means an entire block could establish a car-sharing co-op, and save 67% on their insurance.

But most people don't want to share. They want to hop in and go, without consulting anyone else.

I say if they want a big SUV that sits around and a little car that they use daily, let them pay full insurance on both. Otherwise, they can get together with three neighbors and have an SUV and four compact cars owned in common and get a 2/3rds off their insurance. That doesn't sound like an "ICBC rip-off" to me!

Need versus Wants

As loganwayne said earlier:

"I have two dishwashers as well--me and my husband and perhaps that is what is missing in our society--the social factor--and determining the difference between what we want and what we truly need."

Even made more difficult by an economy and industry (ad)that purposely sets out to convince you that you need everything! And sometimes even you will find love by purchasing the product!

And only you the consumer can keep the economy afloat! Keep shopping!

Good luck to all of us!

Re: Logical and obvious but it doesn't happen

Bytesmiths,

You asked what I meant,

Almost too silly to mention. Although you may have two or more insured vehicles, you can drive only one at a time.

Transferrable Insurance vs Pay-as-You-Drive/per-KM insurance.

Transferable vehicle insurance would be of great benefit to the vehicle owner and the environment.

Transferrable insurance would be an improvement.

Pay-as-you-drive/per-km insurance would be even more productive. Per-km insurance would encourage people to use a small vehicle for single-occupancy local trips and a larger vehicle for longer family trips, camping etc. But a significant added benefit is that people with poor driving records would pay a lot more per km and would therefore be strongly motivated to be passengers in carpools whenever possible instead of being the driver. Since a relatively small group of drivers with bad driving records are responsible for killing over 200 people on B.C. roads every year and injuring almost 7,000 more, we would be protecting both people and the environment.

Hospitals produce massive amounts of carcinogenic pollution by incinerating disposable plastic gloves etc. Reduce the number of people injured by unsafe drivers every year and you reduce hospital smokestack emissions.

Here in Delta, our mayor drives an Extended Cab 4x4 pickup truck. She says she needs it to drive to her second home in Lone Butte. When my oldest brother lived there, I visited him in a small 2WD car during the summer with no problems at all. So our mayor is driving a 4WD gas hog all year round just to accommodate a couple of long trips each winter. It would make a lot more sense for her to drive a small electric car such as the Tango (http://commutercars.com) or the Twike (http://www.twike.ca) from her home in North Delta to City hall in South Delta and only drive the gas hog 4WD on trips to Lone Butte during the winter.

George Clooney is a Tango fan and spokesman. See
http://commutercars.com/images/gallery/customerCars/index/indexfiles/IMG_0496.JPG.jpg Since our mayor is single, she might be convinced to drive a Tango to city hall if George was included as an accessory. She'd have to stash him on the roofracks though. The Tango is a single-seater vehicle. The Twike is a two-seater.

An interesting aspect of the Tango is that as a single-seater vehicle, it's very narrow. The developers have lobbied to get it legally recognized as a motorcycle for purposes of being allowed to drive two-abreast on a single road lane. This aspect alone could cut traffic congestion in half.

My ideal vehicle would be as narrow as the Tango but would have the pedal-assist/exercise capability of the Twike. If I wanted to drive to North Vancouver from South Delta, I'd like to be able to drive to the nearest bus loop in a single-passenger Twike then instantly mechanically/electrically link together with up to 29 other single-passenger vehicles 3-abreast and up to 10 vehicles long. Mechanically-linked narrow vehicles can be 3-abreast on a standard road lane because they can be much closer together than individually driven vehicles.

The driver with the best driving record would be at the front controlling overall steering/acceleration/brakes for this temporary land-ferry/rubber-wheeled-train until it reaches a bus loop in North Vancouver. At the North Van bus loop, the land ferry would break up and each driver could head off to their individual destinations. In the meantime, 29 non-drivers could get some pedalling exercise to contribute a little bit of muscle power to supplement the electric power and/or tilt the seat back for a snooze, read a newspaper, work on a notebook computer, etc.

Temporarily mechanically-linking 30 single-passenger electric vehicles together for most of a long drive would reduce traffic congestion by at least 30-fold because they'd be 3-abreast and there would be no need to maintain any stopping distance between each vehicle. There would be great traction on snow and ice with 120 wheels on the ground!

