Blame Game

I'm fed up with these views that our politicians are to blame for this mess or that mess. Who elected them? Who keeps the consummer cycle hamster in constant motion? These views that politicians have any idea what to do other than get elected is absurd. They're brains were turned to mush once they started smoking to much of there own supply. They're on a power high and the only thing that will bring them down is defeat at the ballot box. Or the way over due revolution where we string them all up and take back what rightfully belongs to the human race. "Emma! Where's my shotgun!"

Bingo!

Club, you are dead on, we elect the bums. We delude ourselves that the person we elect will work for us. NOT! Instead, once elected, the politician works for the PM, with a bit of lolly thrown our way to keep the masses happy.

Many, or most, people are

Many, or most, people are always happy in dictatorships, as it frees them from having to think for themselves. I've had a lot of experience with all of them.

When Preston Manning raised his scewball head, all we could hear around here, a still solid unionist/Reform area: "What we need is a benevolent dictatorship and Preston is going to give it to us". There was even a Reform/Christian militia being formed, who were openly declaring: "When Preston takes over we'll knock off all the fruits, the Indians and socialists".

They went underground after the Oklahoma City bombing, but the warmed up Reform fossils are still being reelected time after time.

When I was in Austria for 3 years after the war, all I could hear was how good they had it under Hitler. Hitler would have been reelected in Germany and Austria without any problem.

If Harper comes up with some good slogans, the suckers will give him a majority. Even now, practically the whole country is under Reform governments under various disguises.

Campbell is one of them.....

So, how do you persuade people to think for themselves and accept democracy?

Democracies are not knocked over by outsiders, they self destruct through apathy and mental drug addiction, following fraudulent ideologies. Look at the history of Rome, how it went down the drain and how the USA is being turned into a fascist dictatorship with the phoney War on Terror, eagerly applauded by the Harper govt.

Ed Deak/

Lost

I guess that's why we can't learn from the past. The apathy, the fact as you state, that most people don't think for themselves. In reality the norm is self destruction. Only this time there is no where left to run to. We've "developed" the whole planet to suite our lifestyles. The last frontier is science fiction, sorry trekkies, we're not going anywhere. This will be our last stand. The developed consummer society we have built and continue to chase based on cheap energy that props up this unsustainable house of cards must collapse. The fall out will be devastating. As it has been throughout civilization when things don't go our way. The difference this time is the scale. Funny that a species with the creativity to invent music, to make art, the ability to reason, show compassion and dream... and everything else good about humans, can't rise above the looming crises. I feel for those who will still be around to witness the fall of the global empire in 50 years from now. It's going to get ugly. I'm embarrassed to look the dolphins in the eye anymore for what we've done.

Club... the problem is that

Club... the problem is that there's no such thing as "cheap" anything, because monetary values mean are only often violence induced, temporary perceptions, as the article above proves.

There are only physical costs, which can not be altered, or ignored, as per GDP and the rest of the neoclassical crap taught in our universities as "science".

The purpose of economic theories is to cover up the real costs and transfer them on wider sectors, while syphoning the benefits off to special interest power elites.

This is the history of the world and this is why it keeps on repeating itself.

Right now, as always, the human race is being led by the nose to its doom by the biggest crime wave in its history. It is called "neoclassical market economics", destroying more of the environment and killing morepeople, on the long term, daily basis, than both world wars and the death camps of Stalin, Hitler and Mao put together.

Harper has a MA in it and Emerson a PhD.

And it is all based on "faith" in the impossible, again, as the article above proves.

Ed Deak.

Did it really take two

[INSULTS DIRECTED AT OUR CONTRIBUTING WRITERS WILL NOT BE TOLERATED IN THIS FORUM. -MODERATOR.]

FIAT RUBBISH OR FIAT ... ?

There are only physical costs, which can not be altered, or ignored, as per GDP and the rest of the neoclassical crap taught in our universities as "science".

The purpose of economic theories is to cover up the real costs and transfer them on wider sectors, while syphoning the benefits off to special interest power elites.

Ed, these statements show either your complete ignorance, or else something much worse. Which is it?

As to the tar sands and their GHG outputs, a recent CBC documentary quoted one expert as saying that for between $2 and $13 per barrel, the GHG output could be reduced to very little. So why isn't it being done when the tar sands are profitable at $20 per barrel?

"Albertan greed", eh?

C'mon, my hippie friends; the extraordinary engineering projects of Canadian wealth and power around Edmondchuck and MacLeod are pretty tiny, compared to the endless tundra in which they sit. Try clicking up one level on the map, dudes, or two.

There's not much treeplanting, graduate school or interdisciplinary social work up there, so of course most Tyee readers aren't familiar. That's cool.

Will be quite happy to see Birch, Booker and Brain at a good seafood restaurant on No. 1 Road in 2025. They'll say, "Can't believe we were such hysterics back then. Sorry."

And I'll just say, "Fellas. Posters. Fretters. Drink some of this Canadian water."

