Thirteen per cent of Canadians live in Alberta and Saskatchewan. But those two provinces account for an eye-popping 40% of the greenhouses gases the entire country emits. They are also provinces which have booming economies, thanks to an oil-rich resource base. You need only look at home prices in to see how westerners have had their personal wealth mushroom over the last five years.
In Saskatoon, for example the average house was worth $135,000 just four years ago. Today it’s valued at $306,000, for a tax-free annual gain of $42,700. In Calgary, homes now averaging $480,000 were changing hands for $225,000 forty-eight months ago. The average annual tax-free benefit to Calgarians, $63,750. (In contrast, the average Toronto home appreciated from $315,000 to $429,000 between 2004 and today.)
But, all is not happy in the West. In fact, we’re hearing, our oil-rich provinces would be hobbled and wasted economically if Stephane Dion ever gained power in Ottawa, and over four years imposed a tax on those emissions. In fact, as the Lib leader prepares to head to Calgary, he is being told in the bluntest way how people in Alberta and Saskatchewan feel about a strategy to deal with climate change. It goes something like this: Piss off.
“It’s going to hurt Alberta,” preem Ed Stelmach, a Conservative, told reporters. “If the proposal just to simply tax the carbon goes through, we may take a major hit.” Over in Saskatchewan, the energy minister Bill Boyd (a conservative) said, “It’s going to dramatically impact upon our economy.”
But that’s just the start of it. Then we get to the motive part. Why would Dion bring in a measure which would wipe out civilization in our western provinces?
Well, don’t be fooled. This is not about finally doing something serious to curtail the gases that are heating the world and melting the ice cap, causing extreme weather and killing off species. This bears no relation to Dion’s plan to slash income taxes for all Canadians and all companies, to invest in new green technologies and develop cleaner energy sources. The environment? Polar bears? Coastal flooding? Do not joke there, little eastern unemployed autoworker left-voting commie, this is about something far bigger: Screwing the West. Just like the PM said.
“I think it’s clear that Mr. Dion has looked at that in a very crass political way and made the political calculation that there’s nothing for him to lose anyway,” the nation-builder, Mr. Boyd, told the media. “If he can take some of the wealth from Western Canada where he has no vote support whatsoever and redistribute it to Eastern Canada, he has a better chance of winning the next election.”
Well, there ya go pardner. Now you know.
Memories of the National Energy Program, brought in by the Trudeau government thirty years ago to create a made-in-Canada oil price, have not faded. No wonder. Not a day goes by that political opportunists like Stelmach and Boyd don’t fan the flames of regionalism and resentment. Why not? It works. Voters eat that stuff up.
While massive amounts of wealth flow every week from East to West thanks to record energy prices, while the oil sands conglomerates, now largely foreign-owned, create a moonscape in northern Alberta and pump tons of carbon into the atmosphere, along comes Stephane Dion with an idea. Drop taxes on what you earn, raise taxes on what you burn. Shift the burden, gradually, with lots of economic offsets, to begin lessening our reliance on fossil fuels. After all, the consequences of doing nothing will be economic disruption on a massive global scale within a generation or two, perhaps just a decade. It is, ironically, a message of hope. We can do something. We can start. We can afford to change habits and mend ways. But only if we do so together.
For years I served as a national director of the Sierra Legal Defence Fund, an organization that fights to strengthen and uphold environmental laws. I saw no conflict whatsoever between my ecological and political convictions. In fact, being a Progressive Conservative I knew that the greatest danger to corporate welfare, profitability and economic progress would be climate change and environmental crisis.
Now the greatest threat is human myopia. Shame on those who feed there.
257 comments ↓
It’s rich isn’t it? A fundamental change is coming sooner than you might think…
Conclusion of article: The best thing that rich-world governments can do is to encourage the alternatives by taxing carbon (even knowing that places like China and India will not) and removing subsidies that favour fossil fuels. Competition should do the rest—for the fledgling firms of the alternative-energy industry are in competition with each other as much as they are with the incumbent fossil-fuel companies. Let a hundred flowers bloom. When they have, China, too, may find some it likes the look of. Therein lies the best hope for the energy business, and the planet.
http://www.economist.com/opinion/displaystory.cfm?story_id=11580723
And I suppose Harpo and his merry band of ‘no imagination’ thinks The Economist is crazy too?
We are so screwed.
Mr. Garth TurnerMP,
I’m glade Mr. Dion is offering some hope to maybe stop Man Made Global Climate Heating in time. Because the way things are going, we are all going to be F****D,
And sooner than you might think! Have you been paying attention?
Are you well informed? Are you a critical-thinker and a good long-term planner?
These guys crying economic doom are out to lunch. What are there going to tell you in 2028 when Canada has run out of all out Natural Gas, because of it’s use in the tar sands?
How do you heat your home now?
That’s PMSH plan, look out for his corporate oil friends like Bush, short-term profits and screws everyone else, including you and his own kid’s future!
Do you think these guys really care about your family?
They don’t seem to even care about there on family’s future on our only planet!
You can’t eat and drink man made money!
How do they look them selves in the mirror? Are they all just that stupid and misinformed? Do they believe their own lies?
Have the Corporation paid them off to stay stupid, and lie to us all?
Are the people being allowed to win seats in office all just insane like PMSH?
Have you seen this yet?
‘How It All Ends’ 10min
http://wonderingmind42.com/?page=1
This is the most important video you will ever see, part 3 of 8 (10min)
The whole letter/show is worth seeing!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CFyOw9IgtjY
Have you had a chance to read this book yet?
The Weather Makers (Paperback)How We Are Changing the Planet and What it Means for Life on Earth
by Tim Flannery
http://www.harpercollins.ca/global_scripts/product_catalog/book_xml.asp?isbn=0002008319
Mr. Garth TurnerMP, FYI
Auther of the book, ‘the weather makers’
Tim Flannery also thinks we need to quickly build more nuclear power plants
to replace the energy we are now getting from burning fossil fuel.
So we can stop man made climate change in time to prevent the worse that will happen, if we don’t get the levels of green house gasses down, and very soon!
Garth
Will the polar bears be receiving a welfare benefit or entitlement as well?
Syncro
“I think it’s clear that Mr. Dion has looked at that in a very crass political way and made the political calculation that there’s nothing for him to lose anyway,” the nation-builder, Mr. Boyd, told the media. “If he can take some of the wealth from Western Canada where he has no vote support whatsoever and redistribute it to Eastern Canada, he has a better chance of winning the next election.”
That’s exactly what I said in a previous comment. Here is mine:
“It’s clear to me now that Dion is only pandering to the vote-rich East. How liberal of him!
His plan is politically motivated, not idealogically motivated.”
And, oh yes, it is Stelmach and Boyd who are fanning the flame of regionalism, not, I repeat, not the very flawed ‘Green shift’ plan.
Good attempt at spin, Garth.
Molly 11:12pm
Good link!
After reading where my premier dismissed the liberal green trial balloon out of hand yesterday with no real criticism or suggestions for improvement I realized that this territory will probably not gain any benefits from the emerging economy. I can’t understand how so many can be ignorent of the idea that this time next year we either will be taxing pollution ourselves internally or the rest of the world will likely be taxing our share for us. Once this issue gets rolling no one will be exempt because just like the “free trade deal” that is slowly being exposed for the hoax it was unless everyone participates under the same set of rules it won’t accomplish anything.
Countries like Denmark already have a signifigent part of their economy fueled by the new technologies and the race is on by every country but this one all over the world to get a piece of the pie.
Think about what is changing. In the coming decades the entire automobile and transportation industries will be retooling to produce new vehicles. Every house using oil, natural gas and propane to heat it will need to be retrofitted. Old factories and houses will need to be retofitted or replaced with new more efficient designs. Our entire electrical power industry needs to be gradually changed over to renewable sources. Not to mention all the research and development for things we havn’t discovered yet.
Anybody worried about a depression yet? You should be if you have your head in the permafrost like my so called government leader. If we don’t jump in now with both feet the rest of the world will happily sell us the products we need when we finally wake up.
As for Alberta and Saskatchewan they can either sit down with the rest of Canada and build a national energy policy including an east-west pipeline and building a national reserve thus keeping some money flowing in with no chance of retaliation from other countries or freeze when they can’t afford their own oil. $40 billion will only last a few years in Alberta but Saskatchewan will survive a bit longer because they at least have a diversifed economy.
Perhaps you or one of our conservative friends can explain something to me. When all this money gets “sucked” out of Saskatchewan and Alberta, how exactly will this effect the actual citizens of Saskatchewan and Alberta? More precisely, by what mechanism are the people of these provinces benefiting from the oil boom, and how will that mechanism be disrupted by a carbon tax?
I ask because it is my understanding (and correct me if I’m wrong) that the people of these provinces benefit from a) increased employment, both direct and indirect, from oil production, and b) royalties and other fees charges by the provincial governments to companies drilling or mining in their territory.
AS far as I can tell, nothing short of an outright government ban would discourage big oil from hauling as much of the stuff out of the ground as they can, as quickly as they can, wherever they can find it. So what`s the concern here? It`s not like a carbon tax that, really, amounts to a very small fraction of the cost of producing a barrel of oil, is going to cause these companies to suddenly pack up their tents and go elsewhere. There IS no elsewhere.
If this plan was implemented today, all those jobs would still be there in the morning, houses would continue to be overpriced, and the provinces of Alberta and Saskatchewan would continue to rake in precisely the same amount in royalties as yesterday.
Yes, individual westerners would pay somewhat more in carbon taxes than the average Canadian by virtue of climate, population density and energy-intensive farming practices. But as far as the oil industry goes, the only effect that I can think of would be a slight decrease in corporate profits for the most profitable corporations on the planet.
Or am I missing something?
The North West Territories, Yukon and Nunavut can be added to Alta. and Sask. as well.
In The Okanagan Sunday, a CP heading was “Dion’s plan for carbon tax ‘not an option’ in North”, and all three leaders were unanimous on this.
Nunavut premier Paul Okalik said, “But in the North, there really are no alternatives for us in Nunavut to turn to, to get away from diesel generation for power and for heat” . . . We’d rather focus on alternatives to get away from fossil fuels . . . to add on a cost to very high fuel costs already is just not an option for homeowners in our territory.”
Fair enough, but fossil fuels, like everything else runs out. There is no more of this stuff being made anywhere, so the only problem is finding answers to these questions.
He said they would rather “focus on alternatives”; how far ahead is new mechanical technology able to operate in -75 degree weather?
It is better to use extremes right from the get-go, to have a realistic idea of what works and what doesn’t, then made available to all at a reasonable cost.
The mindless rhetoric spin, which is in full flow, is just talk — immediate, here-and-now, what’s in it for me bafflegab, so don’t bother getting sucked in by that.
There is the rest of the year to come up with solutions which can benefit all Cdns.; the answers are there, they simply have to be found, preferably by engineers, scientists, mechanics, etc.
Dead-end fossil fuels are a band-aid for a broken leg, not a solution.
Why are all CONS such liars??? And why do the voters believe them? Is it laziness?
Slimy Eddy is selling the bitman to the USA for pennies and ruining northern Alberta in the interm but the $$$ keep on flowing into the workers pockets as they keep their heads down and ignore reality. Gad why don’t Albertans have any vision? What is wrong with them that they refuse to let the world know they really may have an IQ level higher than a room temperature.
And how did the “first” NEP destroy the whole world oil industry, lower world oil prices? How did the NEP cause the world economic slump and world wide production to drop? How did the NEP cause the stock market to slump? How did the NEP cause the technology market to drop?
Stop allowing liars to feed you their baloney.
WHEN BUBBLES BURST: LESSONS FOR THE TECHNOLOGY INDUSTRY, FROM THE OIL INDUSTRY
http://www.seeta.com/articles/bubblesarticle.htm
Quote: In referring to Klein near the beginning of his piece, Morgan wrote that when Ralph became Premier, “Alberta was suffering the after effects of Trudeau’s national energy program followed by a prolonged slump in energy prices.” A mere half of that statement is correct – the part about the slump in energy prices. The rest is hogwash. Some might even say it was pure bullshit.
First of all, the National Energy Program was introduced in October, 1980. Secondly, Morgan’s pal Brian Mulroney became Prime Minister in the fall of 1984. Thirdly, Mulroney and the signing of the Western Accord trashed the last remnants of the NEP at the end of March 1985. Fourthly, Morgan’s pal and idol Klein did not become Premier until December 14, 1992 – a full 12 years after the National Energy Program and more than 7 years after its demise.
And fifthly – in every other jurisdiction of this whole wide world, credible business leaders remember the havoc brought down on world economies by high interest rate policies led by the Federal Reserve Board of the United States in the early 1980’s. Morgan and his fellow conservative travelers never remember this when discussing the difficult times during the eighties. They remember only the NEP. But here are the facts:
- – in October 1980 – the same month of the introduction of the NEP, the prime rate of the Federal Reserve Board of the United States rose from 13.5% to 14.5%
- – in November 1980, the prime rate of the Federal Reserve Board rose from 15.50% to 17.75%.
- – in December by Christmas of 1980 the rate was 20.50%
- – in September 1981, the rate was 20%, after which it began a slow and tortuous slide downwards.
The results of those punitive interest rates was a prolonged spate of foreclosures across North America which lasted for years, the like of which had not been witnessed since the Great Depression.
So, what are we to make of the oft-feted Morgan? Is he Pinocchio? Does he have failing memory because of age (he is only in his early sixties and works out religiously, apparently)? Or is he a conservative political hack?
It’s your pick.
Posted by Darryl Raymaker
Time to fight liars with the truth.
I’m an Albertan, and I’ll vouch that this Conservative government has always catered to big oil and re-election. In this vacuum out here, people’s heads are kept in the sand, while the government allows foreign interests to profiteer.
So much oil revenue leaves Canada, and it needn’t. Other countries have done a responsible job of keeping more revenue for themselves, but the Alberta government is too close to the oil industry, so what did anyone expect except a sell-out. And this is the place where Harper was groomed.
Couldn’t agree more Garth and as I listen to Big Oil in Alberta they too agree with you. CAPP has just recently called for a carbon tax to bring certainty to their price modeling for the future and also to get taxpayer help in developing a carbon capture and storage technology.
Everyone agrees who is involved with mitigating GHG’s here in Alberta that the current federal plan is a non-starter as an effective way to balance the environment with the economy.
While not supporting everything about the Green Shift Plan it is recognized as a solid blueprint for negotiating equivalence agreements with all the Provinces.
Certainty for business is required and engagement by the electorate to contribute to the survival of our society as we know it should be something that all Canadians want to support.
Will someone who is much smarter and more capable with research than I, please do an analysis of where our economy would be in every province, if we had kept the National Energy Plan.
I really think it was Peter Lougheed and the oil corporations that sold the Albertan voters a bill of worthless goods that continues to do harm just by being repeated. Honestly, the oil companies pulled out of Oil Tar because the price dropped and they couldn’t make it work economically. I’ve heard it said that oil had to be around $60 a barrel to make the Oil Tar projects pay.
The oil companies came crawling back to Alberta once they figured out how to suck on the federal teat for capital investment money. That’s all of Canada that paid to get those projects off the ground. Now with the way that successive Alberta governments are squandering their resource money, we’ll probably all get stuck with the bill when the oil companies are finished with Oil Tar projects and have completely decimated the Alberta environment.
Anti-NEP talk served Peter Lougheed in his political goals and every Conservative government in Alberta since.
My guess is it probably would have been better for everyone if we’d kept it and that includes for Alberta and Saskatchewan. But that is just a guess, I’d really like someone to do the math.
And shame on those who want to divide this country – such as Stephane Dion and his Carbon Tax.
Upto to now, 3 territorial and 2 western provinces have rejected his Carbon Tax.
Yes, the west has definately benefitted from their resources. And so has Canada and Canadians. Canadians from coast to coast can say thank you to royalties from the oil sands and other western resources.
I realize Garth you are the communications point man to Stephane Dion and it’s very hard to come up with something that will sell this Carbon Tax. However, don’t try to divide this country by this jibberish.
And btw, Sudbury is a mining and smeltering area and is actually seeing a lot of economic growth. How will they be impacted by the Carbon Tax? I would say that their jobs are at stake as well. And the 150$ northern tax credit is so laughable that it doesn’t even merit any debate.