A land ferry would offer the congestion-reduction aspects of public transit without the inconvenience and time-wasting aspects. At night, the land-ferries could be only as big as necessary. You wouldn't be hauling-around a bunch of empty seats as with buses. It would also be much more saleable from a personal safety point-of-view since a lot of bus passengers are attacked by thugs as they walk between bus stop and home late at night. This is a huge barrier to widespread acceptance of public transit.

Since everyone has their own passenger compartment in a Land-Ferry, there is no risk of catching Tuberculosis, SARS, Bird Flu or other airborne diseases from adjacent passengers. Regular public transit vehicles are perfect disease-spreading machines with large, constantly-revolving groups of people breathing each others' exhaled air within a confined common space. People with compromised immune systems due to organ transplant drugs, cancer treatments, very young age (infants), old age, AIDS, etc. are placed at great risk when they ride public transit adjacent to Tuberculosis or Flu carriers who are coughing their guts out non-stop, spraying a fine mist of spittle all over the place.

Quote:The "Go Green" and

Well, I guess swallowing the 'Big Lie' that fighting climate change will ruin the economy is better than getting it all over your face. Not so sticky and a shot of protein to boot.

Read the linked article. Please. Get informed before you throw around erroneous information. It may be YOU who's brainwashed.

If the link doesn't work, google for the Globe and Mail article on the Rocky Mountain Institute for facts instead of fiction.

72.14.253.104/search?q=cache:xHQSV6wVMj4J:www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20070224.wlovins23/BNStory/Front+globe+and+mail,+rocky+mountain+institute&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=5&gl=ca

raw link to cut and paste

Link in the last post didn't work. Cut and paste this google cache link for the article in question.

http://72.14.253.104/search?q=cache:xHQSV6wVMj4J:www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20070224.wlovins23/BNStory/Front+globe+and+mail,+rocky+mountain+institute&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=5&gl=ca

More dead horses

Maestro, studies have shown for years that at-grade transit attracts more customers than elevated or underground transit. One only grade separated when ridership makes running at grade near impossible (20,000 pphpd +). As SkyTrain is carrying less than half of this amount in peak hours, it's safe to assume that expensive grade separation was not needed.

Remember the cost of the original SkyTrain line to New West was more than the originally planned for LRT to Richmond, Coquitlam and Whalley!

I think the 'transit' chickens will come home to roost sooner than Campbell and Falcon thinks!

Best dish washer ever born

Best dish washer I ever owned ,was a big Saint Bernard, there wasn’t squat that he couldn’t clean, dishes, pots and pans any thing that had come into contact with food, everything sparkled once he was finished. We took on some house cleaning duties for a while, customers requested their dishes to be cleaned ,old Bernard was glad to oblige them. This dish cleaning by Bernard paid off in six ways, happy customers , a well fed Saint Bernard, and cash in my jeans from happy customers, and next to no dog food to buy, most important of all, we helped the environment. I would have loved to name him Kyoto , but I heard some dork back east had a lock on the name.

Keep honking STUMP.. You

Keep honking STUMP..

You know the punchline-sky

PS What are the sacrifices du jour to ol' Al Gore...HUMMERS and burnt Tofu ? I hear he's shortselling his Exxon stock right after he won the Ox-Gored.

I'm with "Brain".

I'm with brain, spin, spin and more spin. Campbell is chasing the polls, plain and simple.

As for cancelling the twinning of the Port Mann, dream on. When Falcon and his puppet masters get an idea in their heads, it's game over. Democracy?? Isn't Falcon the same guy who was going on about how China has the right idea because what the government says, goes? In 20 years we'll be gagging on fumes while these guys are laying on a beach somewhere far, far away.

Con$ervation $aves money Maestro

Did you read the article Maestro? Or are you going to ally yourself with Jerry Falwell? he's now blaming climate change on Satan... the devil warming the planet to put good Christians to work saving the planet instead of souls.

Unless you're a scientist slumming with us plebes, your musings on climate change don't hold water... just more hot air from folks in denial. The facts are in my friend... trying to trash Al Gore's reputation reflects poorly on you, not the guy who should be the American prez right now.

Mssr STUMP, Esq. Yes I

Mssr STUMP, Esq.

Yes I heard the Jerry Falwell comment on the radio yesterday. While it seemed a bit bizarre initially, maybe he's right about ol' Beelzebub. The news put it into the context of nouveau societal focus and attention prior to the Playoffs.