Its sad...

Its sad that people like Earnest don't get the reality that the ocean dragging, the ocean acidification, coral reefs dying, the ocean warming, coupled with melting glaciers, overfishing...

Aand most especially fish farm lice leaving wild salmon on the verge of extinction predicted in as little as 4 years on the inside or 8 years on the outside due to the politics of just one premier alone... what do you think were going to eat in the wake of 8 billion wasteful consumers? Shrimp growing in the sludge of Chinese rivers?

When I read posts like yours, Earnest, I have to shake my head due to the fact that you have absolutely no clue as to whats happening in this world and your ignorance reveals it.

Peak oil, Peak coal, Peak natural gas, these coming conventional energy shortages are for real and only a dumbed down dullard drull dippy dimwitted dummy would think otherwise and ignore the glaring realities of doing nothing other than more of the same.

The sheer reality that anyone can think growth is endless, boggles the mind. To not think that we'll end up in the wake of drowning in our own waste as is the fate of yeast in rotting grapes, is to miss the point.

Already, I've grown accustomed to the reality that my diet consists of anything that does not have eyes... for very, very, very healthy reasons. Food from the top of the chain can no longer be trusted. By 2025, seafood will either be unavailable, or dangerous to swallow. The empire below, knows it. All states but 2 suggest to not eat their own fresh water fish. To think that it can't happen in salt waters, especially shorelines... And that water you suggest, its not coming from the Athabasca river in 2025... thats a surety.

I suggest you go preach to a different choir and find other lemmings willing to follow you off your cliff.

Buddy Campbell

Money is not physical. Whats so hard to understand about that? The minute we put a monetary value on environments, on life and all that sustains it, the second we've done this is the second we've devalued, cheapened and minimized that which is priceless. What is so hard to understand about that?

The human construct of money has more value than life and the environments that sustain it. Why else? Surely you knew the point to asking such a rhetorical question such as this. Nevertheless, its in a mocking tone. These statements show either your complete ignorance, or else something much worse. Which is it?

Is it cool? Is it cool that any effort into mine reclamation of tarsands sites have failed due to PH acidification rendering these pits and the thousands of acres surrounding it as dead spots on the earth? (never mind the tailings ponds... they still don't know what to do about them, ponds that are fast becoming the largest in the world) And what have you done for this wonderful planet of ours. Have have you been north of the fort yourself? I'm guessing you have no clue yourself what goes on.

You should talk to workers in these refineries... truly. Find out about their "ramped up security" and the wonderful quality of the air that makes one have a hard time sleeping the first couple weeks they arrive... but they get used to it. Eventually, the body rests with the toxins to rebuild with when given no other choice.

Its all about value, Earnest. And if all you value is resources that grow increasingly scarce to the point of igniting the next world war instead of environmental and human population sustainability, you might just get your monetary wish and all that goes with it... and your children will get to reap what you sow.

Budd, Budd, Budd....

What expert said the tar sands are profitable at $20.00/bbl?

You may think you can shoot holes in Ed's economics - personally I doubt it; but, if you think anyone is going to take seriously the suggestion that extraction from Colorado shale (that's the geologic name for the Tar Sands) is (even marginally) profitable at a price of any less than (on average) $50/bbl, then I'd like to ask if you're interested in some French bank stocks?

As the Economist (notice I've picked a neo-con reference) recently wrote: "the cost of extraction is now in the $40-$50 range. Moreover, there are other obvious difficulties which may push cost a lot higher than that. Getting oil out of the tar sands is more akin to strip mining than to conventional oil production. The process also uses a lot of water. Laying waste vast tracts of wilderness and polluting the rivers is bound to be fiercely opposed by environmentalists, and dealing with their concerns could make the oil very expensive indeed."

In fact, given the amount of energy required to extract oil from bitumen, the costs of production also tend to rise in lock step with the price of the final product...and, as Ed would point out, much of the financial accounting takes no notice of the other non-denominated costs to the environment - both terrestrial and atmospheric.

I think you need to step back a few metres and punt.

Oh and by the way

In June 2006 the Tar Sands claimed costs of supply (at the Plant Gate - not FOB Chicago) of Athabaska Crude was $39/bbl.

This estimate was based on the following assumptions:

WTI(West Texas Intermediate) at Cushing, Oklahoma is US$50 per barrel;
• NYMEX natural gas is US$7.50 per MMBtu;
• U.S./Canada exchange rate is 0.85; and,
• light/heavy crude oil differential (Par versus Lloydminster Blend) is US$15 per barrel...

None of which are valid any longer.

Budd.....My statements are

Budd.....My statements are based on the complete ignorance and rejection of the presently ruling neoclassical market economic theory, destroying humanity and the Earth.

Basically the same reason the communists sentenced me to the gulags, in absentia, and tortured my Mother trying to find me, because I also rejected their warped minds based economic theories.