There are alternatives out there. It’s the combustion engine is the problem for it looses 85% of the energy true heat that is not used. The electric motor looses 2 % of its energy used. Do you still use a commodore 64 to drive your computer?
Lets use 30% energy to make energy that we waste 85% of
Dum Canadians I think that is right
For years “Big Business” has stolen the natural resources from the land, raised prices via the cost of living and in the end left only death and destruction. Sydney Nova Scotia holds the highest cancer rate anywhere in Canada…..now Alberta and Saskatchewan may hold that along with lug diseases ….so spin the money game all you want cowboys….hold your children and grandchildren tight and ensure your grandparents they will get ill while you stock your bank accounts……all this while these investors run to Dubai to invest in some multi million dollar condo that rotates. Think, less is indeed more! Just checked the weather in Calgary one day 33 plus and the next day 19 or less…..is that healthy?
>>Well, there ya go pardner. Now you know.<<
Nothing like reinforcing anti-Alberta sentiment for your eastern readers, eh Barf?
I will be blogging about your little missive later today.
Oh good. A Blogging Tory perspective. — Garth
If Dion’s Liberals, god forbid, get elected in the next election; they will begin the process of driving the western provinces out of this country. In one idiotic fell swoop, they will accomplish what the PQ and the Bloc were never able to accomplish in many years of trying…..the splitting up of this great country. The only myopic vision that is a risk right now, is that of Dion and the Liberals. Garth, please explain how adding a “tax” OR “green cost” to the price of manufacturing is going to make Canadian goods competative in a global marketplace? The truth is that increasing tariffs on imports is the only what to do this. So Canada makes their products too costly, and increases the cost of the foriegn products that Canadians need to maintain our lifestyle. Have you heard of Bangladesh? Welcome to the North American version.
If the tar sands were in Bragg Creek, and the Athabasca flowed through Calgary, you would hear a different tune than the one you hear today.
Yes, they would still be mined, but the methodology would be different.
Here is a report from the Conference Board… Canada needs an integrated industrial, energy, innovation, and social justice policy! Herr Harper’s mantra of ‘tax cuts’ (Dim Jim was singing that song yet again in the news yesterday) is NOT the answer to our challenges.
To Garth’s posting… our over-reliance on natural resources has been identified by the Conference Board as part of our problem!!!! Time to get into the 21st century folks!
Canada falling behind on innovation: report
The Conference Board of Canada has tabled a blunt assessment of Canada’s place in the world. In a new report, it argues Canada is falling behind its industrialized peers when it comes to innovation and its “mediocre performance” in six key areas is a recipe for future problems.
How Canada Performs: A Report Card on Canada, by The Conference Board of Canada
CTV.ca News Staff
The Conference Board’s report — entitled “How Canada Performs: A Report Card on Canada” — graded Canada’s performance against 16 other industrialized nations in categories such as the economy, the environment, education, health, society and innovation.
While Canada performed well in four of the categories with grades of “B” or better, the Conference Board gave it a “D” in both innovation and the environment.
And relative to other countries, Canada placed in the bottom half in a majority of the categories. When it comes to the economy, for example, Canada was listed 11th, and on the environment it placed a dismal 15th place.
The authors state Canada’s performance in the innovation category is especially worrying because of its impact on the other categories.
“Our performance in innovation is stunningly poor,” the authors write in the report.
“This poor showing is a serious weakness in Canada’s overall performance and an alarming portent for the future.”
Here is Canada’s ranking a number of other key categories:
Economy: B
Education: B
Health: B
Social Environment: B
Environment: C
Innovation: D
Out of the 17 countries included in the study, here’s where Canada fell:
Economy: 11
Education: 2
Health: 9
Social environment: 10
Environment: 15
Innovation: 13
The report states that Canada may actually be handicapped by abundant natural resources, which are masking potential problems in the overall economy.
“Canada’s reliance on natural resource products partially explains why Canada derives less of its revenues from innovative products,” according to the report.
The authors note, European firms are deriving more than 25 per cent of their revenue from innovative products and services — a significantly higher proportion than their Canadian counterparts.
The report states Canada isn’t just competing against industrialized countries. The global economy means it can’t take solace for long in being ahead of the developing world.
“China, India and Brazil, among others, are knocking on our door,” said the report.
To improve innovation and the economy, the report recommends:
increase product and investment
improve domestic investment in machinery, equipment, and infrastructure
improve tax system for investors
The Conference Board’s report did have some good news. Canada placed only behind Finland in the education category. But even here, the report states it could do better by producing more doctoral graduates, and more graduates with math, science, and engineering degrees.
“Don’t be taken in by Sheila. Sheila is a student of the Ayn Rand ideology and holds right wing extremist views.” –By C. B. Innes on 06.29.08 7:44 pm
“Sheila, You sound like the 2 kids who constantly knock on my door with blank eyes, sallow faces and uniform deadness, who tell me how happy they are since they found their god or something else that they were told to say by controlling elders.” –By b.arb the p.roof-r.eader on 06.29.08 5:00 pm
Regarding religion of any kind vs. atheism, I find it ironical that I have been likened to being both a student of Ayn Rand, and to one pushing religion under the influence of controlling elders.
We all know (do we not) that Ayn Rand is a militant atheist whose atheism comes through clearly in all of her writings? Check out:
http://www.celebatheists.com/index.php?title=Ayn_Rand
That I should be likened to being both a student of Ayn Rand and to one pushing religion is astonishing.
My case is simply this. What I notice around here is that most people complain a lot about the corruption of those in power. The argument seems to be about whether the Conservatives are more corrupt than the Liberals, or whether it is vice versa.
What I am saying is that all power tends to corrupt people, and that absolute power corrupts absolutely.
I wonder at the contradiction that we can ask for bigger, centralized government solutions to our most basic problems, and think that the party in power is going to change anything substantially.
In view of my position on the corruption of power, I should think that the vast majority of you who complaining about the corruption of certain politicians should be in full agreement.
So far, Bill Muskoka, Lana and jwp are the only ones who have been objective enough to acknowledge that there are points we can agree on, and that we could live with a government by consensus if we both sat around the same table. This is encouraging.
What is not so encouraging is that my religion (whether Ayn Rand atheism or othewise) should be made a factor in this discussion.
I was told that the religion of David Suzuki should not be considered a factor in his approach towards environmentalism, so let’s at least play by the rules that we establish for others.
Take my thoughts on their own merits without perennially moving in the area of suspicion, cynicism, and of false accusation. The false accusations that I, a fellow Canadian, have received on this blog are too numerous to mention, and obviously the contradictory charges that are made here cannot all be right.
So you are going to have to figure these ridiculous charges out for yourself, but at least speak with one, consistent voice in your opposition.
Excepting of areas like national defence and foreign policy in which Canada clearly needs to speak with one voice, I simply believe that the average citizen is better served with a more decentralized approach.
Is that a point of view that is no longer tolerated in Canada in the minds of some here? I find that extremist.
The different nationalities and ethnicities that make up Canada do not WANT a centralized government, top-down approach.
The First Nations do not want it. The Quebecois do not want it. And the Inuit are deeply appreciated that they now finally have their territorial government in Nunavut instead of having all of their decisions made for them by the remote and distant government in Ottawa.
The centralized government in Ottawa wrongly saw the Arctic for many years simply as “an unexplored frontier,” whereas the Inuit, when finally given a voice, saw it as their “homeland” from time immemorial.
Generally the more freedom we can allow people and people groups to make their
own decisions, and to allow for self-determination, without policies of paternalism and assimiliation, the happier people will be.
What some of us don’t seem to get is that we can allow people greater freedom without falling apart as a nation.
People are reasonable enough to accept that we need a common voice in some key areas.
What you saw in the House of Commons, when there was peace for the first time in a long time, is that by rejecting the assimiliationist and centralized government approaches of the past, many Natives were for the first time proud to not only call themselves “Native,” but “Native Canadians.”
Many for the first time, can now proudly sing our National Anthem, and to include all of us when they sing, “O Canada, our home and NATIVE land!”
As Canadians we have an obligation to furture generations to reduce our emissions of green house gases. Of course Alberta and Saskatchewan will object. Duh! They have short-sighted Conservative governments that don’t give a s*** about the environment, and they allow big oil to continue to pollute at record levels. That doesn’t make it right!
Rather than throw away $25 MILLION in a PR campaign to try and hide the pollution generated by the oil sands, Alberta and Canada, would be much better served if that money was invested to reduce pollution from the oil sands.
Canadian tax payers have been getting the shaft from big oil for years. Compared to other jurisdictions the Alberta and the Federal Governments have been far too generous with big oil.
Here is some information from the Council of Canadians….and keep in mind this report is BEFORE the recent massive run up in crude oil prices.
Energy Revenues: Are Canadians Getting Fleeced?
A report by Jean-Yves LeFort
Energy Campaigner, the Council of Canadians
October 23, 2007
- download PDF -
Introduction
For over 20 years, Canada has lived with free trade agreements and free market rules that keep our energy resources flowing out of the country with little or no direction from government. As energy resources are depleted, extraction becomes more costly and environmentally destructive. Governments all over the world are taking an active role in developing strategies and policies to ensure their energy security, to maximize revenues and to limit the impacts on the environment. Sadly, that is not the case in Canada. In one of the coldest countries on earth, the government continues to rely on the whims of the markets and the big oil companies to dictate energy developments and policy direction.
Relying on the markets, we are told by our political leaders, creates wealth for Canadians. Two recent reports, one written for a government appointed panel in Alberta1 and another from a firm of tax experts in Quebec2, point to a different and troubling reality. They show that despite the appearance of financial health as illustrated by larger than expected surpluses in Edmonton and Ottawa, the citizens of this country are not getting their fair share of the energy revenues.
Are we getting enough?
In strict financial terms, Alberta’s energy is now a major driver of Canada’s economy and the energy sector makes significant contributions to the national and provincial economy. However, several studies have clearly demonstrated that, although very lucrative, the oil and gas industry – and the tar sands especially – are very costly on the environmental and social fronts. Some of the well-known examples of these costs are the devastation to the boreal forest; the vast amounts of water required for the mining process; the fact that the tar sands are already the largest contributor to the growth of greenhouse gas emissions in Canada; the use of relatively clean-burning natural gas to extract heavy crude; and the lack of infrastructure and public services in affected northern communities.
If Albertans are to pay the environmental and public health costs associated with tar sands developments, the province must now start to recuperate more of the economic benefits of its own resources.
Likewise in Ottawa, where the Prime Minster just announced a budget surplus of some $14 billion to be dedicated to the debt, one has to wonder about the long-term prospects of an economy increasingly tied to resource development – where prices are historically volatile – and rapidly less on manufacturing. In a country where social programs such as health care are under great strain and infrastructure is crumbling after years of neglect, is the government planning ahead and making reserves for these and other unexpected expenses?
What is fair?
The Alberta Royalty Review Panel completed its long awaited report last September. According to their website, their objective was to “ensure that Albertans are receiving a fair share from energy development through royalties, taxes and fees.” The review focused on “all aspects of the royalty system, including oil sands, conventional oil, and natural gas including coal-bed methane.”3
Using surprisingly strongly-worded language, the panel members concluded that Albertans have been shortchanged by the oil companies and have not received their fair share of oil revenues. The report calls for a $2 billion increase per year in revenues by the province, to be raised through increased royalties, taxes and other fees. The report also recommends “in the strongest terms” that more transparency, accountability and enforcement be implemented in the royalty regime.4 Clearly, the panel members are not satisfied that the current measures – or lack thereof – ensure that every dollar that should go to the owners of the resource actually does.
Likewise, a group of tax specialists recently looked at the level of taxation of oil and gas companies in Canada. Their starting point was the rather simple question of whether or not these companies pay a “fair share” of taxes in the country relative to their profits. According to a report by tax specialist Brigitte Alepin5, the oil and gas industry in Canada has a lower taxation levels than all other major industries in Canada, including most small and medium-sized businesses. The report exposes an industry that is raking in record profits but still receives tax breaks and subsidies by the federal government. Alepin concludes that because oil and gas companies are some of the most profitable companies in Canada, they should be taxed accordingly.
Here are a few of the report’s findings:
*
Oil companies pay less tax in Canada than in the United States.
*
Using various strategies, including tax shelters and tax deferrals, oil companies create a significant gap between their theoretical and effective tax rates. In other words, they pay a lot less tax than they are supposed to.
*
In 2005, oil and gas companies operating in Canada had a net profit margin of 14 per cent on average. By comparison, the nine largest companies in the world had a net profit margin of 8.2 per cent on average, for operations in the rest of the world.
*
The Canadian government has announced further corporate tax breaks that will allow oil companies to gradually lower their tax rate from 22.04 per cent to 19 per cent over the next three years.
More facts on industry profits:
*
Despite the fact that the industry recorded record profits this year, the federal government will continue to subsidize oil companies through the Accelerated Capital Cost Allowance (ACCA) until 2015.
*
A Pembina Institute report points out that the oil industry received $1.4 billion from the federal government alone in 2002.6
*
In 2006, Encana Corp. made the biggest profit in Canadian corporate history ($6.58 billion).
*
In 2007, Exxon Mobil and Royal Dutch Shell, to name but two, announced their largest corporate profits ever.
*
Statistics Canada reports that companies involved in oil and gas extraction increased their profits by 50 per cent in 2005 earning over $30.3 billion.7
Some facts on royalties and revenues in Alberta:
*
Alberta receives only a 1 per cent royalty until they recover all their capital costs. After all the costs of bringing a project on stream have been covered, the companies pay a 25 per cent royalty on net project revenue.
*
Alberta’s take in the tar sands is lower than other projects in North America and much lower than in oil producing countries around the world.
*
From 1995 to 2002, Norway captured 88 per cent of revenues after production costs as opposed to roughly 50 per cent for Alberta.
*
With a shift away from conventional oil and gas and the lower royalties mentioned above for the tar sands, royalty revenues will decline from roughly $11 billion in 2006-07 to $7 billion by 2009-10 according to the Pembina Institute.8
*
According to the Parkland Institute, the current value of Alberta’s Heritage Fund, started in 1976, is approximately $12 billion US compared to $38 billion US for Alaska and almost $300 billion for the fund Norway started in 1996.9
Maximizing revenues for the owners of the resource
Mechanisms used by energy producers to maximize resource revenues for their citizens include higher royalties, production-sharing agreements, joint ventures, equity purchases, fiscal tools and public ownership. While taxation is often a weak alternative – because the big oil corporations and their army of accountants know all the tricks of the trade to ensure paying as little as possible – it is still a very direct tool available to governments to promote proper distribution of the wealth created by our natural resources.
It is also worth nothing that the trend around the world goes beyond these fiscal tools, in favour of more direct public control of energy resources. As stated at the outset, Canada has chosen to go against this trend to the detriment of its own financial and ecological future, not to mention its citizens’ energy security.
Over the last 20 years, Canada and the United States have closely integrated their energy policies. And the room for governments to act on behalf of their citizens is shrinking even more due to NAFTA and to rapid developments contained in the Security and Prosperity Partnership (SPP), an agreement that calls for complete integration of North American energy markets. Nevertheless if the political will exists, federal and provincial governments can still take concrete steps to improve Canada’s energy security.
The Council of Canadians recommends these immediate actions:
*
The Alberta government should implement the recommendations of the Alberta Review Panel. We endorse it as a first – although by no means definitive – step toward revenue fairness for Albertans.10
*
The federal government should end the Accelerated Capital Cost Allowance (ACCA) in the next budget and not continue to subsidize the oil companies until 2015, as they have announced.
*
The federal government should cancel plans for additional corporate tax cuts scheduled to be phased in starting in 2008.
*
Both federal and provincial governments should strengthen oversight and enforcement to ensure royalty and tax payments reflect the reality of industry profits.
*
The federal government should put a stop to the energy integration strategy contained in the SPP in order to develop an energy security strategy for Canadians.
Conclusion
When one starts to look at other energy-producing nations around the world, it is clear that Canada and Alberta have been overly generous to the industry in recent years. That often-repeated industry argument about investment drying-up and lost jobs does not reflect the reality of the world oil market. Today, oil is increasingly produced in politically volatile regions of the world and where state intervention is omnipresent. By those standards, Canada will always be a good place to invest. The oil companies realize their playground is shrinking and are less likely to pull up stake because their profit margins are slightly reduced.