Well Mssr. Stump, esq. that Climate Change pulpit by the Leftie-vangelists is lathering up far too many. As I said before , its the old " When did you stop beating your environment up " ...loaded comment with a NO - win answer...and the leaders are out there making gray fuzzy statements in knee -jerk reaction.

Re: the article you quoted..YES, I read it.

Who is questioning re efficencies can be gained if one looks ? Even G West and I A-G-R-E-E-D (which almost blew a hole in the ozone layer) a while back on a topic involving architecture and condos. Coupland's book " Vancouver : A City of Glass" is very pertinent case in point.

It seems that almost every high -rise built these days has literal floor -to- ceiling glass on its exterior walls. These contribute to major heat losses. An insulated wall ie 2 X 4 equivalent has an R(ie insulating) factor of 12...Double glazed glass has an R factor of around 2.

If they want to "go green", change the building code to reduce this major heat loss . It uses up far more resources than need be. Are Cities being caught up in aesthetics? ...time they sh!te or get off the pot.

I recently walked through a house being built prior to the drywall being placed. The amount of sophisticated crap they put in these new homes is unreal..ie the HVAC systems etc. These are un-necessary and are energy hogs. However, they buff up buildings costs, hence are deemed improvements and hence property assessments, hence property taxes.Again where is leadership besides pimping the tax grab dollars?

Also, regardless of how well one's abode is insulated, do people crank up the heat and walk around the house in their T-shirts and boxers... or do they wear say such ancient artifacts as sweaters, fleece vests, etc. ? Recycle your OWN body heat.

BTW Stump..our thermostat moves to the "Left" ie its a LEFTIE for about about 18 hours a day , even in the Fall and Winter. It only moves to the Right,...ie average Leftie IQ (ie Room Temp) in the late afternoon /early evening.

The Public can easily buy into these no - brainer minor - tweakings on the road to pragmatic and practical energy efficiency ,and subsequent cost savings. This leads to the greater societal goal of reducing any/all wasteful and unnecessary impact on the natural environment as it unfolds and has unfolded for eons.

Unfortunately , peoples own laziness and Gov't hypocrisy is often a bad mix that maintains the status quo.

obfsuccate and ignore the issue.. as usual

It's your ideological brethren running the show right now... I suggest you put the question to them. The "Lefties" have found a reasonable solution, all we need are reasonable leaders to take note.

In addition : re Go - Green ?!

Also..check this out...in homage to this TYEE topics' photo.

http://www.wastecapwi.org/documents/ManagementofGreenTubes.pdf

Note the potential contaminant.

Note that all over the world countries(recently Australia ) are looking towards banning incandescent bulbs and by default encouraging use of the " energy saving" ones.

However, like ALL things, they will wear out and need to be disposed of. Again , like all things, eventually a flaw in the option , perhaps future non- option, will be exposed, and a need to deal with the pollutant issue beyond the landfill.

Then what, and at what cost, given society will likely be directed into one option, as Gov'ts will, in all nauseatingly - predictably likelihood fall all over themselves to keep up with each other and say "BAN incandescent bulbs" and then only later Gov't will be Pro-Active on the diversion of a "potential pollutant" front .

Can you say ANOTHER eco -fee ?.

PS I wonder if Al Gore heard about this ?

Stump;

Sorry STUMP...speaking of Leftievangelist pulpit sermons

" $$$'s are Evil... we Lefties will remove the temptation from thee and thou "...with the collection plate accompanied by the many commandments of Leftieslation (ie whay you get when you combine "Leftie" plus "Legislation").

You make no sense

sorry buddy, but it's pointless to debate someone who's unwilling to deal with facts but prefers instead to post red herringss and rather sub-standard attempts at humour as opposed to substantive issues.

If you think there's a better, cheaper solution beyond conservation let's hear it.

TRUMP the STUMP episode # 3567

No..its simply another version of " TRUMP the STUMP" .

THIS JUST IN:

Apparently ol AL " Oscar -winner -for- non- right- wing -documentary yawnnn " GORE's Nashville abode uses MORE energy in a single MONTH than the average home uses in a single year. His 20 room Nashville humble abode aka mansion apparently uses a total of $30,000 ANNUALLY in utilities costs.

Time to downsize for ol AL and spouse Tipper...doncha think? ....especially downsize his swelled -ego after he swayed the Hollywood Leftie crowd to vote him an Oscar.