I repeat for your information: "Wealth can not be created, only taken from other sectors, the environment and the future"

"Costs can not be cut, only transferred on other sectors, etc."

"Monetary values are not realities, but often violence induced, temporary perceptions"

Now try to break these by breaking the first and second laws of thermodynamics, plus the laws of speed and reaction.

Good luck!!!!

By the way, how long could a business last by ignoring debits and liabilities, as per the present economic calculations using the fraudulent GDP figures and accounting the sale of capital as "earnings" and "income"?

I wish I could have run my businesses without having to pay my bills.

Ed Deak.

I see someone else has taken notice

http://www.thestar.com/News/article/297574

Charter Of Rights......

This ought to be at the top of the first page!

Thanks, Ed!

BTW Considering that Canada is now the #1 supplier of oil to the US, does anyone think that the nation which championed the notion of "externalizing costs" would EVER let us pull the plug on the Tar Sands....?

Brain

Scary link Lorne

Al Bore and Dave Nooky

I can visualize Al Bore saying, its gonna be Alberta's fault when the clouds all come crashing down, in the mean time Al Bore jumps in his Alberta gas powered vehicle, drives 30 kms to YVR, picks up his wife and her sister, both , just returning from a warm Southern continent holiday, their 747 possibly having burnt Alberta fuel to get there . Riding with Al Bore is his brother in law Dave Nooky , who is telling everyone as they head home. Goodbye Fraser Valley farmland, goodbye seaside cottages and condos, goodbye all river deltas, all ferry terminals. Hello dikes and dams and pumps. Hello migrants to higher ground, too bad there's no insurance company left alive.... Goodbye Delta port and Richmond, goodbye YVR and the Vancouver Convention Centre, goodbye Jericho and the CN railway terminal. All gone, due to global warming caused by Alberta. Probably, this will occur, but, not due to some world warming phenomena, but rather a cataclysmic earth quake on our coast. This is a given, this is more frightening than the global warming theory. The town of Hope, may then become the landing port for the Gulf of Georgia. My point, everyone uses oil in one form or another, E-V-E-R-Y-O-N-E, of course no one wants to stop living with out it. Anyone who says they do are being a hypocrite. This is a fact. EG, ask Ed Deak w-h-a-t source of fuel does he use to run his generators at Big Lake.

where's the proof?

If I might presume to paraphrase Mr. Deak, his position seems to be that you can't make something from nothing, which is quite logical and in keeping with the laws of this univers. If you have a magic formula that disproves this Budd, I urge you to come forth, collect your riches, and save the planet.

Earnest Canuck, your disparaging remarks are indicative of a person who hasn't done their research. Your opinion that none of us have ever ventured beyond the bounds of Metro Vancouver and your snooty tone regarding higher education puts you squarely in the land of the idiot. I'm sure you have plenty of company. How many arrived in SUVs?

woody..... We only have a

woody.....

We only have a generator for emergencies, when the power goes off, sometimes for long periods. Otherwise, we use gas and diesel, like everybody else. Albeit in a very limited way. We don't travel, the last time I was in a plane was in 1968, go to town, 55 km from here, twice a month and use our truck for about 3,000 km per year. In the past 6 months we've used approx. 900 litres of gas and about 200 litres of diesel. Compare this with somebody who commutes to work.

Now, we have the USAF B52s practicing over our heads to kill millions somewhere, sometimes 12, or more times a day, flying N-S and E-W virtually always on the same track. Used to have one flight a day, but for the past few months we can see and hear them in the night, or above the clouds, all the time.

I calculated once, by timing them that while I can see one, each one is using enough fuel to power all our equipment for 5 years. Now add this up into hours, day after day.

In short, nobody in their right mind would suggest no vehicle use, but what goes on today on needless commuting and the needless transport of goods made somewhere else is completely insane.

So what is your suggestion, carry on and increase the waste to fill the pockets of
"investors". Makes no difference to me at my age, but what about young people?

How is it that the ideologically warped can only see everything in black and white?

For your information, there are 400 degrees of gray.

Ed Deak.

Ed

Ed, I'm fully cognizant of your very frugal life style, and sincerely, kudos go to you. By my naming you as an example, I was attempting to illustrate that even you Ed, as environmentally conscience as you , you can't totally escape from the grasp of oil, none of us can. I know, both my wife and I also live very frugally. You asked me [So what is your suggestion, carry on and increase the waste to fill the pockets of investors".] No of course not, you pretty well sum it up where you state, [ needless commuting and the needless transport of goods made somewhere else is completely insane.] This is pretty well what I attempted to illustrate in my little story. Ed, you and I are for the most part, on the same side. What pisses me off, are those characters who beat their chest and extol how environmentally conscience and green they are, then turn around and fly off to some warm climate in some far corner of the earth, or go visit aunt lulu bell on the other side of the earth, simply because they can, in turn spewing their filth in the atmosphere as they go.

Tar Sands

I tried this once before and I was told that it was too long. Ergo, there will be multiple entries. Here goes [again].