Those who argue for the exclusivity of free market rules fail to acknowledge that the oil industry is dominated by a very limited number of large transnational corporations that often act as an oligopoly. They do this with the blessing and often the financial support of governments in Canada, to the detriment of citizens.
British energy consultancy firm Wood Mackenzie has said that even if the Royalty Review panel’s recommendations were implemented, “Alberta would remain one of the cheaper places to do business in the world.” Globe and Mail columnist Jeffrey Simpson also put things in perspective when he wrote, “Even if the new proposals were adopted, Alberta’s take would still remain below… good old right-wing places such as Dick Cheney’s Wyoming and George Bush’s Texas.”
In the midst of record industry profits, it is high time for the federal and provincial governments to reclaim a fair share of the revenues created by our own natural resources.
1. Our Fair Share: Report of the Alberta Royalty Review Panel, September 18, 2007
2. Nos pétrolières canadiennes paient-elles leur juste part d’impôts, Agora services de fiscalité Inc. September 16, 2007
3. Op cit, Alberta Royalty Review Panel
4. Ibid, p. 5
5. Nos pétrolières canadiennes paient-elles leur juste part d’impôts, Agora services de fiscalité inc. September 16, 2007
6. A. Taylor, M. Bramley, M. Winfield, Government Spending on Canada’s Oil and Gas Industry, Pembina Institute, 2005
7. Miles Ryan Rowat, Boom Times: Canada’s Crude Petroleum Industry, Statistics Canada, 11-621-MIE-# 047
8. A. Taylor, Thinking Like an Owner: Overhauling the Royalty and Tax Treatment of Alberta’s Oil Sands, Oil Sands Issue Paper no. 3, November, 2006
9. D.Gibson, Taming the Tempest: An Alternate Development Strategy for Alberta, Parkland Institute, May 2007
10. The Council of Canadians considers the report of the Alberta Review Panel to be a starting point. The Parkland Institute has notably exposed various weaknesses with the report, not the least of which is the fact that if the panel’s recommendations were fully implemented, provincial revenues from the oil and gas would still fall by $2 billion by 2016. We seriously doubt the industry will see its revenues drop over the same period given projected developments. Like the Parkland Institute, we question, for example, why the report chose to maintain a base royalty rate of 1 per cent for the tar sands at a time when record oil prices already provide overwhelming investment stimulus. We urge the Alberta government to consider the recommendations provided by organizations such as the Parkland and Pembina institutes.
Dufus Ed Stelmach falls for it:
http://caiti-online.blogspot.com/2008/06/dufus-ed-stelmach-falls-for-it.html
The former Liberal government, as well as the current Conservative government have not done near enough to combat climate change. We have been throwing away BILLIONS of dollars in tax subsidies on an industry that is raking in record profits and polluting our environment at unprecedented levels.
The costs to the oil industry to meet the Kyoto Protocol are quite small in relation to the environmental damage that is being done in Canada, and to the world…. we’re talking $0.25 per barrel impact folks.
It’s time Canadians said enough is enough! We need to stop these outlandish subsidies to the fossil fuel industry and put ALL of that money into subsidizing renewable energy sources like solar and wind. And, we need to make the fossil fuel industry responsible for the pollution it creates.
Here is a report from the Pembina Institute….take the time to READ it before criticizing this posting, please. Footnotes provide reference, as any good academic style report should. You will find it critical of Federal government policy (the former Liberal government)… so my posting is NOT a partisan shot at the Harper Conservatives. As Canadians we need to be informed on the kind of bad behaviour that we are allowing in this country by the fossil fuel industry, and how our tax dollars subsidize that bad behaviour.
Government Spending on Canada’s Oil and Gas Industry
Undermining Canada’s Kyoto Commitment
Executive Summary and Preface
January 31, 2005
Amy Taylor
Matthew Bramley
Mark Winfield
Commissioned by Climate Action Network Canada
Government Spending on Canada’s Oil and Gas Industry
Foreword by CAN Canada
The oil and gas industry is the fastest growing and largest source of greenhouse gas emissions in Canada. Industry leaders were among the most outspoken opponents of Canada’s decision to ratify the Kyoto Protocol, predicting major negative economic impacts. Chief among industry
claims was the contention that Kyoto would lead to huge expenditures for the purchase of foreign credits depriving Canadians of the capital needed to make “real” reductions in pollution
in Canada.
This was in spite of estimates by the federal government and others that the economic impact of the Kyoto Protocol on the oil and gas industry would amount to no more than $0.25 per barrel of oil.
A few days after Canada ratified the Protocol the then Minister of Natural Resources wrote to the oil industry and provided it with a guarantee that it would not be required to reduce its
emissions more than 15% below the business as usual forecast.
This “relative” target allows
emissions from oil and gas to rise substantially between 2002 and 2012. Further, the industry was assured the government would assume all costs of emissions reduction in excess of $15 a
tonne.
The federal Climate Change Plan for Canada describes a number of subsidies and incentives for wind energy and other forms of renewable energy. It was the view of the Climate Action Network — Canada (CAN) that these initiatives were insignificant in comparison to the subsidies and other government support presently being provided to the oil and gas industry.
CAN asked the Pembina Institute to conduct a study to determine the extent of government support for Canada’s oil and gas industry and to recommend changes to federal and provincial government policy.
It turns out that the industry’s real fear may well be that Canadian taxpayer will object to the huge corporate welfare that is being provided to the country’s richest and biggest polluters.
While proclaiming its desire to combat global climate change by ratifying the Kyoto Protocol and promising to reduce greenhouse emissions, the Government of Canada provided the oil and gas industry with $1,446 million in subsidies in 2002. The increase in subsidies between 1996 and 2000 was 33%. Total expenditure between 1996 and 2002, inclusive, was equal to $8,324
million (2000$). Federal government expenditure on oil sands alone is estimated to be approximately $1,193 million (2000$) from 1996 to 2002, inclusive.
Government Spending on Canada’s Oil and Gas Industry
Executive Summary
Governments in Canada, as well as elsewhere, subsidize a number of socially beneficial services. These include, for example, health care, education and energy services. To the extent that subsidies provided to the energy sector are for oil and gas developments, however, they are contributing to increased environmental impacts and hindering developments of
environmentally friendly alternative energy options. The purpose of this study is to investigate government expenditure on the oil and gas sector in Canada. To that end, we identify and
document the various forms of public support provided to this industry by the federal government. We focus on federal government support provided through grants (direct expenditure), the tax system (tax expenditure) and government departments (program
expenditure) for conventional oil and gas as well as for oil sands between 1996 and 2002. We also discuss provincial support for oil sands. This special focus on oil sands is important for two reasons: One, growing oil sands production is the principal cause of increasing environmental impacts from Canada’s oil and gas sector and, two, previous research by the Commissioner of
the Environment and Sustainable Development concluded that investments in oil sands receive significant tax concessions relative to other forms of energy.
In the late 1980s and early 1990s, the federal government supported energy megaprojects. This included, for example, the Hibernia Development Project and heavy oil upgraders.2 Since 1995, federal spending on non-renewable energy resources has been significantly reduced. While it is true, then, that current subsidies are lower than in the past, they are still substantial.
Government expenditure on the oil and gas sector including tax, program and direct expenditure totalled $1,085 million (2000$) in 1996 and $1,446 (2000$) million in 2002. The increase in
expenditure over this time period was 33%. Total expenditure from 1996 to 2002, inclusive, was equal to $8,324 million (2000$). The vast majority of the expenditure is associated with tax
initiatives and in particular the Canadian Development Expense, the Canadian Exploration Expense, the Resource Allowance and the Accelerated Capital Cost Allowance for oil sands.
Other research has demonstrated relatively low taxation levels for the oil and gas sector,3 high tax concessions for oil sands4 and relatively high profits of oil and gas companies.5 In addition, previous research comparing the amount of revenue collected from oil and gas developments in Canada with that collected in Alaska and Norway revealed that, relative to these international
benchmarks, companies extracting Canada’s oil and gas, most of which belongs to the public, are receiving an implicit subsidy in the form of excessive profits that governments are failing to capture through taxes, royalties and other revenue generating policy options.
1 Commissioner of the Environment and Sustainable Development. 2000. Report of the Commissioner of the Environment and Sustainable Development.
2 Commissioner of the Environment and Sustainable Development. 2000. Report of the Commissioner of
the Environment and Sustainable Development.
3 The Technical Committee on Business Taxation. 1997. Report of the Technical Committee of Business
Taxation. Submitted to the Honourable Paul Martin, Minister of Finance.
4 Commissioner of the Environment and Sustainable Development. 2000. Report of the Commissioner of
the Environment and Sustainable Development.
5 Statistics Canada, CANSIM Table 180-0001 for 1995 to 1998 and CANSIM Table 180-0003 for 1999 to
2002.
6 Taylor, Amy, Chris Severson-Baker, Mark Winfield, Dan Woynillowicz and Mary Griffiths. 2004. When
the Government is the Landlord. Pembina Institute for Appropriate Development.
3
Government Spending on Canada’s Oil and Gas Industry Federal government expenditure on oil sands, including tax expenditure, research and development support and the Syncrude Remission Order,7 is estimated to be approximately
$1,193 million (2000$) from 1996 to 2002, inclusive. The government of Alberta does not track tax expenditure associated with any form of oil and gas development. Neither does it track
research and development support or direct expenditure. A similar discovery was made by a past investigation into this topic.8 The trends in government expenditure on the oil and gas industry described above are particularly worrisome in light of Canada’s commitment to reduce greenhouse gas emissions under the Kyoto Protocol. In 2002, 20% of Canada’s GHG emissions came from the oil and gas industry, up from 16% in 1990. Upstream oil and gas production and natural gas transmission,
which now account for 16% of Canada’s GHG emissions, saw their emissions increase by 56% between 1990 and 2002. Petroleum refining and natural gas distribution, which now account for
4% of Canada’s GHG emissions, saw their emissions increase by a more modest 17% over the same period. Total GHG emissions from Canada’s oil and gas industry rose by 47% between 1990 and 2002. Oil and gas production is also associated with other environmental impacts.
Exploration and development of oil and gas results in land disturbance as wells are drilled, roads are built and pipelines are constructed. Oil and gas production is associated with significant water consumption and results in emissions of criteria air contaminants including acidifying emissions of nitrogen oxide and sulphur dioxide.
Over the last two decades there has been growing interest in the value of subsidies provided by governments around the world to various sectors. Concurrently, there has been mounting
pressure to reduce and/or remove perverse subsidies — that is, subsidies associated with environmentally damaging activities. To date, in Canada little progress has been made in this
regard. According to the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), “incentives for natural resource development and use [in Canada] raise sustainability
concerns.”9 The OECD has criticized Canada in the past because “direct subsidies and fiscal incentives to the energy industry continue to undermine efforts to improve energy efficiency.”10
More recently, the OECD called for a “[s]ystematic review of environmentally harmful subsidies
in sectors such as transportation and energy”11 — a task yet to be completed in Canada. This study is intended to be a first step in that direction.
Based on the evidence presented in this study, we recommend a number of actions related to public expenditure on oil and gas developments:
• Complete a systematic review of all subsidies on a regular basis. This important task should be undertaken periodically to ensure that the subsidies in place are in the
7 In 1976, the federal government granted a remission order allowing participants in the Syncrude oil
sands project to deduct royalty payments while still making use of the resource allowance. This remission
order expired in 2003, but was associated with federal expenditure over the 1996–2002 study period.
8 Pigeon, Marc-Andre. 2003. Tax Incentives and Expenditures Offered to the Oil Sands Industry. Parliamentary Research Branch.
9 Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. 2000. Economic Survey of Canada. Paris,
France: OECD.
10 Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. 1995. Environmental Performance Review:
Canada. Paris, France: OECD.
11 Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. 2004. Environmental Performance Review:
Canada. Paris, France: OECD.
4
Government Spending on Canada’s Oil and Gas Industry
best interest of society given current conditions. For example, many of the subsidies
associated with oil and gas production were established when oil and natural gas prices
were different than they are today. Changes in prices and other national/international
conditions should trigger regular assessments of existing subsidies.
• Eliminate federal subsidies to the oil and gas sector. In doing so, fiscal objectives
will be aligned with environmental objectives. This is an important component of any
policy package intended to reduce GHG emissions. To determine which subsidies are
most appropriate for removal, a complete assessment of federal subsides to the oil and
gas sector should be undertaken by appropriate government authorities with input from
other relevant stakeholders. The assessment should be accompanied by the
establishment of a specific timetable for the elimination of environmentally harmful
subsidies associated with oil and gas developments, including oil sands.
• Redirect environmentally harmful oil and gas subsidies towards environmentally
beneficial energy options. Government support for energy conserving, energy efficient
and low-impact renewable energy technologies needs to be expanded until such time as
they have gained substantial market share and are able to compete with conventional
technologies on their own.
• Develop and implement a just transition strategy for communities highly
dependent on oil and gas production. As subsidies are phased out, funds should be
made available to facilitate a transition away from oil and gas for communities highly
dependent on oil and gas production.
• Reconcile government support for oil sands developments with international
obligations to reduce GHG emissions. The preferential treatment for oil sands
development currently taking place is at odds with environmental objectives and,
specifically, Canada’s obligations to reduce GHG emissions under the Kyoto Protocol
and the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. Immediate reform of
this support is needed as part of government policy action to reduce GHG emissions in
Canada.
• Implement the polluter pay principle. Government intervention is required to facilitate
the internalization of environmental costs into market prices. The most appropriate way
to ensure this internalization is through the implementation of the polluter pay principle,
whereby those that cause environmental harm are required to incur associated costs.
For example, the federal government could reduce the number of GHG emission permits
to be granted free-of-charge to the oil and gas sector under its proposed “Large Final
Emitter” policy. It could also remove the “emissions intensity” basis of that policy so that
industry will have to pay for permits to cover emissions associated with production
increases.
• Maximize revenue generation from oil and gas developments. To the extent that
governments in Canada are not maximizing revenue collection from the development of
oil and gas resources, they are instead providing an implicit subsidy to the oil and gas
sector. Governments in Canada need to ensure that they are providing maximum
compensation to the citizens of the country for the development of these non-renewable,
largely publicly owned resources.
5
Government Spending on Canada’s Oil and Gas Industry
• Provide comprehensive estimates of federal expenditure, including tax
expenditure, at the sectoral level. Expenditure associated with all forms of government
support should be tracked and published by the Department of Finance on an annual
basis.
• Provide accurate and up-to-date estimates of provincial expenditure on a sectoral
basis in Alberta.12 The government of Alberta does not currently track expenditure on
oil and gas developments. Informed public debate requires public knowledge of the level
of government support provided through tax breaks, reduced royalties and support for
research and development on an annual basis.
12 Similar estimates are needed for other oil- and gas-producing provinces, such as Saskatchewan and
British Columbia, although these regions were outside the scope of this study.
Sheila: Do you apply your statement “that all power corrupts people and absolute power corrupts absolutely” to your belief in the absolute power of God?
When we are all aware that Oil and Natural gas are “non-renewable”, why is it that our planet wants to consume as fast as we can. Why is it that we also are aware that this consumption is a major source of climate change and unhealthy pollution,yet we still need to “dam the Greens”. When will those deniers finally realize that SOMETHING must be done. If the “Green Shift” is not accecptable. what option do you suggest.Doing nothing is NOT and option.
The Green Shift Birdy[BOO!]Baird M.I.A.
“That’s why I said in the House of Commons, you heard my question, ‘Where the hell’s the minister of the Environment,’ ” Liberal MP and environment critic David McGuinty (Ottawa South, Ont.) said in an interview last week. (Mr. Baird did, however, eventually rise to respond to some questioning that day.) Mr. McGuinty said he recently asked local Ottawa radio station CFRA if it would host himself and Mr. Baird for a debate on the environment, and CFRA then told him that it could arrange for Mr. Kenney to debate him. “Mr. Baird has been silenced,” Mr. McGuinty said.