Maybe he can stick a bulb in his mouth (or his___?) and light it up like Uncle Fester did on THE ADDAMS FAMILY TV show?

Organic Egg on face ?

Typical Leftie - vangelist , " certified hypocrite "....preach YET don't practice.

What? They should lead by example? A Leftie ?

QUESTION: Can you impeach an OSCAR win ?

Not a total loss, maybe we should work towards a goal to allow SMART cars in bicycle lanes...a "HYBRID" use of that discriminatory 2 wheeled use with low current demand anyway. They would fit....wouldn't they....?

Sorry,...You lose ,...a-g-a-i-n ... STUMP. Lefties may , in theory, "walk on water" , but it only counts if the water is below the bunions, not above the neck.

Must cut population growth

The population of British Columbia has grown 15.7% since 2002, while our Kyoto quotas have remained capped. Meeting Kyoto commitments and continued population growth are incompatible goals. Carbon emissions are direcly proportionate to population. Mr. Campbell is blowing hot air unless his policies address this inconvenient fact.

I disagree.

Population growth is not a key factor in meeting the Kyoto standard.

Actually doing something to address them is.

Bring on $3/litre gas and stop building bridges and roads for more automobiles.

Start charging every car that comes into the downtown core - just as they're doing, very successfully, in London.

Mr Campbell isn't the only one blowing hot air when people are trying to blame this problem on immigration, as you are.

A Copy, Paste and Keep Resource

Thank you, Cycling Commuter for your lengthy post, 21 hours ago (at writing) The linked information was too much for me to absorb at one reading so, as my subject title suggests, I'll paste the whole into a document to access as needed.

I favor the fully electric car but, for longer non-commuting trips, would not be averse to carrying a small Honda-type, gasoline-driven generator, for use at rest stops or as needed when an electric outlet is unavailable.

Other kyoto signatories have stable or declining populations...

I called it an inconvenient truth for a reason, Alcibiades. All of the major signatories to Kyoto have stable or declining populations, which give them wiggle room in managing their carbon emissions. Canada is out in left field. It need not be an immigration issue, but failure to deal with population growth will make Kyoto targets (even more) unattainable.

Percy

I disagree.

It's just another convenient Canuck excuse for doing nothing. Phil Hochstein is pushing the government to permit thousands more foreign workers to come here for employment in the construction industry for 2 years rather than the current 1 year allowed under temporary permits. Canada is not in left field at all - we're just lazy and prone to look for excuses. We clearly need a lot of immigration and there are plenty of people anxious to come here. Bring 'em on.

If it makes the rest of us sit up and notice what a bad job we've done with our natural environment so far - all the better.

Let's have $3/litre gas and a hell of a lot higher royalties on energy companies and the sooner the better.

The picnic is over. It's time to start cleaning up the mess.

Blowing Hard Dough

maestro, take a break why don't you. You have all the symtoms of social or stress disorder. Are you seeing anyone for this?

Growth Poulation and Physical

Alcibiades:

I think you missed the point stated earlier: "The population of British Columbia has grown 15.7% since 2002, while our Kyoto quotas have remained capped. Meeting Kyoto commitments and continued population growth are incompatible goals"

In other words, if housing is made more energy efficient and therefore uses less energy, it will not make a difference to the green house gas emissions if the number of houses increases; and the number of appliances manufactured and so on.

Tied to this is the fact the our communities assume perpetual growth, and that such growth is good.

Without recognizing limits - limits to consumption, ecological resiliency, and limits to physical growth, we will not succeed!

We need to do more with less; not less with more!

cluboclowns'nbozos

You and your ilk are the members of the cult that gets all lathered up...go tear yerself another one and vent through it. Try not to dent the ozone layer .

Yer the types that don't want to discuss things...all youse wants to do is have everyone agree to the subjective unsubstantiated junk - science party line.

Why not have ONE of you speak for the others and take turns, its often the same old propoganda re-lathered up.

Didn't ya catch the thing about Al Gore's Utility Bill on the news...its typical of these Save the World types.

Now I'll discuss Freebear points in my next post, so that your own typical moronic-sky reek does not become remotely attached.

Now go change your diaper, you waste of time.

Second Opinion...

Social, stress and anger problems. Your behaviour is abnormal. Are you trying to influence people here? Are there other ways you could attempt to make a point? You have failed to recognize that the only person all lathered up is you. Please get help. Wish you a speedy recovery.