Seldom have I seen such a collection of left wing babble in one place at one time.

I feel qualified to make a few comments because I am a retired power engineer and this is my territory you people are trying to comment on.

Brain, your trust in CBC is truly amazing. All the CBC is is the propaganda arm of the LIEberal party of Canada. I have a lot of nasty words concerning the CBC but fortunately for the gentle people here, I refrain from using them.
In the first place, they totally misrepresent the use of water. 99.999999% of the water used at the Ft. MacMurray sites is used either for transport of material or it is used for cooling. Your report suggested that it is consumed and will never again enter the system. So much for the mental midgets at Cretien's Broadcasting Corp.
In the second place, using that population stat is totally bogus. Two million people don't live in the area, nor do two million people live upstream, downstream or anywhere nearby. Many have tried over the years to put a plan together to sell some of our water to the USA. Every single time, it meets with disaster and usually for the same reason. The tree huggers don't want to wreck that "pristine" environment. More BS from the CBC.

Have you ever seen that "Pristine" environment - complete with mosquitoes that could carry off a small child? Or the tar sand beetles? Or the fifty below temperatures that they get on a routine basis?

to be continued...

no thanks

If the previous post by Tractorman is indicative of the name-calling and raving he is planning to continue, I vote "no thanks, anyway".

Tar Sands cont'd

Grumpy, Oreo cookies? I had never heard it described that way but it does seem to fit. I like it.

Some of you seem to think that any water that is used by process is going to be returned to the environment not fit for any kind of use. Before I retired, I did work in an environmental lab doing similar work to what the lads at MacMurray are doing. I can tell you from personal experience that neither the federal nor the provincial environmental department people have much of a sense of humor when it comes to violations. In vitually all cases at our site, the waste water was returned to the lake in slightly better condition than we took it.

Earnest Canuck - Amen bro' Not many of these left coast people have the foggiest idea of what goes on in the real world.
Maybe if the tar sands were shut down and gasoline for their precious little econobox cars was fifty dollars a liter, they might like it better. Of course, anyone making less than a million a year would be a penniless bum.

to be cont'd

Tar Sands

gkam, I guess that it is all right for the left[OFFENSIVE WORD MODIFIED. FEEL FREE TO BE PROVOCATIVE AND CONTRARY BUT PLEASE REFRAIN FROM THE INVECTIVE. -MODERATOR.] to continue to mess all over the one industry in this lonely country up here that can provide some employment AND help with our nation's energy problems.

You keep your head buried in the sand. It seems to suit you well.

Before you go back to the land of perpetual sand, you might explain one tiny little thing for me -
If I try to comment at the technical level, you call it raving. And yet the left wingers here obviously have no technical training in the field and they can say anything that they want. Do you see any kind of a conflict with this?

I have just decided to wait until some feedback comes along before I finish this. Wouldn't even surprise me if I get banned. [won't be the first time either]

You guys are still going to have to ask yourselves what life will be like when gasoline is fifty dollars a liter and your [not-so] smart cars are laid up because you can't afford to feed them.

Oh, my, . .

Just because someone disagrees with Mr. Tractor, he assumes he is much smarter and well-informed than they. Some of us who disagree have both education (Master of Science working with energy and the environment) and experience (former Senior Engineer for one of the US's biggest power companies).

I called your post raving, bacause it was - full of invective and the calling of names. If you want to discuss the technical points of this topic, let's get on with it. But stop this sophomoric assumption that you know more than everyone else.

Tractorman

What, exactly, is our country's 'energy' problem?

As to the technical side, what exactly is the cost at the plant gate of a barrel of Athabaska crude these days?

Neanderthals have net access now?

How about that, I just found out that only environmentalists drive cars and live in cities.

Apparently Tractorman and Earnest_Canuck live in tree forts and go to work on horses.

Thank god its 2008 and they have wind-up computers out there in the boondocks now.

Banned for name calling on the Tyee? Geez, you aim high don't you? Get a job and find a woman boys, life's too short to call that your proudest day.

this is more like it!

I used to be a red neck too, Tractor. You might need to calm down and think about what you have said here. The fact that you can actually construct sentences in english is significant(some posters here have trouble with that, always including myself).
But your favourite project (Tar Sands) is a disaster. Takes more energy than it provides and that does not account for the water used. I happen to inhabit the "left coast" and accommodate numerous relatives who made their money in the "Patch". They paid what taxes they saw fit to Alberta and now they expect BC to look after them
Left coast
Get it?

Tractorman

I''ll get into the name calling in another post, because there's facts to be discussed here. I'm a 2nd-Class power engineer still working in the field (for 24 years) so we're probably equally ignorant.

The difference is , you hung yours out on the line where everyone can see the lurid pink lace.

Syncrude alone used 34 million cubic metres of water in 2006 that wasn't returned to the environment in usable form. It returns 80% of all water to the environment, not 99.999999%, and it claims to be the most efficient user of water. so what does that say about the other three operators?

http://sustainability.syncrude.ca/sustainability2006/environmental/water.html

And....