Partly due to Mr. Baird’s low visibility, Toronto Star national affairs columnist Chantal Hébert selected Mr. Baird as the most overrated politician of the year on Thursday’s “At Issue” panel on The National. “He was the man that was supposed to green their credentials. Now the opposition has thrown down the gauntlet, and where’s Mr. Baird? Maybe under your table,” she said. “Somebody else is deputized to speak on his behalf. That is very strange behaviour for a man who was supposed to carry with him the credibility of the government on the environment.”
ABSOLUTELY NO TAKERS FOR DEBATE FROM THE GOVERNMENT SIDE ON THE GREEN PLAN … NOTHING NEW HERE
Simon Doyle, Hill Times June 30 2008
Reading the paper yesterday, one editorial pointed out some great exemptions in the B.C. carbon tax coming into effect tomorrow. Cruise ships with a port of call outside B.C.(read most all cruises) are exempt from paying the carbon tax. Flights withen B.C. get hit with the planet saving carbon tax. Flight from Vancouver to Toronto, exempt. Must be a cleaner fuel used on cross continent flights? Organically grown vegetables from B.C. get hit with the climate change preventing tax. Lettuce trucked up from California, is exempt from the new tax. There goes that whole eating local is better as obviously the carbon footprint is much less to truck vegetables 1500 miles then to truck it 100 or why have the exemption. Hopefully the Federal Liberal plan will not have nearly the amount of leaks in the carbon taxation plan as the B.C. carbon tax.
Many for the first time, can now proudly sing our National Anthem, and to include all of us when they sing, “O Canada, our home and NATIVE land!”
By Sheila on 06.30.08 8:20 am
Wishful thinking from a non-native.
19.06.2008 02:21:40
PM HARPER’S “APOLOGY’ TO BE OFFICIALLY REJECTED
For Immediate Release: Breaking News from Squamish Nation Territory
Prime Minister Harper’s “Apology” to Be Officially Rejected by Residential School Survivors at Rally and Press Conference
Vancouver, 18 June, 2008
http://www.mohawknationnews.com/news/singlenews.php?lang=en&layout=mnn&newsnr=611&srcurl=%2Fnews%2Fnews3.php%3Flang%3Den%26layout%3Dmnn%26sortorder%3D0&srcscript=/news/news3.php
As Canadians we need to realize that ANY program to reduce carbon emissions in Canada… whether it’s a carbon tax, or a cap and trade system… will raise consumer prices as business passes those costs on to us. And, regardless of which path is pursued, the fossil fuel industry will smear, confuse etc. in order to maintain the status quo.
In a previous post I noted that the size of the Canadian economy is about 1.37 TRILLION dollars. Even if the entire $15 Billion in carbon taxes that Dion is proposing was passed on to Canadian consumers the total impact is about 1.18% in YEAR FOUR of The Green Shift.
Let’s keep in mind that a significant amount of fossil fuel production results in exports to the US. That should mean an increase in prices to US buyers of our oil… and they should be bearing the brunt of carbon taxes on those exports… not Canadian consumers. The net impact should therefore be considerably less that my original 1.18% estimate.
Since Canadian consumers will be paying for any reduction in carbon in this country the fundamental question is: Do we want to pay the full amount of that reduction, or do we want the impact offset by reductions in income taxes, and additional support for the least advantaged in our society?
My vote is for The Green Shift.
I also believe strongly that the Federal government should IMMEDIATELY cancel all subsidies that it currently gives the fossil fuel industry and ALL of that funding should be redirected to subsidizing renewable energy conversion.
For example, assuming it currently costs about $20,000 to convert a Canadian home to solar power, every $1 BILLION in subsidies the Federal government currently gives to the fossil fuel industry could convert about 100,000 homes to solar power. In my view this is a much better use of our tax dollars.
High gas prices fuel gov’t windfall
Feds reap $100-million bonanza for every 10-cent hike at the pump
Kent Spencer, The Province
Published: Monday, June 30, 2008
Soaring prices at the pump add up to a tax bonanza worth hundreds of millions of dollars to the federal government, says the Canadian Taxpayers Federation.
Ottawa takes in $100 million in additional GST for every 10-cent rise in the price of a litre of gas, says Maureen Bader, the federation’s B.C. director.
“High gas prices are good for the federal treasury,” she says.
Maureen Bader of the Canadian Taxpayers Federation shows governments’ huge chunk of the tax pie.
Jason Payne, The Province
The GST is only one of the taxes that consumers are fuming about as the summer touring season begins.
So, long winded, likes to here herself talk and lecture Sheila, shallow Catherine who’s trying to play they divide the country game – Harper doesn’t give a fiddlers damn about the price of gas/oil – he’s raking in the money. Charming.
He broke his promise – you know the one that if the price of gas reaches $0.85…yadda, yadda…..
Bill Boyd, the energy minister quoted, is an uber-partisan.
He is well-known here for being caught a few years ago falsifying his credentials: he said he held a welder’s ticket when he does not.
Yeah, he lied about being a welder.
I for one respect Mr Dion for wading right into the fray. He clearly believes in his plan if he’s willing to do so — when was the last time you saw harper hold public meetings where he is unpopular?
His cabinet ministers won’t even visit their own ridings to meet with constituents when they think they’re unpopular.
Dion is out front of this issue and that sure looks leaderly to me!
Welcome aboard Ala Carte Airlines
New Airline Charges
It all started with the charge per bag the airlines are implementing.
Attendant: Welcome aboard Ala Carte Air, Sir. May I see your ticket?
Passenger: Sure.
Attendant: You’re in seat 12B. That will be $5, Please!
Passenger: What for?
Attendant: For telling you where to ‘Sit’.
Passenger: But I already knew where to sit.
Attendant: Nevertheless, we are now charging a seat locator fee of $5. It’s the Airline’s new Policy.
Passenger: That’s the craziest thing I ever heard. I won’t pay it.
Attendant: Sir, Do you want a seat on this flight, or not ?
Passenger: Yes, yes. All right, I’ll pay. But the airline is going to hear about this.
Attendant: Thank you. My goodness, Your carry-on bag looks heavy. Would you like me to stow it in the overhead compartment for you?
Passenger: That would be Swell, Thanks.
Attendant: No problem. Up we go, and done! That will be $10, Please.
Passenger: What ?
Attendant: The Airline now charges a $10 carry-on assistance fee.
Passenger: This is extortion. I won’t stand for it.
Attendant: Actually, you’re right, you can’t stand. You need to sit, And fasten your seat belt. We’re about to push back from the gate. But, first I need that $10.
Passenger: ‘ No Way ! ‘
Attendant: Sir, if you don’t comply, I will be forced to call the Air Marshal. And you really don’t want me to do that.
Passenger: Why Not? Is he going to ‘Shoot me’?
Attendant: No, But there’s a $50 Air-Marshal hailing fee.
Passenger: Oh, all right, here, take the $10. I can’t believe this.
Attendant: Thank you for your cooperation, sir. Is there anything else I can do for you?
Passenger: Yes. It’s stuffy in here, and my overhead fan doesn’t seem to work. Can you fix it?
Attendant: Your overhead fan is not broken, Sir. Just insert two quarters into the Overhead coin slot for the First Five minutes.
Passenger: The Airline is charging me for Cabin air?
Attendant: Of course not, sir. Stagnant cabin air is provided free of charge. It’s the circulating air that costs 50 cents.
Passenger: I don’t have any quarters. Can you make change for a dollar?
Attendant: Certainly, Sir! Here you go!
Passenger: But you’ve given me only three quarters for my dollar.
Attendant: Yes, there’s a ‘change making fee’ of 25 cents.
Passenger: For cryin’ out loud. All I have left is a lousy quarter ? What the heck can I do with this ?
Attendant: Hang onto it. You’ll need it later for the wash room.
Sheila: Do you apply your statement ‘that all power corrupts people and absolute power corrupts absolutely’ to your belief in the absolute power of God?” –By Judy on 06.30.08 8:51 am
I believe in the power of love, not in the love of power.
If the “Green Shift” is not accecptable. what option do you suggest.Doing nothing is NOT and option.
By Doug on 06.30.08 8:53 am
Well, Doug, how about legislation and investements to start. Taxing the crap of basic necessities is not going the answer.
Let’s say that one wants to upgrade one’s residence. Increasing costs through taxation limits one’s budget to allow to purchase new effiencies (appliances or home renovations).
Now Dion wanted to tax the crap of leisure vehicles (like Bombardier’s ski-doos, snow-mobiles, motor homes) and large homes – then, at least the Carbon Tax would be directed at those that actual “pollute”.
By Sheila on 06.30.08 8:20 am
What we should be doing in Oddawahaha is what the NWT has done for a long time…Consensus Government wherein everyone sits down and reaches a mutually acceptable conclusion. MLA’s are elected as independents, not by party.
Unfortunately, that requires mutual respect and maturity. Those attributes are not part of the Party system, but could be were it not for the need to believe there must a a Fearless leader, rather than a Guide.
As to the God/god/religion issue. I fail to see what that has to do with political positions, unless some want their religious beliefs written into our laws? Must we be constantly reminded of Caesar’s and God’s due?
Here is a little excerpt of historical reality people should never forget.
Hitler’s will was already irredeemingly perverted, and its duration consequently short, overpowered as he was by unconscious forces that he was utterly unable to balance under the point of crisis. His ego grew and then cracked under the strain of those reactionary forces he had himself evoked and that manifested themselves over all the planet…Should a country ever lose its Golden Mean, we shall know what to expect.
We are witness to this yet today. People simply are insane repeating the same acts and expecting different results.
As you are new here may I strongly suggest reading John Ralston Saul’s excellent book ‘The Collapse of Globalism and the Reinvention of the World’? Also, Jared Diamond’s Best Seller ‘Collapse: How Societies Choose to Fail or Succeed’
Have a great day All.
Perhaps, we can end the game of political Pong here on this blog and work towards finding consensus solutions?
No trees were harmed in the transmission of this message, however, a few millions electrons were inconvenienced.
Why Oddawahaha does nothing to ease gas prices.
High gas prices fuel gov’t windfall: Feds reap $100-million bonanza for every 10-cent hike at the pump
Shouldn’t we get free condoms and K-Y Jelly with every fillup?
And shall we weep for them? I think NOT!
PMO braces for ‘quite a shakeup’: One source close to the PMO says ‘everyone in the PMO is on tenterhooks right now.’
Oops, is that a loose thread I see unravelling from Caesar Disgustus’s robe? Where’s the cat? Here Kitty, Kitty, Kitty…we have a thread for you to play with.
Here’s a good compromise, let the Green shaft money remain within the borders of the province where it is generated. That way it can be used for actual projects & R&D needed to reduce GHGs where it is needed the most.
In fact, you can even keep my so called tax cut as long as you can guarantee me that 100% of this money is put to good use toward the goal of reducing GHG.
I think Mr. Dion should stop fiddling with our tax system and concentrate on actually reducing GHGs. If that is really his aim.
Sheila,
you start off on this blog in pure neo-Republican attack-dog mode, then switch to social idealism, and now you’re into motherhood.
I’ll let you know whether we agree on something when I discover the real Sheila in future comments.
Now Dion wanted to tax the crap of leisure vehicles (like Bombardier’s ski-doos, snow-mobiles, motor homes) and large homes – then, at least the Carbon Tax would be directed at those that actual “pollute”.
By Catherine on 06.30.08 9:44 am
Guess you missed the key fact that Alberta and Sask. account for 40% of the pollution and only represent 13% of the population.
You expect the rest of Canada to pay for Alberta and Sask. while they profit from polluting? Exactly how is that fair?
Canadians prefer Obama over own leaders: poll
http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/20080629/poll_us_canada_080629/20080629?hub=TopStories
Barack Obama: 26 per cent
Stephen Harper: 21 per cent
Hillary Clinton: 16 per cent
Jack Layton: 9 per cent
Gilles Duceppe: 6 per cent
Stephane Dion: 5 per cent
John McCain: 3 per cent
How is Dion going to sell his plan with only 5% of Canadians admiring him? Usually polls register approval, but not this one, it’s all about admiration. Go figure.
Gord.
Doing nothing is NOT and option.
By Doug on 06.30.08 8:53 am
The liberals did that for 13 years, did you complain?
Just kidding, I think doing nothing on AGW is exactly what we should be doing, but I’m not sure that makes any sense.
Gord.
Here are two easy questions for those who support the Green Shift Tax, what will the reduction of GHG emissions be if the plan is put in place?
And what will the cost be to administer the tax?
The target is 20 per cent below 1990 levels. There is no supplementary administrative cost contemplated. — Garth
–
Posted by Darryl Raymaker
Time to fight liars with the truth.
By Emilie on 06.30.08 1:28 am
Your post is well stated.
Who’s zooming who / Who’s screwing who.
Fast Eddie Stelmach had his chance to show Albertans that he represents US, not the U.S. and he failed big time. His new royalty plan left BILLIONS on the table, that is the board room table of the energy companies. His post election actions provide proof that he never had any so called PLAN to deal with the energy royalties and the environment in a way that would benefit ALL Albertans. The proof is in the puddin’.
To hell with middle class Canadians, the Conservatives are slaves to the corp elite and they love to leave BILLIONS on the table. Didn’t Emerson leave a BILLION lying around somewhere?
More Globalist denial of privacy. ‘Yes, Luke, your journey to Dark Side is almost complete!’
New pact would give EU citizens’ data to US
Since when does the U.S. hold the RIGHT to access private information of foreign nationals merely because it wants to? What is our very own Oddawahaha conceding as well?
Wake up folks ‘Big Brother’ is called the Credit Bureaus, and Bell.
Take such things very seriously because under NAU qand SPP Canada will cease to exist as a free nation.
The Head Terrorist is George W. Bush and Halliburton.
NYTimes.com: Your Brain Lies to You
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/06/27/opinion/27aamodt.html?ex=1215403200&en=678360e34f9c1774&ei=5070&emc=eta1
Very interesting article, I hope to make the time to find the source data.
If valid it goes a long way to explain behavior in many circumstances, most topically would be partisan behavior.
I am just getting back to normal after recent trips to Sao Paulo, Brazil and Oslo, Norway. It is remarkable what you can learn from other societies and what this causes you to bring back home. Those long flights and stopovers are also good for reading. I was able to finish Supercapitalism by Robert Reich and take a good chunk out of Hegemony or Survival by Noam Chomsky. Add to that the lighter reading from my backlog of Scientific American and my mind is awash with ideas springing from more knowledge and shared insights.
It becomes very difficult to maintain my pride and the prestige of being Canadian.
Now refer back to the enlightenment of the above link and how our minds are so susceptible to manipulation. How falsehoods can so easily become truths (in our minds).
I read yesterday’s postings and was generally embarrassed for many people.
How do you say that in a constructive way?
So utterly absorbed by red herrings and so completely missing the point that we have such large issues confronting us.
A very good post today Garth, getting back on a real track thank-you.
How is it that you can have the self-discipline to post everyday knowing that there is such a high proportion of people who are, or at least seem to be, unable to grasp the real problems and the reality that real problems require real solutions?
I applaud the LPoC for taking the lead on at least trying to begin the process of finding a real solution to our environmental problems. (And as a staunch non-partisan I generally will not applaud a party.) It may be that we will not get our heads out of the sand soon enough to appreciate what is being tried. If not we will live to struggle through the consequences of the stupidity.
Can I put another bug in your ear?
After living the contrast between Sao Paulo and Oslo it is more obvious to me now than ever that Canada needs a national transportation plan with teeth and authority. It may be that we are 20 years late getting started but the longer we waste, the worse the transition will become. We need a national plan. We need a magnanimous visionary to sit down with a map of Canada to define how we are going to have a viable transportation system, for both freight and people, through our transition from the personal automobile.
Sao Paulo has not done that and it is a disaster.
Oslo has done an admirable job and although suffering pain from the high prices of oil, at least they have alternatives and can continue to function.
We on the other hand are lemmings headed for the cliff.
Oops, forgot the link, and yes, it is France’s new Prez that is bending over to please Bush’s paranoid desires.
New pact would give EU citizens’ data to US
The Head Terrorist is George W. Bush and Halliburton.
By Bill-Muskoka on 06.30.08 10:56 am
Bill, that’s as bad as the dictator crap, when you do this kind of stuff you lessen the actual meaning of the word you are using.