Growth - Population and Physical

Alcibiades:
I think you missed the point stated earlier: "The population of British Columbia has grown 15.7% since 2002, while our Kyoto quotas have remained capped. Meeting Kyoto commitments and continued population growth are incompatible goals"

In other words, if housing is made more energy efficient and therefore uses less energy, it will not make a difference to the green house gas emissions if the number of houses increases; and the number of appliances manufactured and so on.
Tied to this is the fact the our communities assume perpetual growth, and that such growth is good.

Without recognizing limits - limits to consumption, ecological resiliency, and limits to physical growth, we will not succeed!

We need to do more with less; not less with more!

Freebear:

Yes good points....

....... which is what I alluded to way back when I discussed the Hi Rises and the amount of glass used on exterior walls. Glass has a rather poor "R" value. There are more and more hi-rises being built. Change this. Changes in the seemingly minor status- quo situations can reap an increasing number of dividends.

If we need to play the blame game..BC..whether by good luck or good management or both, has chosen hydroelectric power as the source of electricty. In much of the rest of Canada and the US, coal is the primary source of raw material to produce power. Some links indicate approx 30% of the energy potential contained within coal actually translates into electrical power, hence much is wasted.

I fail to see where BC is a major "polluter" on the global stage. Others have a lot of cleaning up of their own nests before coming knocking on ours.

Why should BC be grouped in with bigger sinners in the rest of Canada ? That both dilutes the blame and subsidizes the far more guilty ones. Typically Canadian?

Whats next..loss of "carbon sink" as a new enviro- parameter...what actually happened to that term "carbon sink " ? Some other group comes out of the woodwork and say ones local economic activity, ie forestry ,reduces the amount of carbon sink, thus more greenhouse gases result, and must be penalized?

Every person born establishes an impact on the current status - quo. Our hope is to minimize the negative impacts as pragmatically and practically as possible. I say " pragmatically " and " practically " because ideological decisions tend to do more harm than good , and are indicative of weak, lazy and indecisive leadership catering to special interest groups.

Those self righteous ideological types out there in public and on the TYEE remind me of an old Rhinoceros Party platform, a hybrid of the Pro-Choice fans..ie if they feel they are a pox to the environment, perhaps do their bit and support retroactive abortions. That would be far more consistent with their sphere...or atmosphere, of logic.

freebear

I did not miss the point. I was responding to Percy who is a constant critic of any kind of immigration. He has other axes to grind - as you'll pick up if you read back over some of his other offerings on diverse subjects.

I have no problem with limits to growth and adjustments in life style. Britain - although it has a smaller population growth factor than we do - 2.10 vs 5.85 immigrants per 1000 population - has actually met and exceeded its Kyoto targets during the same period that we have done NOTHING.

The problem is not immigration, it is a lack of political will and a paucity of immagination.

SO no, I was making another point entirely.

We need to stop making excuses and looking for easy fixes. It's way too late for that now.

Poor, poor Gore

OK, Maestro. Al Gore's a hypocrite. Him and about 5,999,999,999 other people on the planet. So am I. So are you.

In what way does that disprove the science and scientists who've shown climate change to be an major problem? Show us the junk science smart guy. Try to avoid the hacks picking up the bounties Exxon and its ilk have had to put on the table to try to get global warming data discounted. Peer-reviewed studies would be even better.

Jerry Falwell's an idiot. Does that negate the advice for living one finds in the Ten Commandments?

That's just plain dum

Alcibiades

Bring on $3/litre gas and stop building bridges and roads for more automobiles.

Who gets the extra revenue and how stupid are they gonna be with it.

Extra revenue - What extra Revenue?

There won't be any stinkin' extra revenue - every penny will have to go into making up for the mess of sitting on our hands for the past 20 years.

There would have to be a non-political board appointed to supervise the changes that are necessary - both to housing, transportation and the rest - the equivalent of what FDR did in the States in the thirties. A group of non-ideological experts with no personal axe to grind (i.e. not guys like Jimmy the P) who'd keep the Campbell clan from shifting any more resources to their friends. By the way, you might want to drop in at Mary's blog on the subject of what this bunch has been up to.

Non political, yeah right!

FDR's agenda was to get the economy back on it's feet by selective spending not be a nice guy.

What are you talking about?

The point I was making was with respect to the appointment of individuals and committees with no political agenda to take the decisions about how we meet Kyoto targets out of the political arena entirely.