Interesting report here...

http://www.wilsoncenter.org/events/docs/Bruce_OIL-AND-WATER-Oct-23_FINAL.pdf

Merely one of hundreds.

Tractorman, the industry you try so vociferously to defend is one of the most polluting industries in the world, next to the war industry. It's obviously OK for you to dump millions of cubic metres of water containing heavy hydrocarbons, napthenic acide and heavy metals into the environment without a clue how to treat or remove the contaminants, and I can't help you understand the errors in your thinking.

All that yap-yap about providing employment for the unemployable in a lonely part of the country is just a smoke screen. We don't let people start wars on a pretext just because it reduces unemployment and makes the GDP go up. And we don't let them feed their drug addictions even though they reduce unemployment for copos and social workers and make the GDP go up. Can you make the jump to polluting the environment to feeding an oil addiction, simply to make the GDP go up?

This isn't about lefty [EDITED. -MODERATOR.] or Chretinites or the CBC or anything else. You've manifested a rude, selfish attitude, and if you tried to operate a recovery boiler the same way the oil industry operates in Fort, the branch would have your ticket in a minute, if your employer didn't.

But because it's a huge company in a tactical industry, one that swallowed more than $20 billion in government subsidies since 1967, and one that's protected by the Alberta Government, even though it never paid them a dime in royalties all those years (and protested mightily when forced to do so to the tune of 1%!) nothing is allowed to be said.

And you defend it. Disgusting.

Simply disgusting

Bait Still Works

I thought that would do it and it did. Now that we know everyone's acedemic qualifications, what you all have to do now is answer one simple question.

If the tar sands are providing 20% of Canada's energy and you shut it down, where is that 20% replacement energy going to come from?

You can whine and gripe all you want but the facts remain. The alternate energy sector has a dismal track record over the last several decades. BTW, I have seen the wind farms in southern Alberta and I have seen the wind farms near Palm Springs CA. They are impressive but the fact remains that we are still short of energy.

If the tar sands shut down, this will be a very cold and lonely country to live in.

Come again?

Let's just deal with Canada's hydrocarbon needs.

OK with you Tractorman?

Where do you think all that production from the tar sands is going?

Haven't you been listening to Dick Cheney's supplications?

Canada could easily meet her own needs without any further development of the tar sands if we had a reasonable domestic National Energy policy. If you're not aware of that, it's clear why you're into name-calling - you simply have no clue what you're talking about.

Canada currently provides the United States with roughly one million bbl of oil a day - coincidentally pretty much what the tar sands are currently producing. (You can look it up).

However, the Yanks want a 5-fold increase in output.
That's what the little bun-toss in Houston last summer was all about.

Remember?

So let's do some truth-telling here and recognize that ramping up the program has bugger all to do with domestic needs.

We should give the required notice to get the hell out of NAFTA now before the Americans decide they want our water too.

So, stop with the fulminating and let's actually see what you do know about the situation.

The lefties around here aren't as easily gulled as your friends at the Moosehead or the Black Horse.

After enough beers almost any Albertan can be convinced he's a vital link in somebody's chain.

I think you're just rattling yours!

Hi Woody

I agree that we all use fossil fuels in one way or another. But surely you must agree that it's a finite resource... and as such should be husbanded with a much greater care than our current profligate attitude... because we all use fossil fuels in one way or another and haven't found viable substitutes for many applications at this time.

B-52's

Hey, Ed,

Where do you live? Can I find it on mapquest? As a former Air Force tech, I wonder why the USAF has changed flight paths, and what is up.

I've been wondering if Dubya was really going to give up command, and let following administrations find out the terrible little (and BIG) nasties they have been hiding.

I fear some kind of action against Iran, (trumped up, of course), and suspect the possibility of a National Emergency, and the loss of freedom from this crew of Nazis.

gkam....We live at Big Lake,

gkam....We live at Big Lake, which is about halfway between 150 Mile House and Likely.

The usual flightpath is slightly to the West of us on N-S flights and slightly to the North on the E-W courses.

The South flights always change course over Williams Lake, which indicates a navigation beacon, most likely in the Riske Creek area.

We've had these N-S flights, usually one a day, since we bought this land in 1975, which indicates the "fail safe" nonsense, but the E-W flights are only since last year and the numbers have increased, indicating pinpoint navigation exercise, in the last few months. Sometimes 2-3 within minutes, crossing each others' constripe
paths. There were 3, within 10 minutes yesterday when I was outside to feed my cows.

I never navigated in ships, or planes, but have been a top line car rally navigator in the 60s, so I do know a bit about maps and calculations etc.

Ed Deak.

BUFFs

I know this a thread about oil sands, but please excuse one more off-topic note.