Clinton’s a racist, Bush is a terrorist, and Harper is a dictator, that’s your level of debate, don’t you understand what these terms actually mean?
Gord.
You see Garth, you and your liberal arrogance miss the point, again.
The west is fed up with Ottawa telling them what is best for them and then taking their money and resources. You just don’t get it.
There is no fanning the flames of regionalism and resentment. Its called protecting the province from an over zealous tax revenue hungry liberal wannabe government.
And Boyd is absolutely correct. We see this all the time. Liberal policies that adversely affect the west to pander to the east. All because liberals have nothing to lose in the west and hope to gain lots in the east.
Have you ever wondered about that, Garth? Why liberals with Chretien’s majorities could not break into the west? There is a reason for that which seems escape you.
Kyoto, gun registry, wheat board. These are the most recent thorns. Taking away shots guns and rifles from farmers and hunters in order to stop gang violence in Toronto. We see through that. How is it that you don’t?
Why is there no wheat board for Ontario and Quebec? When the libs took the Crow Rate they should have also abolished the wheat board monopoly. At least give choice rather than government control. Its only in the west though, not Ontario and Quebec.
Now you want to tax the industry that drives the economy. You see Garth, we see through all that. Either you don’t, you don’t want to, or you actually are quite aware of the strategy and are in full support of it.
In any event, the division Dion’s plan will create nationally may not be reconcilable. Thats the message on the street. Thats the message Dion needs to hear, if he cares.
The target is 20 per cent below 1990 levels. There is no supplementary administrative cost contemplated. — Garth
–
By Platty on 06.30.08 10:54 am
Dion says he can’t tell us what the target is, something about not trusting him. Is the 20% reduction a trustworthy number? I’m not sure who to trust anymore. Help.
Gord.
By Gord G. on 06.30.08 11:07 am
Gord, there is a lot of evidence that suggests that Bill’s opinions are correct.
What have you read, outside of what MSM spoon feeds us, which suggests that these individuals are doing anything in the interests of a long term stable society?
I can give you a long list of readings if you are really interested in evaluating alternatives.
Hey, if you’re wealthy like me then be happy and screw the rest. But if you’re anywhere in the bottom 70%… I don’t understand; is it ignorance, brainwashing or both?
“I’m confident we will have significant reductions. I’m not telling you specific numbers because you would not trust me,” he said.
Does Dion have specific numbers? If he does, why does he think people won’t trust him by revealing those numbers? Somehow he thinks that by hiding the numbers it will make him more believable. I don’t understand the logic, Garth since you aren’t afraid of releasing the numbers, please explain what Dion means, if you can.
Gord.
You expect the rest of Canada to pay for Alberta and Sask. while they profit from polluting? Exactly how is that fair?
Equalization payments ensure that the rest of Canada profits just as much as Alberta & Sask.
In fact it’s quite hypocritical to take all this money from Alberta while blaming it for all of Canada’s imaginary ills.
global warming, climate change, whatever it’s called this week, is a fake issue which has been rejected overwhelmingly by the scientific community….
the “green shift” is all about the redistribution of wealth – a tax on everything at a time when Canada’s economy is on the precipice of disaster…
Dion is a marxist and his agenda is not about “saving the planet”, it’s about destroying the middle class and making the proletariats totally dependent on the state – the “green shift” is the new communism and it is about eradicating personal freedom ….
no thank you
Hey, if you’re wealthy like me then be happy and screw the rest. But if you’re anywhere in the bottom 70%… I don’t understand; is it ignorance, brainwashing or both?
By Brammer on 06.30.08 11:27 am
Brammer, my post was specifically focused on the terrorist comment.
Gord.
GARTH!!! … You castigate me for posting a cogent news article plus my commentary with this warning:
Learn to use a link. This real estate, unlike the physical stuff, is still valuable. — Garth
… yet you placidly, compliantly, overlook this stream of crap obviously copied and pasted from somewhere and not even sourced ..!!!
By TS on 06.30.08 8:28 am
By TS on 06.30.08 8:50 am
Why the double standard … is TS posting from some Liberal party computer ….??!!!
Clinton’s a racist, Bush is a terrorist, and Harper is a dictator, that’s your level of debate, don’t you understand what these terms actually mean?
Gord.
By Gord G. on 06.30.08 11:07 am
And I would say uou are entitled to your opinon Gord. When you publish your dictionary please let us know!
I know what real freedom is, and likewise what it is not. Perhaps some day you will understand.
Until then please keep your ever so delicate sensitivities as your guide. The shock will be unnerving when you discard them in favour of reality.
You expect the rest of Canada to pay for Alberta and Sask. while they profit from polluting? Exactly how is that fair?
By Zorpheous on 06.30.08 10:47 am
And the other 60%? Ontario, alone, is actually at 41%!
So again – why not tax the crap out the luxuries and not at basics!
Maybe you start reading on what Alberta and Saskachewan is actually doing and investing in to mitigate their environmental impact, before dumping on them.
So what are you doing to speed up McGuinty to act on his promise to get rid of the coal fired plants in Ontario? Seems that McGuinty is too busy banning dogs, lord’s prayers, and handing out free needles to drug addicts to actually something tangible to help clean our environment. Heck even in McGuinty’s own back yard, he has done NOTHING to clean up the poop dumping at Petrie Island!
Turner, you can’t have it both ways… you want wealth redistribution, but you want your cookies too.
Get rid of the Provincial Governments, eliminate all forms of Government with the exception of the Federal Level, and then, maybe, for a brief moment, you might get Alberta’s attention.
No Federal centralization without the elimination of the special interest groups, including the Provinces.
Otherwise, go spin. We’ll keep after our own business here in Alberta, and you can keep after yours.
Why should we advocate wealth sharing when you jackass can’t even agree on a simple taxation formula.
You want to know who else is ’screwed’ .. try Dion !!!
Canadians prefer Obama over own leaders: poll
CTV.ca News – Sun. Jun. 29 2008
A new poll suggests Canadians would prefer to vote for Barack Obama rather cast a ballot for their own political leaders, while 45 per cent of Americans envy Canada’s health care system.
The bi-national survey, conducted by the Strategic Counsel for CTV and The Globe and Mail, showed that here in Canada, Obama was more admired than Prime Minister Stephen Harper — or any other national leader.
“Some would read (the results) as an indictment of our political leaders,” the Strategic Counsel’s Peter Donolo told CTV.ca. “Others would say it’s an acknowledgement of the phenomenal nature of Obama’s appeal. He really is a prototype of his own; he’s broken the mold.”
Stephane Dion trailed far behind the other leaders, just ahead of Republican presidential nominee John McCain:
* Barack Obama: 26 per cent
* Stephen Harper: 21 per cent
* Hillary Clinton: 16 per cent
* Jack Layton: 9 per cent
* Gilles Duceppe: 6 per cent
* Stephane Dion: 5 per cent
* John McCain: 3 per cent
This recent poll by The Strategic Counsel surveyed 1,000 Canadians and 1,000 people in the United States.
More at:
http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/20080629/poll_us_canada_080629/20080629?hub=TopStories
………………………………………
Well folks … here’s another poll that again confirms Canadians prefer Harper over Dion by a 4 to 1 factor !!!
As for Obama and Harper, it’s possible there is a tie if you apply the +/- 3.1% margin of error.
Maybe Liberals can convince Hillary to come to Canada and be their leader, because she is three times more popular than Dion !!!
How many more polls do you need to finally admit that Dion is NOT a leader … and neither is his credibility as he attempts to peddle his crazy Green Shift (which is a TAX scheme, NOT an environmental plan).
By Janice on 06.30.08 11:18 am,
But will the west ever get “fed up with” multi-national oil companies “telling them what is best for them and then taking their money and resources”?
The major problem i see will the carbon tax compensate Farmers FULLY after all they are the ones who grow food for all Canadians? Farming is a energy intensive business — Tractors and combines use alot of fuel. If Farmers are not FULLY compensated many will go bankrupt which will no doubt increase a crisis in food production?
Will Canada last?
http://thetyee.ca/Views/2008/06/27/CanadaEnergy/
sending or receiving certain types of file attachments. Check your e-mail
security settings to determine how attachments are handled.
As usual… lots of neoCon bobblehead rhetoric… but no alternative plans that really address the issue of cutting green house gases, no real debate, no facts, no data… much like your hero, Herr Harper.
I also believe strongly that the Federal government should IMMEDIATELY cancel all subsidies that it currently gives the fossil fuel industry and ALL of that funding should be redirected to subsidizing renewable energy conversion.
For example, assuming it currently costs about $20,000 to convert a Canadian home to solar power, every $1 BILLION in subsidies the Federal government currently gives to the fossil fuel industry could convert about 100,000 homes to solar power. In my view this is a much better use of our tax dollars.
By TS on 06.30.08 9:11 am
I totally agree on what u said TS. Eliminate the 3-5 billion of gov’t subsides to the oil industry per year.
You might want to add a geothermal system to your solar system to provide heating /cooling for another $20,000
Perhaps Canada (federal and Provincial) should subsidize 98% of the cost to install a solar/geothermal systems for both homeowners and business
owners.
Nuclear power has been a failed policy for Canada. All Canadian reactors except Douglas Point built went overbudget or had major maintenace problems (ie Pickering).
The new maple reactor went 400% overbudget and still not working. I can’t blame the conservative gov’t for cancelling the program.what a boondoggle!
Darlington was suppose to cost $2 billion and in the end cost the Ontarian taxpayers $15 billion. I wonder would happen if the Ontario gov’t given each home owner a subsidy to install geothermal/solar system Ontario would have been better off. Again the Ontario gov’t under Dalton wants to expand its nuclear program of $25 billion but I will see that number doubling to $50 billion with cost overruns as per past history.
Nuclear has other problems… decommissiong of nuclear reactors will cost billions, security problems and waste problems.
“Equalization payments ensure that the rest of Canada profits just as much as Alberta & Sask.
In fact it’s quite hypocritical to take all this money from Alberta while blaming it for all of Canada’s imaginary ills.
By LiberalTaxMan on 06.30.08 11:35 am’
Nice try…. but equalization payments are a completely separate issue (Ontario by the way contributes to the equalization pool as well).
We are talking about green house gas emissions and paying for the pollution that is generated by various provinces. This has NOTHING to do with equalization.
Alberta has its head firmly in the sand while it generates 40% of Canada’s carbon emissions. At least Quebec and Ontario have agreed to put hard caps on industry and participate in a cap and trade system. Alberta is doing absolutely nothing except spend $25 million on PR.
The rest of the world is recognizing the terrible performance of the Tar Sands… that’s why US mayors voted to boycott “dirty Alberta oil”. Wake up man! It’s time to clean up the carbon mess that Alberta generates. Dion’s plan will help do that with Accelerated Capital Cost Allowances on green technology.
Barb,Bill,Garth, Charlie,Dube,SLG,KPN,and the rest of the blogsters .
HAPPY CANADA DAY !
And I would say uou are entitled to your opinon Gord. When you publish your dictionary please let us know!
I know what real freedom is, and likewise what it is not. Perhaps some day you will understand.
Until then please keep your ever so delicate sensitivities as your guide. The shock will be unnerving when you discard them in favour of reality.
By Bill-Muskoka on 06.30.08 12:00 pm
My Dictionary:
Head Terrorist – Bill Muskoka
Racist – Bill Muskoka
Dictator – Bill Muskoka
Just kidding Bill, I wouldn’t want to call you any of those names, although I could if I wanted to. It wouldn’t make it true though would it? I mean just because I wrote it on this blog doesn’t make it true does it?
BTW, what’s with the n-word reference in your post to me about Clinton, pretty provocative isn’t it, or do you use that word a lot?
Gord.
Farming is a energy intensive business — Tractors and combines use alot of fuel. If Farmers are not FULLY compensated many will go bankrupt which will no doubt increase a crisis in food production?
By Scotty on 06.30.08 12:14 pm
I believe there is a major potential for farmers to access new technologies if they were developed. The problem is that there has no incentive to invest in these techologies as long as investors can make significant profits by simply tinkering with old technology.
They have become the advocates for the old guard. In many ways they have been working to turn back the clock to colonial Canada when the economy was totally dominated by foreign owners who exploited our resources for their benefit.
The problem is that once these resources are gone there will not be adequate capital, value added production, or commodities to sustain a healthy economy. This is the direction that capitalist globalization is dragging us and the rest of world. It is short term gain for some being traded for long term pain for most.
By Gord G. on 06.30.08 11:39 am
“Brammer, my post was specifically focused on the terrorist comment.”
That is the easy one. Read either of Noam Chomsky’s latest books.
Note that they are not long winded opinion but are carefully cross referenced threads of relevant facts. (I think that I counted 470 references in Failed States.) A joining of the dots that is absent in any work that I have seen cited as a rebuttal.
By Scotty on 06.30.08 12:28 pm
Scotty, here’s the real problem, new, innovative ideas that are put forth by ordinary Serbs like us get ignored. Especially if it would mean a real reduction in costs for all…governments are very fond of the taxes they collect.
For example, I have enough high sugar waste on my one operation to produce 134,000 liters of ethanol per year. I would use an ethanol generator to produce my ethanol. My equipments and trucks would be converted and what I don’t use could be used to feed Ontario’s power grid with my ethanol generators.
Do you think I can find ANY government support? Do you think any government will even consider pointing me to the technology I need to do this, even completely on my own dime?
Nope. All they do is with eyes glazed over, nod, smile and say ‘yeah, uh, we’ll look into that and get back to you…’ I guess after three years, they are still looking.
I could find the help in the U.S., but what if I go to this expense and trouble only to have the Ont. government or municipality shut me down? When it comes to their taxes…I’m sure they’d find the technicality to turn off my ethanol production.
Leasa
By Zorpheous on 06.30.08 10:47 am
Hey Zorph…just wondering, has Danny Williams had any comment on Mr. Dion’s plan yet? It would be interesting, no?
Leasa
The target is 20 per cent below 1990 levels. There is no supplementary administrative cost contemplated. — Garth
That is the target Garth, but I have yet to read anywhere, including in the Green Shift literature, where it posts real numbers, hard numbers, of what the reduction will be. I think you need to have these numbers in place before you can sell this to anyone in Canada. It may look good to those who believe that GHG emissions are out of control in Canada but, without hard numbers, this plan is dubious at best.
And how can a program have no costs??
Having spent a majority of your working life in politics, you must be cognizant of the fact that everything government does has a price!
Unless these questions, and more, can be answered by the Liberal Party of Canada, the price of the Green Shift Tax, to all Canadians, is far, far too high.
==
Why the double standard … is TS posting from some Liberal party computer ….??!!!
By Harry S on 06.30.08 11:54 am
No,we like TS and hate you. Got it Bozo ?
Dion tied with McCain for unpopularity
Recent Strategic Counsel-CTV poll ranks Dion and McCain at the bottom of the list amongst Canadians polled.
* Barack Obama: 26 per cent
* Stephen Harper: 21 per cent
* Hillary Clinton: 16 per cent
* Jack Layton: 9 per cent
* Gilles Duceppe: 6 per cent
* Stephane Dion: 5 per cent
* John McCain: 3 per cent
Applying the +/-3.1% polling margin of error to the results could mean that Dion and McCain are virtually tied.
Amusingly, Duceppe is more popular than Dion … considering that Duceppe’s popularity is confined to Quebec while Dion’s numbers are for all of Canada!!!
That means Dion has virtually zero popularity in Quebec …!!!
What say you .. Liberal trools !!!
You have made the same post three times today. You are cut off. Hit the pavement. — Garth
Oops, forgot the link, and yes, it is France’s new Prez that is bending over to please Bush’s paranoid desires.
New pact would give EU citizens’ data to US
By Bill-Muskoka on 06.30.08 11:03 am
Connect the dots ..
THE NEW WORLD DISORDER
7-year plan aligns U.S.
Rules, regs to be integrated
Posted: January 16, 2008
1:00 am Eastern
By Jerome R. Corsi
© 2008 WorldNetDaily.com
German Chancellor Angela Merkel, President Bush and European Commission President Jose Manuel Barroso at a White House summit meeting last April where they launched the Transatlantic Economic Council
Six U.S. senators and 49 House members are advisers for a group working toward a Transatlantic Common Market between the U.S. and the European Union by 2015.