I would have thought that was obvious. Guys like John Kenneth Galbraith who FDR snatched away from Harvard and put to work for the good of the whole society.

Instead of the kind of thing Premier Campbell specializes in - to wit - structurally putting the future of new energy generation in the hands of for-profit entrepreneurs instead of keeping it in the public realm. What Campbell is doing to the asset base of this province is criminal, in my opinion.

That's exactly the kind of pandering to one's base that we have to avoid if there is going to be any success in addressing the coming crisis.

I just don't want a bunch of compromised politicians playing nice to their friends at the expense of both the economy and the environment.

Carbon sinks

Forestry companies are already expected to replace the trees they cut down... and face penalties if they fail to do so.

Did you think all those college-age tree planters are employed because of corporate good-will?

Another example of good resource stewardship creating employment.

Stump:

Re: Carbon sinks and tree replanting

...yes true, but that was meant to expand the discussion...into a " What Next ? " mode re: Save -the -World initiatives.

In discussions of replacing old tress, I read once that younger trees have a higher capacity to clean up the environment than more established ones , due to their more vigorous growth patterns. However, when one logs an area and replants it, it would likely take / decades for the seedling to catch up and replace the positive environmental contribution of an older tree and its carbon sink capacity.

What about the Amazon ?...in the big global picture...if they keep turning the rain forest into agricultural land...this likely means no tree replanting in that jurisdiction , and less and less of a carbon sink that previously existed.

Wasn't the Amazon Rainforest once called the " Lungs of the Planet" for various obvious reasons ? Is the world now going to gang up on Brazil ? I doubt it, and for various "other" reasons. So then where is the global consistency that trumps the skepticism/cynicism pocketed elsewhere ?

Thus, if the "carbon sink" becomes a part of the big picture equation, it will change the discussion, and in fact perhaps encourage other issues/variables currently ignored or not yet acknowledged to be brought forward.

This Climate Change cult-istas is like a Rock Group on a world tour and dazzling everyone with all the flashy images and perceptions. Then the stereotyping and demonizing begins...maybe ol Jerry was right...ol Beelzebub is at it again....and does the Kyoto protocol apply in Hell ? We should check their utility bill in Hades , probably at least as high as Al Gore's.

$3 per litre gas?

Geez...

I seem to recall that we have this portion of the economic strata called the "WORKing Poor"...who probably earn just enough to keep a car on the road that barely passes Air Care, so they can get to WORK (....and the White Elephant eggs in one basket of SkyTrain is a non -option for many of them ).

Many are also trying to support families, but will most certainly and 110% willingly do their part by contributing to a TRIPLING of the gas price , even if it means they must bulk buy Kraft dinner.

The Working Poor would ALSO spend much more time in the Food Bank line -up, which also gets longer due to others put in a similar situation for the exact same $3 /litre gas reason.

Rough guess would see a high double- digit percentage of their net paycheque now going to their gas bill to get to WORK.

ie ....if they clear $10 per hour(an overly generous estimate) work 40 hours a week... thus clear $400 per week...currently spend $50 per week on gas...BUT tripling gas to $3 per litre = $150 per week to get to work ....YEP ! Thus $350 a week "after gas" is now only $250 a week "after gas".

Of course, Gov't always spends WISELY any and all funds gained from the " Beelzebub Tax " ie demonize something and tax it. It always reaches the targeted initiative and thus 100% consistent with the propoganda initially shoved down the Public throats so the Public will buy into the Beelzebub Tax.

BTW: The Kraft Dinner price goes up because that added overhead cost always trickles down to the consumer...rich or poor...but mostly impacts the poor.

..........YEP !!!

Geez Alci, I thought you were far more intelligent and compassionate than that.

North American consumption patterns

Maestro:

You seem to fail to understand that while every country can do more to help the environment, it's North Americans (and Europeans, and Aussies, and basically the 'developed' nations) who have the most wiggle room in terms of weathering the economic effects (if any... another highly debatable assertion, given the evidence that suggests enviro-initiatives can spur economic growth) of sustainability efforts. Suggesting Brazil, or India, or China match us may seem to be fair and balanced on the surface, but for the working poor (in developing nations) you are ostensibly looking out for, the hardships will be much greater than simply having to skip take-out pizza on the weekend, or shopping for hand-me-downs instead of new threads.