The debacle a few months ago, involving the "accidental" loading of a nuclear missile onto a B-52 headed for Barksdale AFB was NO ACCIDENT. Those kind do not happen. I think it was more likely that someone was blowing the whistle on something that shouldn't have been done, such as preparing a "surgical" strike on Iran.

Of course, a "surgical" strike by a B-52 is like brain surgery with a chainsaw.

For Tractorman

Who said anything about stopping the flow of oil from the Tarsands? I'm saying stop the continued development until tarsands oil companies can clean up their act. The Pembena report is sound. Oil companies are blowing it environmentally, and governments are looking the other way.

Its mindboggling that anyone can suggest that water isn't being consumed and rerouted as well. Does anyone seriously doubt the fact that a million barrels of oil a day production isn't consuming a fresh water supply that can feed 2 million people? The projected daily output is 1.7 million barrels per day by 2014 and that will take a fresh water supply that feeds 3.5 million. Will ecosystems down stream of the Athabasca be able to survive?

C'mon. Anyone who knows how bitumen is extracted knows its by steam and that steam isn't returned back into the river, but condensates are returned back into the ocean and no one is breathing a word of the contaminants they contain.

As for your brainwashed, narrowminded view of "we have to burn oil, coal and natural gas til its all gone" deadly paradigm... (sorry, but its such a pissoff), what is clearly lacking is vision and I can't say your's is any way shiny or stellar.

I’ve brainstormed on other sites about a week ago and the rest (outside of a leadership quality summary) is just a cut and paste, but it sums things up with greater detail. I can’t do the budgets, the numbers, because the realities of it are that the feds can only do so much. We must rely on but at the same time, influence market initiatives and personal intitiatives to see this vision through.

Cont.

- There is so much more we can do... it begins with city and municiple planning. Its all about access and what powers a cities needs. There is clearly such a lack of vision in these regards! Think for a moment why we face such serious problems in converting over to Green tech. Infrastructure will need to be changed on such a large scale...

But you know... I keep hearing how there's SO MUCH MONEY in DEVELOPMENT. Are we to think there won't be jobs out of this, that economies can't be run on such development alone? Someone please tell me the numbers new construction in housing alone has generated alone in the last 5 years.

And one last thing. What does it take to be a leader, truly? We have a current leader who rules with an authoritarian, controlling attitude that is reflected through its cabinet. All must go through the PMO to the point where all decisions are made by the PMO. There is no functional plan to run a country that should channel all ideas and all decisions to just one man. We are seeing the failures of this government precisely due to such a “brand” of leadership. And that vision isn’t overly shiny concerning the environment, economic protection of Canadian industry, or world affairs. Harper is running this country like a governor runs a U.S. state and I don’t think its a far reach to suggest that this is precisely how he percieves it!

Cont.

What do I think of Dion? His English is bad, but so is the English of half this nation. Where does he accel over Harper? Try a love for his country. Try a man who is honest and worthy of respect. Try a man who knows he can’t do it alone. For within the leadership debate of the Liberal party, was born a comprimise. And I suggest to you all, that when there is no comprimise, eventually, only isolation is the effect. An uncomprimising leader stands alone. Ask God why God forgives. And if God talk is too much for you, ask yourself is forgiveness has merit, for forgiveness is that which comprimise is built.

Taking faults with the pros is what makes relationships last. And don’t think for one second as you look at yourselves in the mirror you see perfection.

I say give Dion the respect and ability to lead that he deserves. Its not the “what” that defines a leader. Its the “who”. An english white man’s middle age with a background in institutionalized economics means nothing to me. Does that leader have a soul to go with that leaders brain? Is that leader aware of what it takes to delegate authority, to share the responsibility to get the most out of his/her team? Is that leader aware of the worlds shared environments? You know the answers and they aren’t hidden.

So I say give Dion a chance. I can be wrong with the assessment of people's character, but its rare. I know people. You don’t use the word “Kyoto” with love 100 times a day for no reason (its the name of his dog). You don’t wear green on your sleeve by accident. And you don’t double the size of national parks in Canada on a whim. Dions greatest asset is the fact that he does listen, he does love our nation, he embraces strong federalism of which the expansive size of this nation needs to remain strong, and he wants whats best for the environment. He has a soul! And I have to tell you all, with all I have read in terms of what Harper feels… there is no love for this nation and its past visionaries. To Harper, were just another U.S. state.

And finally, the what of an individual is nothing compared to "the who". Ask Stephen Hawkins. Ask why it is that whether one is a ditch digger, an artist or a fortune 500 CEO, that the "who" of a person trumps the "what". What is the potential, "realized" or otherwise? The will? Goal? Plan? This is what defines who we are, Tractorman and don't ever forget this. Don't ever discount words of truth when you hear it.

Hey, Brain,

Your energy rant was exactly right.

We had programs to do all that in the late 1970's and I had just gotten my MS to help us do so, when we got the Reagan Revolution - the triumph of emotionally-satisfying ignorance over educated rationality.