The Transatlantic Policy Network – a non-governmental organization headquartered in Washington and Brussels – is advised by the bi-partisan congressional TPN policy group, chaired by Sen. Robert Bennett, R-Utah.
The plan – currently being implemented by the Bush administration with the formation of the Transatlantic Economic Council in April 2007 – appears to be following a plan written in 1939 by a world-government advocate who sought to create a Transatlantic Union as an international governing body.
An economist from the World Bank has argued in print that the formation of the Transatlantic Common Market is designed to follow the blueprint of Jean Monnet, a key intellectual architect of the European Union, recognizing that economic integration must inevitably lead to political integration.
(Story continues below)
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=59713
We’re being screwed in every direction.
Joe Calgary writes in part: Get rid of the Provincial Governments, eliminate all forms of Government with the exception of the Federal Level, and then, maybe, for a brief moment, you might get Alberta’s attention.
No Federal centralization without the elimination of the special interest groups, including the Provinces.
Otherwise, go spin. We’ll keep after our own business here in Alberta, and you can keep after yours.
Why should we advocate wealth sharing when you jackass can’t even agree on a simple taxation formula.
By Joe Calgary on 06.30.08 12:10 pm
====================================
Joe, this is not a logical argument, since even though our Federal government may have the power to do so, it is ludicrous to even suggest that all municipal and regional services should be assumed by the Feds. This is the type of radical ideological argument that one might expect from the NDP.
Alberta’s attention can be gotten very quickly if other tactics are employed. Just electrify all of the railroads and automobiles in Quebec and Ontario! Quebec made the first move last week by approving the use of electric “enclosed golf carts” for use on city streets only. With electric cars rechargeable overnight for $3.63 Cdn it will not be very long before Alberta will have no other choice but to sell it’s then surplus petroleum products to India and China! Americans may not be able to afford it by then!
Alberta’s attention has always been easy to gain since you only need to get the front of the line to turn and look your direction and the whole Province follows suit. I remember when they had zero members elected to the Opposition Parties because the sheeple always believe what their leader says and does!
I grew up on the border looking in from Lloyd!
Resource prices mask Canada’s slide, report says: Conference Board says Canada losing ground due to a ‘failure to innovate’
OTTAWA – High commodity prices are covering up Canada’s sliding socio-economic performance relative to other advanced countries, the Conference Board of Canada says.
“We appear to be riding high due to global demand for our resources, but this is not a sustainable course for our country,” the think-tank’s president, Anne Golden, stated Monday.
Citing a “failure to innovate,” Golden said Canada is losing ground to other countries that better exploit their own advantages.
What was that Flaherty was saying recently about our economy?
HAPPY CANADA DAY !
By Men With Hats on 06.30.08 12:31 pm
And the same to you mon ami!
So what are you doing to speed up McGuinty to act on his promise to get rid of the coal fired plants in Ontario? Seems that McGuinty is too busy banning dogs, lord’s prayers, and handing out free needles to drug addicts to actually something tangible to help clean our environment. Heck even in McGuinty’s own back yard, he has done NOTHING to clean up the poop dumping at Petrie Island!
By Catherine on 06.30.08 12:05 pm
You are absolutely correct about McSquinty. He’s done sweet f*** all about our two major coal fire power plants. Yet John Tory keeps barking about mythical “Clean Coal” Technology, which is a complete fiction.
As for taxing the poor Albertians, sorry you have your facts completely wrong. The taxes will be paid by the Oil companies and not the people of the province, yet the people of the Alberta will get the tax shift benifit. The Oil companies can’t pass along the tax price, because the Oil markets set the price. There will be no job loss in the oil sector either, because the Oil Companies need the employees to work the oil sands or they don’t get the product to market.
Your beotching about Oiling companies that are making money hand over fist, who will have to pay for polluting our shared atmosphere and those are the same Oil Companies that have recieved 40 billion in tax subsidies over the last 30 years.
Seems you have fallen for PR campaign of the oil giants who want to make you think that you will pay for it, when it is they who will pay for the pollution they produce and all the time they continue suck on the government tit.
The rest of the world is recognizing the terrible performance of the Tar Sands… that’s why US mayors voted to boycott “dirty Alberta oil”. Wake up man! It’s time to clean up the carbon mess that Alberta generates. Dion’s plan will help do that with Accelerated Capital Cost Allowances on green technology.
By TS on 06.30.08 12:29 pm
Hey TS, I wonder who has more clout?
Governors cheer oilsands
http://www.canada.com/edmontonjournal/news/story.html?id=7f45ff73-84ba-4600-9f28-1d53ed2427fb
Gord.
Screwed – again??
TIMING TIMING TIMING
It takes time and effort to Become Aware.
Since Stephane Dion is prepared to alienate the Provinces of Alberta and Saskatchewan just so he can get elected into Government, I thought that I should provide some information on what could happen in the near future if Dion’s Green Shift plan were to be implemented and became Federal Policy.
There are still many separatists residing in Alberta including myself. However, unlike myself, most of the recent crop of separatists appear to want to join the United States of America so that they can become Americans. Unfortunately for them, they are not aware that the American Empire is coming to an end in the near future.
Meanwhile, there are many Corporate Elites in Canada and the USA who want to integrate the two economies together so as to form the North American Union (NAU). They are using NAFTA and the SPP to accomplish this goal by 2010. However, it is beginning to look like they might have to use the piece-meal approach by causing one or more of the Provinces to separate from Ottawa and to join the USA. They would be welcomed with open arms, especially if it was Alberta and/or Saskatchewan with all of our dirty crude oil and other natural resources. Most of the Provinces have been wooed by some American special interest group over the past few years.
Since the Bilderberg Group controls most of the Canadian Political System, including Prime Ministers Trudeau, Mulroney, Chretien, Martin, and Harper, it is my opinion that The Powers That Be approached the future PM Dion to pursue this plan in order to force the Province of Alberta to separate from Canada in order to join the USA. The Premiers of Alberta are controlled by the Bilderberg Group and/or the Tri Lateral Commission so it should be easy to startup the movement to separate. Ex-premier Peter Lougheed is a member of the Tri Lateral Commission and has been involved in a number of SPP and NAU events. The Big Oil Cartel is also on board for this move.
Once Alberta moves to separate, Saskatchewan and British Columbia would be soon to follow. Then Manitoba and the ‘Atlantica’ Provinces will follow after that. That will leave Ontario and Quebec to ponder their fate. They will soon follow in order to complete the Canadian/American portion of this merger. The next question will then be how best to merge Mexico into the NAU, since the more corrupt Mexican society is going downhill so quickly.
If we had a REAL Conservative Government in Ottawa, they would terminate NAFTA and then setup a Domestic Pricing System for ALL of our natural resources. This would allow the Canadian manufacturing sector a better chance to compete against cheap labour countries like China. For example, a domestic price for crude oil could fall into a range of 60 to 100 dollars. This would also provide an opportunity to generate more Canadian refining capacity for gasoline, diesel and jet fuel.
Once again, I must reiterate that Man-made Global Warming is a HOAX. Any solution that involves reducing carbon dioxide emissions is also a HOAX. Therefore, any solution to reduce CO2 emissions that involves money is a SCAM. This is just a MONEY TRANSFER SCHEME sponsored by the United Nations and their initial agents Maurice Strong and Al Gore. Anyone who reads what has been published by these Canadians, Dr. Tim Ball, Lorrie Goldstein and Lawrence Soloman, would Be Aware of this SCAM.
Most of the Climate Changes and weird weather is due to natural cycles. However, if you were to Google weather wars or electromagnetic scalar wave technology, you might discover that some of this weird weather could have been caused by man-made technology.
Cheers.
Dion is a marxist and his agenda is not about “saving the planet”, it’s about destroying the middle class and making the proletariats totally dependent on the state – the “green shift” is the new communism and it is about eradicating personal freedom ….
no thank you
By ex-Canadian on 06.30.08 11:37 am
WOW, someone just fell out Teh Stupid Tree.
Actually the Carbon Tax Shift is a libertarian/conservative model. It gives the choice to consumer who can then drive the market by their actions. Why are you against people have a choice in market place?
Equalization payments ensure that the rest of Canada profits just as much as Alberta & Sask.
In fact it’s quite hypocritical to take all this money from Alberta while blaming it for all of Canada’s imaginary ills.
By LiberalTaxMan on 06.30.08 11:35 am
The money from the tax shift comes from taxing the polluter, not the people of Alberta. Albertains will receive a 2:1 tax return, per capita, in comparison to the people of Ontario.
As I said before, it is the Oil Companies that will be paying the tax, they can’t pass the cost on, since oil prices are set by the oil markets. The tax shift will put money back into the pocket of the people of Alberta, who then can exercise their rights in the Market place to drive the economy to a green way of living, or not (their choice). Giving the people the money and the power in the market place is a libertarian/conservative model.
Of course the Oil companies will do everything to convince you that it you who will be paying and not them. It’s not like they can move to another country, the tar sands are in Alberta, not India. And hey, maybe we should cut the 1.4 billion Welfare payments the Oil Companies get from the tax payers, and put that money in pockets of the people of Alberta instead.
Maybe the people of Alberta need to pull their heads out the tar sands and see who is really ripping them off.
AB & SK produce 40% of the GHG emissions. And thus they will be providing 40% of the $15 billion carbon tax revenue. That’s $6 billion in revenue from AB & SK.
Those two provinces have 13% of the population. And thus they will receive 13% of the $15 in tax cuts (assuming it’s really revenue neutral). That’s $2 billion back in tax cuts.
There’s a net loss of $4 billion to the economies of AB & SK. That money will be going to ON, QC, & BC. There’s no other way to define it as a tax-grab wealth transfer.
And to justify it by saying, “yeah but WE had to buy that energy,” is a load of nonesense, not to mention the height of arrogance. The East does not even come close to buying the majority of it’s energy from the West. What you don’t produce yourself you get from the good ‘ol US of A.
The sooner we get away from evil oil companies and their greedy, immoral, illegal and murderous policies, the better off our country will be. If you don’t believe look to Africa where oil companies shore up Idi Amin like dictators, or send in their own mercenaries to murder elected officials. Iraq, Venezula, Iran have taken control of their own oil rich fields. Guess where the oilmen, Bush and Cheney want to attack. It is no secret that Iraq oil fields are now divided up between BP, Exxon, Shell etc. It is always about the oil, and the sooner we stop relying upon it the better off our country will be. Look at the new jobs, innovations, research and development it will create if we do.
Now Northern Leaders are rejecting the “Green Shift”. In Alberta, the Green Shift refers to the money being sucked out of their province.
Well, Doug, how about legislation and investements to start.
By Catherine on 06.30.08 9:44 am
That is a good idea. What kind of Legislation would you suggest, and when might we see it? Investment is also good, hopefully in some alternative energy source, and when will that happen?
5 premiers have already said “Bad Idea” to the Dion tax grab, and the plan is only 2 weeks old. I’m sure there will be more soon.
the “green shift” is the new communism and it is about eradicating personal freedom ….
no thank you
By ex-Canadian on 06.30.08 11:37 am
Ex Canadian or Duel Citizen
Good for Mr Dion! The invasion by the oil companies in North america with their price gouging and destruction of our environment (while we pay for it) has and will probably cause more hardship than any war in history!
Now you want to tax the industry that drives the economy. You see Garth, we see through all that. Either you don’t, you don’t want to, or you actually are quite aware of the strategy and are in full support of it.
In any event, the division Dion’s plan will create nationally may not be reconcilable. Thats the message on the street. Thats the message Dion needs to hear, if he cares.
By Janice on 06.30.08 11:18 am
Hmmmm, when Iggy said “we didn’t get it done”, what did he really mean?
“You see Garth, you and your liberal arrogance miss the point, again.
The west is fed up with Ottawa telling them what is best for them and then taking their money and resources.”
No people in Vancouver are fed up with people in Alberta and other points east of Vancouver talking about “the West”. Believe me the world view of people in Coal Harbor and Yale town and Kits bares more a resemblance to people living in downtown Toronto than people living in Prince Albert or Red Deer. And another thing given the mild weather out here, Vancouverites are better positioned than virtually anyone to take advantage of the Dion’s carbon shift.
One American’s view of Canada.
Goodbye, Canada
I’d like to close with one last thought. This might seem crazy, but I think Canada as a country should do away with those cheesy provincially unique license plate tag lines — like “Yours to Discover” or “Je me souviens” — and replace them with one thought that sums up this great country: Live and let live.
I especially like his idea on the license plates. Maybe that is a great way for all of us to realize, after all is said and done..’We ARE CANADIANS?’
Jennifer wrote: If this plan was implemented today, all those jobs would still be there in the morning, houses would continue to be overpriced, and the provinces of AB & SK would continue to rake in precisely the same amount in royalties as yesterday. Yes, individual westerners would pay somewhat more in carbon taxes than the average Canadian by virtue of climate, population density and energy-intensive farming practices. But as far as the oil industry goes, the only effect that I can think of would be a slight decrease in corporate profits for the most profitable corporations on the planet. Or am I missing something?
JENNIFER SMITH 06.30.08 12:44AM
· · · — — — · · · · · · — — — · · · · · · — — — · · ·
Jennifer, as usual you are totally correct.
· · · — — — · · · · · · — — — · · · · · · — — — · · ·
and.. Jennifer wrote: “by what mechanism are the people of these provinces benefiting from the oil boom, and how will that mechanism be disrupted by a carbon tax?
…a carbon tax that amounts to a very small fraction of the cost of producing a barrel of oil is not going to cause these companies to suddenly pack up their tents and go elsewhere..
JENNIFER SMITH 06.30.08 12:44AM
· · · — — — · · · · · · — — — · · · · · · — — — · · ·
Jennifer, another great point. Big oil here, mostly foreign owned, uses idle threats and/or irresponsible corporate bullying to modify our government’s behavior.
Alberta’s being fleeced. The citizens don’t know it because it is well spun around here.
We should have looked at other countries keeping the wealth themselves. We just think we’re keeping it, but no, we have bad deals.
Politicians here are too complicit, too owned, and NO GUTS! They protect their phony-baloney jobs as Mel Brooks said. It’s much easier for politicians to lay blame on the East – to create the necessary fear they need, because that’s a lazy sell, easier than to tell the truth that they are in cahoots with big oil and blew it big time.
So, as predicted, Conservatives just lie about The Green Shift. There’s no common sense used, just politicking and catering to world corporate interests who love to rob Canada. We’re an easy target, and getting easier with all of Harper’s changes he’s making to facilitate takeovers.
But the sheep will continue to follow Harper right to the slaughterhouse.
global warming, climate change, whatever it’s called this week, is a fake issue which has been rejected overwhelmingly by the scientific community….
Gee whiz ! Another idiot oracle .Thanks imbecile !
Last week or so someone in Ontario was upset about paying $.05+ PKH. We pay about $.11+ PKH in NS for electricity (coal generated plants). In the 70’s the govt. promoted electricity for home heating. We also pay $21.66 every 2 mos. for meter rental (yeah right – why don’t they say for meter reading). Our bill for 61 days was $300.16. for 2367 kwh. We did have a cold 2 months. But, I only have lights on in the room we’re using, wash my clothes (2 loads per week) in cold water, do 2 loads of dishes per week, but wash pots & pans in the sink and a few extras per. Hang my clothes out to dry when possible, use a pressure cooker/slow cooker when possible rarely use my oven. All of our appliances are Energuide ones. Yeah 90 of are lights in & out are efficient. We mow our lawn once every 2/3 wks, depending on weather. I recycle/reuse/donate everything I can. Actually have for many years. Recently ought 2 3/6 litre toilets but have to pay a $150. fee to an ‘environmentally Govt. approved co.’ to come into our home to approve them to gain a rebate of $50. for both of them. How ludicrous is this. The Cdn Govt website link doesn’t even approve these toilets as they are higher efficiency toilets than those listed. Do you think I’ll spend hours filling out forms, etc. for a $50. rebate. Sort of like buying income tax programs that offer you a rebate of $10 if you go through hoops to obtain it.