Minimum wage jobs

If one is working a minimum wage job in this current economic climate, and driving to work, it may well behoove the person to seek employment closer to home. As I understand it, there are plenty of vacancies in low wage positions these days and driving across the city is probably not necessary when/if there's a job around the corner.

Or the prov. gov't could raise the minimum wage to a realistic level and get serious about affordable daycare. Hmmm, option one looks like the more realistic scenario.

Maestro

Maestro yu said: "Geez...
I seem to recall that we have this portion of the economic strata called the "WORKing Poor"...who probably earn just enough to keep a car on the road that barely passes Air Care, so they can get to WORK (....and the White Elephant eggs in one basket of SkyTrain is a non -option for many of them )."

As Stump notes, it is about land use and settlement patterns; live closer to work, affordable housing; free transit.

And $3/litre gas will come, just you wait.

And whether or not greed and lust for profit and government revenues results in offshore oil & gas development (And its not even about Canadian energy security-NAFTA means we must continue exports at current levels to the U.S.).

What would happen to the 'god' economy if we decided paying someone to cook and serve a meal was a waste of money and we no longer patronized restaurants?

Do we really need someone else cooking our food?

But we would be told that we can't not go to the restaurant because it will hurt the economy!

It's probably more energy efficient

freebear

As long as you walk to the restaurant.

There is an irony there.

Alcibiades

for the good of the whole society.

In that a goodly number of today's problems could be traced back to the programs that were brought in.

Oh I don't think so at all

In fact, if you trace the arc of the current malaise wherein the rewards of a economy built on phony economics have been vesting more and more wealth in a smaller clique of individuals and companies while the relative position of the working and middle class either stagnates or declines I think you'd find it dates to the 70s when the kinds of measures that FDR and his advisors had put in place were overtaken and cancelled out by neoconservative economists from the Chicago School. These folks began to take over the candy shop during the Nixon years.

The details, should you want to pursue this any further, are readily available from Ed Deak.

If you’re talking about the effects of disregarding the importance of the environment and its health I don’t think you observation has much credence either.

$3 per litre gas ......one more time?

Sorry ladies and gentleman...

"Pie in the Sky" ideology may be calorie free, but it also doesn't provide any real sustenance.

Alci was the one that posted the $3 per litre price suggestion ...as well as his follow through. Review his "Extra revenue-What Extra Revenue ?" post above.

He implies it as a TAX,aka Gov't intervention...and NOT via supply and demand market forces..thats a whole other issue. Alci simply wishes to use the EXTRA funds ie approx $2 a litre as wealth distribution mechanism to fix the messes(?) we(?) have created(?)

One collateral problem will be that all fuels will be taxed..ie Natural Gas is used for vehicles AND as well as for heating residences of OLD AGE PENSIONERS ..WORKING POOR etc. Propane as well.

Then people will " try" and switch to electricity wherever possible...but we don't have enough capacity in place to satisfy demand due to this literal overnite $3 per litre gas price increase.

The "FDR model" may have worked in a time when a World War had finished,the roots of another one was commencing...society was shifting quickly from rural /agriculture to increasingly Urbanized...there was a time and place for FDR and his posse' of a -political types.

Also there was perhaps a "desperate times call for desperate measures" zeitgeist in place that had a General Public at the time as a more cohesive willing partner, the Great Depression certainly helped this (i)Gov't and (ii)the People "joint societal venture".

However...modern society is less cohesive...people drive their vehicles from their "caves" in the morning back to their "caves" in the evening(BTW...Hi Rise "caves" are often the most IMpersonal communities, though their enviro-impact/footprint is deemed minimal by some special interest groups ).

Modern History seems to show that this approx $2 per litre bounty TAX on gas will thus have Special Interest groups bending the Gov'ts ears to fund their own niche's " worthy initiative ".

Many of these Special Interest groups will be Public Sector Unions who see the cash register overflowing...while the Private Sector and even its Unions struggle to react aka try to survive via the added costs such as the $2 per litre gas tax (on top of the current $1 per litre retail price).

However, one final comment...do you ever think there is a economic catalytic/tipping point that even somewhere in the deep dark bowels of Gov't that Gov't realizes that fuel price increases (even with the Tax grabs Gov't loves)and maintianing them as well, ultimately lead to a recession-depression...not a boom...but a bust, and somehow there is communication by Gov't of this "Goose and Golden Egg " maxed -out potential to the Private Sector oil producers?

Just a thought.