I'm not sure we can overcome the power of vested interests in time to avert genuine tragedy.

Let have me have light, kazam

Then God said, let me have light , Kazsam, a bottle of bud light hits the dirt, No say-it god, not bud light, I want 10w-30 Alberta premium light, splat , a glob of 10w-30 Alberta premium hits the dirt, Whoa say-it god , looking up to the sky, have you no Brain he ask, no, came the reply , he is writing a four section column about nothing for the Tyee.

T'man

I thought that would do it and it did. Now that we know everyone's acedemic qualifications, what you all have to do now is answer one simple question.

That's childish. Your comments here are not worthy of anyone's attention. See you on another thread.

woody

Only the ignorant minimize and mock the importance of truth.

(To the Brain: Yes, and how

(To the Brain: Yes, and how many Canadians fit that bill, and what's more, why?)

--------

I agree Dion is a good guy at heart - wrong party, though, which is why it appears the backroom boys didn't want him for leader.

gkam

Yeah... most of it was a cut and paste. Stuff like that isn't pulled out of a hat overnight. People should realize as well, that I'm not a Liberal. I voted Green last time and really, what it comes down to is I vote for anyone but Harper (meaning I don't even consider voting Con until he's gone) and vote for the best candidate in from there, NDP, Lib, Green, whoever has the best candidate in the next election.

Nevertheless, a party will have to take over from the Conservatives after they are gone and that party is the Liberals with Dion as a leader. I spend a good deal of time these days involved with Ontario media and that province is either red or blue, with the future of the nation hanging on Ontario's response to who they choose. So far, its Liberal country with 40% of the popular vote there. This nation has become very regionalized with its voters. Quebec has the Bloc. Ontario goes Liberal. Alta is Con and if there is a province with biased media, its there, believe me.

The sad truth about our environment is that until we actually see it with our own eyes, we don't understand the sheer ugliness of the reality of degraded environments. Even Tractorman, if he even has one, if he farms, should realize his own lands are becoming degraded.

Continous dryland farming is proving to be a bust. The reliance on fertilizers, chemicals and monocrops will continue the trend of depleted topsoils. And why do people like him not catch on to the signifigance of it? They won't be around to see the true horror of the legacy they leave behind.

One would think that we should, as parents, try to leave things in better shape than when we found it but clearly, just as there are bad parents all around, this is not the case. And perhaps the ugliest truth is not so much the lack of awareness to the severity of the problems and challenges we face on so many fronts, but the complete lack of desire to do anything on a mirco environmental level never mind the macro, to help!

Cont.

This is the kind of ignorance that is rampant in the world today. I get ridiculed for typing 70 wpm without being questioned as to why that is. What substance has this blogger offered? What has woody suggested that is so revelating, so positive, so constructive?

There couldn't be a bigger hypocrital statement such as this, to bash any and all solutions with the mere wave of a hand. Its shameful, disgusting, and sadly, common.

This world is not some lost experiment, folks. Its not some mindless chunk of rock floating helplessly in space. There will be justice in this life before the next.

The next time, dear readers, you step foot on a cemetary (that place so many avoid like the plague itself) remind yourselves of these words... "3/4's of those who find themselves in a box in the ground timed out early because they believed in something that wasn't true or did not heed the truth when it was told." In short, it doesn't matter how healthy your physical body is, or your emotions, or even your mind... if your beliefs are unhealthy, you won't live long.

Look at the people who lived in Jones town. Or followed Hitler. Or later, GWB. Or those who believe that all foods are "safe at safeway or that you can try anything once or that cocaine can be done recreationally... mere mortality is no exuse to live a life of ignorance and destructive abhorrative shame.

Uh-huh

Agreed. But don't forget the folks who do see the world without rose-colored glasses but who also work themselves into fits of apoplexy on appropriate occasions (I'm think of Dr. Suzuki, for example). It's hard for some feeling/thinking individuals to stay entirely calm when they see such immoral corruption and destruction going on...

Held Hostage

It's sad, isn't it, when comments become personal and judgmental instead of staying merely political or informational.

The truth is that we are indeed held hostage by the tar sands, but there is no payoff acceptable to those who are the powerful in the world. The fact that they too are going to be adversely affected by greenhouse gases, global warming, pollution, malthusian growth, and other ills (all within the much nearer future than they can imagine) goes over their heads.

Like the purloined letter, the evidence they demand before they believe is there in front of them, ignored while the world as we know it comes to a bloody end.

Albert Einstein said that the next war (perhaps the one between Iran and the West, fomented not so covertly by the Bush League) would be fought with atomic weapons, but that the war after that would be fought with spears and arrows.

I applaud those who, like The Brain, practice what they preach in personal conservation. But Tractorman may have the majority on his side, uninformed, uneducated, uncaring, utterly selfish and denigrating to the very idea of altruism.

In both the short and the long run the rest of us are carried willy-nilly into the future and unfortunately have no real say in the matter of our destination, truly hostage to the tar sands, big oil, big agriculture, big pharma, big money, and small-minded politicians.