Am I pissed off, yes. If any govt really wants us to get off this cycle of fossil fuel dependence they had better get their act together and punish those who are polluting, encourage those who wish to decrease their GHGs with ‘REAL’ monetary incentives. I agree with others, why are we offering tax ‘benefits’ to oil & gas companies who are raping our resources. The cost of oil is so high now that these tax benefits should be stopped. I too would like a renegotiation of NAFTA. Mulrooney and his negotiatior – can visualize him but can’t recall his name – screwed Canada big time re our energy resources.
By Bill-Muskoka on 06.30.08 3:20 pm
Maybe Canada can steal New Hampshires cheesy licence plate slogan, Live Free or Die. Now what was this guys problem with our cheesy licence plates again?
Bill Muskoka – DH just put on the Bucket List. I watched it during chemo this winter, but he had not seen it. Loved that film. Sure he shall too. Thanks for reminding me.
the “green shift” is the new communism and it is about eradicating personal freedom ….
no thank you
By ex-Canadian on 06.30.08 11:37 am
How original . You write that, all, by yourself ?
Wow !
BTW, what’s with the n-word reference in your post to me about Clinton, pretty provocative isn’t it, or do you use that word a lot?
Gord.
By Gord G. on 06.30.08 12:55 pm
Do you grasp the significance of quotation marks in grammar Gord? Some would call it a quote, othert a cite, but for you I am sure it will have some PC meaning, rather the hard reality it portrays. Wish you could go visit the South sometime and read that little sign for yourself like I have in person! Then make it an issue with the locals. Oh, I would suggest having your affairs in order before doing so.
Some Sheriff might declare your corpse an act of suicide based on the five bullet holes in your back from a bolt action rifle.
By Bill-Muskoka on 06.30.08 3:20 pm
Maybe Canada can steal New Hampshires cheesy licence plate slogan, Live Free or Die. Now what was this guys problem with our cheesy licence plates again?
By Marc on 06.30.08 3:48 pm
Cheesy would be from Wisconsin I think. Persoanlly, I still like the NWT Polar Bear plate…the only non-rectangular plate left in this nutball world.
marc 3:48 PM
“maybe Canada can steal New Hampshires cheesy license plate slogan, Live Free or Die”
progressive Canadians lack the perspicacity to appreciate the concept of personal freedom because in the Peoples Democratic Republic of Canuckistan it’s all about the state, egalitarianism, screw America and new taxes designed to regulate personal behavior ….
there won’t be any license plate slogans in Canuckistan because nobody will be able to afford a car except for Garth and everyone else on the “green team” …..
I would be vastly more supportive of the Green Shaft plan if it didn’t involve a massive transfer of money from Alberta and Saskatchewan to the rest of Canada.
The money transfer is not necessary. It could have been reduced by increasing the taxation of the consumer over industry, or by ensuring the tax money stayed in the province of origin.
But no, instead we have the ludicrous situation of Dion trying to convince Albertans that handing over massive amounts of cash to TROC is good for them. It’s an insult to Albertan’s intelligence.
It’s amazing how often people demanding that they be given money accuse others of being selfish and greedy.
The first comment today pointed to a piece in the Economist – not by any stretch a whacko left-wing tree-hugging magazine – which is supportive of a carbon tax.
http://www.economist.com/opinion/displaystory.cfm?story_id=11580723
If this link works properly you will notice a number of links at the top right of the article, which expand on the opinion, with details on the alternatives to coal and oil, and how we can facilitate a transition to them. Key to the transition is getting the subsidies out of coal/oil and into sustainables.
Gee Mary: Most of the premiers disagree with Harper on just about everything.
So what is your point?
“I’ll let you know whether we agree on something when I discover the real Sheila in future comments.” –By Herb on 06.30.08 10:44 am
Herb, please do get to know me better before making the kind of asinine comments that some around here have made, accusing me of being everything from a student of an atheist, to a religious fanatic, to a paid political operative who clandestinely works out of an office in Chicago.
My consistent approach has been to try to bring into sharper focus the values a free society with maximum freedom of choice vs. the restrictions of state control which do not allow for human creativity and wisdom where people live in the realm world closer to home.
Those who advocate stronger state control while, all the while incessantly belly-aching about the abuses of power that we have seen by all parties in the past, have got to start honestly facing the issue as to whether they are so naive as to think that the problem of the corruption of power is simply a political issue that pertains to one political party, or whether it is a deeper human issue that we might have to look deeper than partisan politics to find answers.
Where that debate could lead, who knows? But let’s at least not demonize those who suggest that political activism tends to reflect our culture, rather than the other way around, and that political activism is downstream from culture.
My point is that if more citizens in our culture took more personal responsibility, and grew up, instead of staying in a perennial condition of dependence upon the state for all our “solutions,” we might not be as frustrated with big brother government non-answers.
Why should people get so angry that somebody even wants to open that discussion, determining that they are going to stick with looking to those who are in power, all the while whining about how those in power have failed them and disappointed them in the past.
“Let’s grow up!” has been my consistent theme, and that, my friend, is the real Sheila.
Why do people get so angry with me? I do not really know for sure, but my guess is that it might be that they don’t want to forfeit the security of government, top-down solutions, so that they might have to take more responsibility for their own lives, and for those in their community.
I am not at all saying that all those who disagree with me are irresponsible. I just can’t understand why some would insist on perpetrating centralized government approaches that they have been so frustrated with in the past, whenever the government imposes its will on them, and they don’t like it.
And some seem to want to see government take a greater and greater role in looking all citizens from the cradle to the grave, when it is desirable if more people rather than less will have their emotional, social and financial needs met through strong and healthy family relationships.
When we by-pass the responsibility of the family, and look to government alone, we fall into the trap of looking for absolutist solutions wherein government shekels become government shackles, and where the free bread and circuses amuse people for awhile, but keep them from thinking about their real situation in life, and their need to maintain maximum freedom through maximum personal responsibility.
The fact that we could wake up one day to find we are no longer a democracy is evidenced by the number of people here who don’t seem to think that people like myself should even have a voice at the table.
I put freedom and responsibility together, and some around here seem to be mistaken to think that we can still remain free while giving the government a greater and greater degree of responsibility, and less responsibility at the individual and family level.
By kpn on 06.30.08 3:58 pm
My joy to share. Sorry for your own real life experience with chemo. I do not wish that on anyone. I have had too many friends go through the experience.
The closest I can relate is a case of the most severe flu I ever had, or the Iodine dye used for a test once. Turned out I am allergic to Iodine and puked my guts out violently.
Nicholson and Freeman were fantastic in their roles that is for sure.
Happy Canada Day BTW.
By Molly on 06.29.08 11:12 pm
An excellent link, Molly.
“I wonder at the contradiction that we can ask for bigger, centralized government solutions to our most basic problems, and think that the party in power is going to change anything substantially. – Sheila
So what you are saying then Shiela, is that there is no difference between the parties. LOL! The Harper party says it all the time every time they get caught being corrupt. “All the other parties do it too” they claim. Sorry, but what people claim and do are often two different things, including who you claim to be. In my view, you’re nothing more than a fictional character of some bought off propagandists imagination. Good luck trying to sell it to the masses.
“we could live with a government by consensus if we both sat around the same table. This is encouraging.” – Sheila
What do you call a forum such as this? And do you see consensus? At the end of the day, facts trump fallacy, imagination/inspiration trumps the dull/uninspired, good policy trumps bad and truth (especially fully revealled truth) trumps lies. In the realm of debate, its all about getting the head to nod. Shuffle a bunch of truths someone’s way and they begin to nod at anything. Don’t think we don’t know the art of it here on this site and remember, in the end, fully revealled truth trumps lies. In the end, your own fallacies/lies will be your own undoing.
“What is not so encouraging is that my religion (whether Ayn Rand atheism or othewise) should be made a factor in this discussion.” – Shiela
Personally, what I believe is that beliefs themselves are fair game but it must relate to “the system”. That is, after all, the common denominator for the serious bloggers on this site.
If, for an example, someone, an evangelical perhaps, wants to discuss what the bible has to say concerning the future prophesies of humanities effects on the worlds environment, I’d say that at this point its fair game and the reason why I’m saying it is that Stephen Harper has made it so. He made it so lobbying governments to hide the identity of political donors with “church groups” in mind as being potentially singled out (persecuted) for their political leanings if their organizations were singled out as political donators to political parties. Harper has also gone on to claim to be “the voice” for evangelicals much the same way as Republicans have (Harper, Republican, is there a difference?) and as such, has made the entire realm of Christian beliefs as relating to political decisions on policy, foreign, environmental, human rights or otherwise, on the table of discussion. And he has most certainly played the “evangelical” card enough times from the endorsment of evangelical candidates and their supporters to his ugly stances concerning accusing opposition parties as being anti-semetic.
“I was told that the religion of David Suzuki should not be considered a factor in his approach towards environmentalism, so let’s at least play by the rules that we establish for others.” – Shiela
What you said isn’t accurate. You said David Suzuki/The David Suzuki foundation IS a quazi religion unto itself, a fallacy if not an outright lie.
“Take my thoughts on their own merits without perennially moving in the area of suspicion, cynicism, and of false accusation. The false accusations that I, a fellow Canadian, have received on this blog are too numerous to mention, and obviously the contradictory charges that are made here cannot all be right.” – Shiela
Some aren’t. But some are, Sheila. Everything you’ve said on this site is a matter of record. Do you somehow think you’re invincible to this fact?
“So you are going to have to figure these ridiculous charges out for yourself, but at least speak with one, consistent voice in your opposition.” – Shiela
Your own voice should be more than enough.
“Excepting of areas like national defence and foreign policy in which Canada clearly needs to speak with one voice, I simply believe that the average citizen is better served with a more decentralized approach.” – Shiela
And now you’ve just made a major mistake (outside of blathering on about your moral high road again). You’ve taken a position, a broad and general position on how the system should be governed and what you’ve just said, to be clear and precise, is that national interests should only go so far as national defense and foreign policy.
Take a good long look a that the laws of the land, Sheila. Tell us why you think the right to universal health care, the right to universal education, the concept of treating people as equals with human rights, gender, age, race, language, and the rights to the basic needs for survival suddenly isn’t deemed a national interest to be insured and guaranteed at the very least, by federal laws.
Please tell us why you believe the Charter “doesn’t work” for natives or any other minority group (bear in mind readers, I’m not talking about the way things are practiced, the feds have some big catching up to do of which all political parties, particularly the Harper party has dragged their feet).
Please explain to us why you believe the “environment” isn’t a national issue that effects all Canadians. Please explain to us why you believe the balkanization of Canadian federal powers will somehow help Canada’s ability to compete with foreign interests. Outside of the current ursurped Harper government we have right now, we’re in general, not a nation of sellouts. Save the “lets get weaker, its free’er” speak for the weak minded Con sites.
“Is that a point of view that is no longer tolerated in Canada in the minds of some here? I find that extremist.” – Sheila
What makes you think that extremists like yourself aren’t continually tolerated on this site? It is, after all, a democracy.
“The different nationalities and ethnicities that make up Canada do not WANT a centralized government, top-down approach. – Shiela
So minorites don’t want to be treated as equals. They don’t want the same human rights, the same access to universal healthcare, to universal education, to national laws that treat everyone the same with gun control, immigration, national defense, federal crimes, environmental policies, freedom of speech, FOI, trade laws, do you have any clue as to just what you’ve said?
I guess the gun toter’s and the war mongerers, and the foreign corporations, and the greeders, and the oil burners, and the racists, and the religious nutters and the bigots, they all want to be treated differently… I see your point now.
The First Nations do not want it. The Quebecois do not want it. And the Inuit are deeply appreciated that they now finally have their territorial government in Nunavut instead of having all of their decisions made for them by the remote and distant government in Ottawa. – Shiela
You mean the militant FN members, the Eastern/Western separatists, and disgruntled Inuit who are losing their ice that you say isn’t happening, don’t want it.
We live in a democracy, Shiela. Don’t put words in the mouths of the majority lest you provoke someone to call you what you are.
“The centralized government in Ottawa wrongly saw the Arctic for many years simply as “an unexplored frontier,” whereas the Inuit, when finally given a voice, saw it as their “homeland” from time immemorial.” – Shiela
I see. So people who aren’t inuit don’t see where they were born (Earth) as their homeland from “time immemorial”… my God… who writes this propagandistic crap?
“Generally the more freedom we can allow people and people groups to make their
own decisions, and to allow for self-determination, without policies of paternalism and assimiliation, the happier people will be.” – Shiela
You forgot the part about why we have to get rid of universal healthcare, the CWB, the CBC, the nation of Canada as we know it, the protection of Canada’s economic sectors (U.S. multinationals can’t gain market share that way) the need to get into endless wars for U.S. corps and the end of human rights guaranteed in the charter. Lets not forget about your wonderful vision of “freedom”.
“What some of us don’t seem to get is that we can allow people greater freedom without falling apart as a nation.” – Shiela
Just ask the NCC poster girl, she’s got it all figured out!
“People are reasonable enough to accept that we need a common voice in some key areas.” – Shiela
So lets decentralize the federal government! Good idea!
“What you saw in the House of Commons, when there was peace for the first time in a long time, is that by rejecting the assimiliationist and centralized government approaches of the past, many Natives were for the first time proud to not only call themselves “Native,” but “Native Canadians.”” – Shiela
Perhaps you can explain to us why the Kelowna Accord was scrapped by the Harper government while your at it. Y’know, explain to us why the Harper government that promotes the “decentalization of federal powers” has been the biggest threat to FN’s themselves. Please explain to us why you believe the “do nothing” platform of Harper party rights is the best way to go, why the blatant double standards of the purported “Harper Party” view is best when it comes to “property rights” being on the U.S. multinational favor when it comes to Native ownership of resources.
Its getting tiresome to have to continually refute the naivety/ignorance/lies/propaganda doublespeak from yours truly.
“Many for the first time, can now proudly sing our National Anthem, and to include all of us when they sing, “O Canada, our home and NATIVE land!”
By Sheila on 06.30.08 8:20 am
Words are cheap, Shiela. FN’s wasn’t complaining with movement towards the Kelowna accord, the agreement FN’s, the provinces and the feds all signed onto until Harper arrived to “tear it up”. The practice of the Harper party is appalling when it comes to treaty agreements. Its as clear as the Harper party platform.
I hate to break it to you, but you aren’t a mouthpiece for FN’s, Shiela. Try reading the words of the Phil Fontaines of the world and accurately “quote” their words and you might have a chance of forming an opinion that has a chance, especially in a political forum but until then, people like yourself are all the same, purporting to speak on behalf of the “majority” when in reality, the majority is what you oppose. Real sweet version of “freedom and democracy” you’ve got goin’ on there, good luck sellin’ it to the masses.
It gives the choice to consumer who can then drive the market by their actions. Why are you against people have a choice in market place?
By Zorpheous on 06.30.08 2:15 pm
Ya know, Zorph, some people do not have a ‘choice’. Some people, especially the elderly on fixed incomes shiver now because of high heating costs. Some working poor who pay no taxes now, have no choice but to drive that old car to work…very few places in Canada have public transit.
And as for myself, I have no choice but to burn lots of diesel to run my business. I can assure you any tax cut I would get under the green shift would fall extremely far short of the raise in C.O.P.
Every time fuel goes up now, every time the oil companies raise the price of oil…my fertilizer goes up, my fuel goes up, my box bill goes up (they say because of the wax), everything goes up. Who do you think the oil companies will pass on the cost of any carbon tax to? The farmer, the little old lady, the family, you, me.
What I am looking for and most people are looking for is some relief as the C.O.L. is going crazy. Don’t even mention a new tax scheme. It’s nothing short of madness.
Leasa
Do you grasp the significance of quotation marks in grammar Gord? Some would call it a quote, othert a cite
By Bill-Muskoka on 06.30.08 4:03 pm
Bill, that’s why I used the word reference, there’s a new website that I think you might like, it’s called Hatebook, there’s more info about it here,
http://www.winnipegfreepress.com/canada/story/4193097p-4784170c.html
Gord.
“Let’s grow up!” has been my consistent theme, and that, my friend, is the real Sheila.
By Sheila on 06.30.08 4:16 pm
Do you love the Eagle’s song ‘Get Over it’ as much as I do? LOL Right next to it are ‘Life In The Fast Lane’, ‘Hole In The World’, and ‘Cloudy Days.’