Otherwise....Go for it...sounds like a well thought out plan(?) Koom -bay -ya-sky.

And what would the Chicago School

have had to tinker with if FDR hadn't come up with the New Deal? One thing usually leads to another.

Environment is top of mind for many

Maestro opines:

The ultra-left wing media outlets CTV and the Globe and Mail meanwhile, notes:

By this month, environmental issues had surged to the top of the worry list of 26 per cent of the people who participated in a poll conducted for The Globe and Mail and CTV News

complete story at:

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20070127.wepoll27/BNStory/ClimateChange

Leading me to wonder if seemingly intelligent, but uninformed people, offering their contrary opinions on serious issues, isn't one of the bigger roadblocks to even greater public acceptance of the need for individual action, guided by sensible rules, and based on reality -- rather than wishfully thinking everything is going to work out without actually tackling the problem.

Change is in the (hot) air. So many politicians wouldn't be jumping on the enviro-bus if it weren't so.

Stump:

I do like your LAST line in your comment titled " Environment is top of mind for many " . An interesting one to interpret in various ways.

I like the Title " Environment is top of mind for many " as well , it sounds like an old Confucious " quote ".

However, careful with the choice of Leftievangelists/ enviro-vangelists like Al Gore..." practice what thou preaches" . You do remember what happened to old Jimmy Swaggert and Jim Bakker right ?

The cause gets corrupted by the preacher/non -practitioners..... and the sheep scatter....(except maybe the Leftie sheep who can't seem to get enough).

PS Impeach that dam OSCAR-sky !!!

Nobody "chose" Al Gore

for anything.. except a majority of the American people... to be their president.

I'd say that's a knife that cuts both ways. Consider the company your viewpoints have been keeping.

Stump:

This is getting formulaic ... esepcially when the Left is " Inconvenienced by the Truth".

..and also: You are plagiarizing Ellen Degeneres' Oscar routine on the " Al Gore chosen by a majority of Americans " comment. Careful...That's symptomatic of Leftie denialists and apologists.

BTW who doesn't care about the environment, etc...??? and no group has a monopoly on this. Perhaps this issue ties in nicely as to why the Left are becoming irrelevant. They are into retro mode and recycling old issues and trying to make them look nouveau and pioneering.

I can remember way back when the environment was becoming a big issue but it was more based on local concerns , hence more within OUR power to deal with. Back then a lot of the "environment" was rivers and pollution levels/ coliform counts. Society saw the need and invested in sewage treatment plants. That was OUR problem locally, and dealt with LOCALLY.

Same applied to other issues. Ol' Terry Jacks didn't like the Howe Sound Pulp Mill... got into an enviro lather...and action was taken. Unfortunately the mill is shut down, no longer viable after millions spent to upgrade it. Oh well, I'm sure it was all REALLY over Terry Jack's "I'm all right Jack" view, but that's how Lefties work, one surficial agenda masks the real self -serving one.

Mind you , I checked out Al Gores' home state, electric power generated mostly by hydrolectric and Nuclear means...so even if he is an energy Hog "The U.S. President shoulda been " is likely polluting less to maintain his 20 room mansion than say if he was in California where such things as coal is burned.

Here's some hot air.

Loaded with CO2 as well. You don't see this discussed very much. If all the fires were put out the CO2 levels might actually improve.

snert:

Interesting link. Thanks !

I can't say I had ever heard of " Coal Fires " before...nor their collateral effects.

However, it's these side bar issues(ie Coal Fires contribute a huge volume of greenhouse gases) that often aren't tallied up in the Big Picture overview, and yet all the blame -game is often directed at convenient targets like Western Civilization lifestyles.

Of course, Western civilization tends to have more disposable income which can donate funds to support these myopic /tunnel - visioned Environmental groups.

What a coincidence eh?

Perhaps the " Inconvenient Truth" fans/disciples should be more Pro-Active , saddle- up and help fight COAL FIRES ...and especially those in Non- Western Civilization countries .

It DOES look serious , in my own view .

It's also an "Incovenient Truth"

I've known about coal fires for a long time so I thought I'd look it up.

I was really surprised at the magnitude of the problem. It is big enough that it should be dealt with in any discussion on Global Warming but you just never see it.

I wonder if it is being ignored because it doesn't fit in with the 'Green' agenda and the plans to revamp the world to their image.

I don't know how many are burning in Canada but there are some in Alberta for sure.