Or will someone invent a method of separating carbon dioxide into a plain black powder while releasing gaseous oxygen into the atmosphere? Will someone invent a way to store electricity in batteries powerful enough to operate a vehicle? Will someone build fission plants in numbers great enough to produce electricity without pollution?

Tar sands

Ah yes. So many comments. So little time. A veritable feast to be had.

GWest, OK let's deal with Canada's hydrocarbon needs. And while we are at it, we should also factor in a little to offset our balance of payments to the USA and other countries where we spend a boatload of money. Apparently, we don't sell lumber down there anymore. Nor do we sell a lot of fish. US tourists don't exactly flock up here any more. We have difficulty selling cattle. The manufacturing jobs in Ontario and Quebec are fleeing like rats leaving a sinking ship. So, what's left that we can sell to offset some of our voracious international spending?

Doggone, your oil patch relatives made their fortunes in Alberta and they expect the province of BC to look after them? Very strange. My dad retired from Alberta to BC a long time ago. He took with him close to five million [2007] dollars. He always used to get angry because the BC government was always telling everyone that ALL of the Albertans were moving out to BC and expecting the BC government to look after them. Same old, same old. You guys give as good as you get.
Oh and BTW, I tried being a leftie for a while a long long time ago. After it became apparent that the lefties are only it in for themselves and that they use stupid people to prop them up, I sort of gave up on them.

....

What would you like to discuss?

What would you like to discuss about Canada’s balance of payments (also referred to as the current account), Tractorman?

I don't think, with respect, that you have a single clue about that, or anything else.

Moreover, I'd really like to know where you'd find any confirmation that 'lefties' are, as you put it, just 'in it for themselves'.

In fact, the lefties have NEVER been in power in Ottawa.

BC has had three NDP governments since 1900 - for a total of 13 years out of 107 and Alberta has had a Socred or Conservative government since 1935 - surely you're not talking about the United Farmers Government from 1921 to 1935?

If anybody’s been in it for themselves, my friend, it’s not the lefties.

I'm an "angry puppy"???

Let's look at your quotes:

...and on and on it goes. Now who do you think's got an anger-management problem? I hear guys like you always wore hard hats in the mill in case a wrench came down...

Besides, when are you gonna give up making up figures and start addressing the facts as we've pointed them out? There's lots of room for intelligent questioning of the facts. Here's my question: given the article says:

Can anyone tell me why the Ft Nelson gas plant isn't permitted greater draws of water from the Liard watershed than the several hundred-thousand-per-year to increase gas production? But Ft. Mac is? Yet Ft Nelson is permitted to dump wastewater in the Liard, but Ft. Mac isn't? That's a question that directly relates to the article, and one that relates to fairness and responsibility as it relates to our environment - our children's heritage.

But, no, you've gotta horn in with some obnoxious bumpf from the Corus Radio Low-Forehead Show. I should be angry. Your posts on this thread have been like blowing an air horn in a sleeping man's ear just for the fun of it.

I think that's ignorant.

None so blind...

If you are successful in shutting down the tar sands operations as some of you seem to think is the proper thing to do, keep in mind that Alberta is one of only two provinces that are officially labelled as a "have" province.

The end justifies the means, eh? I can think of a couple of other national leaders who said that too.

Anyway, never mind this. It's already been answered plenty of different ways by several people 1 and 2 days ago just up this thread. Go back up and read it.

Quote:Oh and BTW, I tried

If your political views are something you simply try on for size I would suggest you beware of the old saying 'if you don't stand for something, you'll fall for anything.' Your second statement could apply to right-wingers too IMO, and finally Tractorman, I've seen your apologist, ignorance is bliss brethren here before... and as usual, the question on my mind is: who's paying you to promulgate this nonsense?

A curious bunch...

Easy math. At 1.1% growth you have a doubling time of 63 years. This explains why we grew from 1 billion humans in 1830 to 6.6 billion today, with higher growth rates. Population growth rates are falling as to be expected. (Club of Rome, Limits to Growth) Yet we continue to drive an economy at much higher rates of growth based on all the economic principles of wealth creation. Chasing the golden idol? Using our resources at an unsustainable rate and compromising future generations. The math is easy, but yet we ignore it. Others actively promote growth! They don't understand growth, doubling time or exponential math unless it has something to do with their own bank account. How can we as parents and mentors, teachers and guides, ignore the peril staring us in the face? Do you laugh when your toddler plays with matches? Knives? Poisons? I just don't get that most folks can't see the dangers behind the facade of wealth creation. It's like watching someone drive with an infant playing unrestrained in the back seat of a moving vehicle.

I wonder, are there aliens watching us right now to see if we'll climb out of the pot of soon to be boiling water? Very curious bunch indeed. Those of you who have more than you'll ever need, congratulations! Your contagious disease has spread to the masses. The futue looks great doesn't it!?