I sent a joke video to a friend due to it’s great marketing to rope ogling, dirty old men with peak oil-speak. I thought he would enjoy a clever ad campaign.
Wrong. Seems western politics are no laughing matter.
Out of the blue came an UNRELATED reply [which I won't reply to] But it seems in line with today’s postings, so someone here could crack at it:
The fellow said, and remember, I had not, nor have I ever said anything to him about politics, ever. [I haven't actually talked to him in months, I was just cheering up this sick friend with a video. Perhaps he's too depressed...]
He replied:
“”Maybe a carbon tax will make us better off? If we start paying more than the market rate now won’t that help? No that effects only one side of supply and demand. And depending on the inelasticity of the demand curve may have little effect on consumption.”"
I think he’s gone mental. The link was Greg’s striptease girl, and the friend seems depressed. Dear Abby, is my friend reading too many Calgary newspapers?
Maybe I should re-watch Greg’s video.
“the “green shift” is the new communism and it is about eradicating personal freedom ….
no thank you
By ex-Canadian on 06.30.08 11:37 am”
LMAO! What utter nonsense. I didn’t realize that Britain and most countries in Western Europe including Germany would be considered Communist states.
“Why the double standard … is TS posting from some Liberal party computer ….??!!!
By Harry S on 06.30.08 11:54 am”
As I have stated in a previous post Harry S., I have never belonged to a political party and I have never made a political donation.
Having come from the West, there is only one thing I can tell you about the mentality out there. As long as it comes from an “easterner” it will be rejected as an anti-west, pro-east agenda. There is no debate. There is no reasoning. That’s the thought, due to decades of getting screwed over from the “east.” (I call it the “teenager syndrome – the east is the parent – stupid and knows nothing – the west has money, energy and zest – and won’t listen to anyone or anything)
For the Green Shift to fly, Dion is going to need support from some oil execs, or some big economic thinkers that are grounded out west.
So I read a rumour that the Cons are going to go with Cap and Trade. I would really like a con supporter to tell me why a cap and trade system is better than the Green Shift.
“global warming, climate change, whatever it’s called this week, is a fake issue which has been rejected overwhelmingly by the scientific community…. By ex-Canadian on 06.30.08 11:37 am”
This is a blatant and unadultered lie. You should be ashamed of yourself for posting it.
I think if we are being sold to get off our dependence on fossil fuels, the various levels of government should be making a similer approach. A large amount of revenue is collected off fossil fuels via various taxes. How would any government clear themselves off of a dependance of fossil fuels and the tax dollars that come with it if Canadians cleared themselves off it. Would we be rewarded with higher income taxes for our efforts to make up for the shortfall? We are all addicted, and admission is the first step to solving our addiction.
Great solution, Alberta and Sask will leave Canada and that will cut Canada’s greenhouse gases by 40%.
Works for me.
progressive Canadians lack the perspicacity to appreciate the concept of personal freedom because in the Peoples Democratic Republic of Canuckistan it’s all about the state, egalitarianism, screw America and new taxes designed to regulate personal behavior ….
there won’t be any license plate slogans in Canuckistan because nobody will be able to afford a car except for Garth and everyone else on the “green team” …..
By ex-Canadian on 06.30.08 4:06 pm
Are you referring to “personal freedom” or anarchy?
Dead-end fossil fuels are a band-aid for a broken leg, not a solution.
BY CHARLES OXLEY ON 06.30.08 1:15 AM
And the Conservative Spin is like taking health advice from the witch doctor.
I would be vastly more supportive of the Green Shaft plan if it didn’t involve a massive transfer of money from Alberta and Saskatchewan to the rest of Canada.
The money transfer is not necessary. It could have been reduced by increasing the taxation of the consumer over industry, or by ensuring the tax money stayed in the province of origin.
But no, instead we have the ludicrous situation of Dion trying to convince Albertans that handing over massive amounts of cash to TROC is good for them. It’s an insult to Albertan’s intelligence.
It’s amazing how often people demanding that they be given money accuse others of being selfish and greedy.
By rabbit on 06.30.08 4:12 pm
Once again Rabbit, you guys simple don’t get it. The Oil Industry is the source of the CO2, not the people of Alberta.
But hey lets look at Harpers plan, Cap and Trade, where emmission caps are set and CO2 producers are force to offset in Market driven trading scheme,… so that means Alberta’s Oil Industry would then have to Emmission credits from areas of Canada with lower Emmissions,… which means all your money goes to Quebec, not Ontario.
Also, since oil is produced for export, you can’t tax the consumer, since it is not possible to the public in the USA, so that does work either, and you can bet that the Canadian Oil Industry will push for Export exemptions, which means the CO2 produced form oil production in Canada that is sold out of the counrty will not count.
Nope, tax the source is the best method.
And like I said before, it isn’t the people of Alberta that are paying the tax it is the Oil Companies that are. And the Oil Companies don’t want that because the price of oil is set by the market, not by them.
Now the greatest threat is human myopia. Shame on those who feed there.- Garth
And while we’re talking myopic….
when I was growing up in the UK, Canadian geography consisyed of hydro-electric power and aluminium (not aluminum!) And I knew that Canada did not stop at the Rockies; that the western most province was not Alberta, but British Columbia.
So enough with the western alienation crap, and the east is out to get the west…. has anyone asked our Western most province? From MSM reports last week, BC. is pretty pissed off with our Harper and his “western” government.
Having said that, to the east, instead of belly aching Alberta ans Sask. for their CO2 emissions, and the transfer of wealth from East to these two oil rich provinces…. invest in developing the green technologies that will replace our dependancy on oil and put these two myopic, self serving Conservative provincial governmentsto shame.
Well, Doug, how about legislation and investements to start.
By Catherine on 06.30.08 9:44 am
That is a good idea. What kind of Legislation would you suggest, and when might we see it? Investment is also good, hopefully in some alternative energy source, and when will that happen?
By Doug on 06.30.08 2:40 pm
I believe that investments have already started.
In fact Ford is getting a piece of it for their hybrids.
As for legislation, there are numerous pieces on the environment – for air pollution, land pollution, and water. I think we need more.
A great example was the CFC legislation and the Acid rain legislation. There was also investments for business.
Now for decreasing individual work travel. I would like to see government (both federal and provincial) give tax breaks to businesses that encourage work from home.
If we put our minds together, we can come up with many of these types of examples.
By John Zalischuk on 06.30.08 2:14 pm
Excellent posting, John … and the question that arises: “Is Canada a country worth saving?”
If you stand back, take off the rose-coloured glasse, and ask yourself the question is a ratshit lil’ country like Canada viable in the newly emerging global economic world of tomorrow??
The problem with uniting Canada with the USA is the huge Canadian lefty vote that would have to be absorbed by the Americans, because they will overwhelmingly vote Democrat, thus destroying the political balance. A Democratic US president like Obama would welcome Canada into the USA, as would a majority Democrat Congress. AB and SK might fit into US politics, but ON and PQ ??
What kind of USA would this create and destabilize US politics forever?? Unfortunately, economic union is linked with political union, because harmonizing the countries is necessary to unite them. Ottawa would vanish and Washington, D.C. would be the capitol.
Your thoughts ….
Gad, why don’t Albertans have any vision? It’s time to fight liars with the truth.
~ EMILIE 06.30.08 1:28AM
· · · — — — · · · · · · — — — · · · · · · — — — · · ·
Emilie,
Any suggestions? If I even whisper that the government hasn’t been forthcoming, you wouldn’t believe how Calgarians go into a robotic-like mode, dragging out old fallacies and propaganda about Liberals.
It’s unnerving to see brainwashing is so effective and so normalized.
How do you reverse the politician’s 40 years of lies? Is it the people’s fault if they don’t know?
[I don't even believe we have politicians. I now know that the Conservative politicians in power are lobbyists for corporations, and that's how they stay in power.]
And of course there is no proper local media on these issues, and never has been.
Good link from Brammer:
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/06/27/opinion/27aamodt.html?ex=1215403200&en=678360e34f9c1774&ei=5070&emc=eta1
· · · — — — · · · · · · — — — · · · · · · — — — · · ·
So Emilie, my Alberta friends believe what they hear the most. Especially when it sounds like “Dinner!”
Is there hope? I dunno. Brammer’s post and Bill-Muskoka say there is a way, though.
By kpn on 06.30.08 3:58 pm
My joy to share. Sorry for your own real life experience with chemo. I do not wish that on anyone. I have had too many friends go through the experience.
The closest I can relate is a case of the most severe flu I ever had, or the Iodine dye used for a test once. Turned out I am allergic to Iodine and puked my guts out violently.
Nicholson and Freeman were fantastic in their roles that is for sure.
Happy Canada Day BTW.
By Bill-Muskoka on 06.30.08 4:18 pm
Hi Bill – its my 2nd and likely my last time. Don’t feel bad for me. My anti-nausea drugs worked great. This last time I had a portacath put in – actually just had it removed today. First time the chemo burned my arm for 2 days at a time and had something put in my upper arm where they’d instill the chemo (can’t recall the procedure name) to combat the burning. Problem was DH had to wrap my arm with a plastic brown garbage bag with tape so I could take a shower. This last time I said I wanted a portacath. Unfortunately, it would plug up most of the time so they had to send me down to an imaging(?) unit to see what was the problem with it. I was told I was 1 out of 5k that had a problem. It just delayed my 5/6 hr chemo.
Hey, I have a short haircut now & glad to be alive. A friend of DH’s popped in so we’ll watch the rest of the movie later. To me the movie was inspirational.
http://www.cbc.ca/technology/story/2008/06/26/f-qanda-mcbean.html
C’mon oil burners, greeders and paid propagandists, lets not forget to deny “climate change” and label all scientists as nutters. Lets get the smears out and make some money!!
http://www.cbc.ca/technology/story/2008/06/27/iceless-arctic.html
The meat and potatoes of the link above illustrates the seriousness of the state of our artic ice cap. The cap has melted to the point that ice that was once frozen to land coastlines is no longer frozen so the cap is virtually floating unrooted. The artic ice pack as a whole is on the move and as a result, measured thicknesses of where older thicker ice plates used to be in specific locations have changed their location due to the “floating effect” of the artic ice pack as a whole and as a consequence, we have a layer of icepack at the north pole that is a year old.
A number of commentators have remarked on how late this spring is and global warming deniers like the Shiela’s of the world have tried to lead those to believe that climate change isn’t happening, that C02 isn’t increasing or even if it is, it isn’t having an effect, that damaged ozone isn’t having an effect, that GHG’s aren’t building up and that we are now entering a cold cycle.
The science is telling us otherwise. The artic pack that is “on the move” is shifting temperatures around in the near term and this spring, we had a late spring but the long term, (even next year) isn’t good. As artic ice gives way to open water in the summers by 2020 – 2025, the open waters will absorb more heat and climate change will continue to accelerate.
I don’t think people really have any idea of what will happen from there. Past scientific models simply missed the acceleration of global warming/climate change. Did they miss the acceleration of climate change with the artic ice cap gone and what it would mean to the once permafrost north?
Its highly likely. And for people of any stripe, self interest, naive, ignorant, uneducated, or simply corporate bought, to campaign against the truth of it, the seriousness of it… to be this blind to the consequences of their own selfish, self centered views…
People in the coming generations will remember the do nothing governments and the propagandists who claim climate change as “hype”. They will remember these people with names real or no because the damage “do nothing” policies and lies to justify them really will cause that much future damage and much of it will happen in our own lifetimes, not the next. It will happen far more quickly than greeders are betting on.
There is no greater risk to this planets life than our gluttinous consumption of conventional fuels and if we collectively put the economy first before the environment, we will become products of that neglected environment.
The future including the next election will converge on the issues of economy intertwined with the environment, its that important to us now. There were 1400 cases of West Nile in Saskatchwewan last year when a mere decade ago, there was none. A study of following 171 plant species over 10 years watched these same plant species move up in elevation by 29 metres per year. Folks, thats 1,000 feet over a decade. If this pattern repeats itself, there will be mass extinctions of elevation sensitive flora and fauna 10 years from now. Climate change is here and all the Sheila double speaks of the world will not stop it. The ugly fact is that we have less than 10 years to get GHG’s to 1950’s levels or that “tipping point”, that pendulum might be swinging to far the other way.
I haven’t even begun to talk about the ugliness of what would happen if ice dramatically melted from Greenland and Antartica. In two words, “flood basalt” and for people who know the damage flood basalts can do, they are triggers/end results to mass extinctions all on their own. If anyone wishes, they can debate the “science” of it all they like, but serious changes are happening to this earth and no amount of smear/propaganda/lies will cover it up.
Its crisis, the time to act was years ago, exasterbating the immediacy of action in the now, and the consequences to inaction are dire and apocalyptic. Y’all remember that next time you vote… y’know, what you personally could have done other than limiting those conventional fuel propelled joy rides cause if you somehow self conveniently forget, the environment will force you all to remember anyways and the “we couldn’t do anything” line won’t cut it, lest your real life be as real as a hollywood production, an illusion of pretend and nothing more.
“Well, Doug, how about legislation and investements to start. Taxing the crap of basic necessities is not going the answer… By Catherine on 06.30.08 9:44 am”
LMAO!!! Legislation? Sure Catherine… your hero Herr Harper has had his attack dog Baird working on legislation for well over a year and the latest rumors are it won’t be ready until 2010… and that is for legislation that doesn’t even deal with the problem since it covers intensity targets, which everyone knows will allow total carbon emissions to actually increase. Dream on.
LMAO!!!! Investments? Where’s the money going to come from sweetie? Your hero Herr Harper and Dim Jim have blown the surplus in only two years in office with ill-advised GST cuts and stupid military expenditures that Canada does not need. There is no money in the Federal till for your ‘investments’.
The Green Shift provides tax cuts for all Canadians (pg 6 of The Green Shfit) and additional benefits for those that are the most disadvantaged in our society (pg 7/8 of The Green Shift). Harper’s does nothing except allow carbon emissions to rise. Harper RAISED your personal income tax with his first budget by 0.5%, then gave it back to you in his second budget.
Businesses will be encouraged to invest in new, green technology with the Accelerated Capital Cost Allowance (pg 9 of The Green Shift), as well as with tax cuts for corporations and small business. In addition the Science, Research & Experimental Development Tax credit will be made 25% refundable (pg 9 of The Green Shift). It is currently non-refundable.
You keep screaming on and on about so-called massive increases in prices caused by putting a price on carbon… yet provide no analytical information to support your position. This appears to be little more than a neoCon, bobblehead scare tactic.
In earlier posts I noted that the Canadian economy is worth about $1.37 TRILLION – by year four of The Green Shift plan about $15 billion in taxes will be raised. Applied against our entire economy that is only an increase of 1.18% due to the cost of carbon. Some of that will be offest by income tax reductions. Will some Canadian consumers see some increase in costs beyond their income tax reductions and other benefits? Sure it is possible based on their personal behaviour… but “taxing the crap out of basic necessities” is not going to happen as you suggest. My calculations show 1.18% maximum impact.
Where are you calculations and logic?
Garth … I fear that Dion’s Carbon Footprint for his cross-Canada campaign to sell his Green Shift will be much too high and will destroy any last shred of credibility he may have …
So … I am suggesting that you and Dion go on the trip but motorcycling … with Dion sitting in a sidecar attached. That would certainly reduce his Carbon Footprint and he would gain great credibility and favour with sympathetic Canadians.
Can you just see that Garth … with you at the controls and Dion grateful for your faithful service to the Green Shift environmental cause ….??!!!
Why is there no wheat board for Ontario and Quebec? When the libs took the Crow Rate they should have also abolished the wheat board monopoly. At least give choice rather than government control. Its only in the west though, not Ontario and Quebec.
…..ah, Janice – it was the western farmers and the Conservative government who set up the Wheat Board in the first place many years ago – just thought you’d like to know. I know truth in info is what you crave (LOL).
Sheila – you’re on a soap box every day, several times a day – like to hear yourself talk – go on Blogging Tories.
Happy Canada Day to all – we’ll work on getting our Canada back.
Sheila ,
I don’t think many who post here have heard of Emerson or Thoreau , let alone read them . Good rant .
Lawrence 06.29.08 11:03 pm
But as a general principle I think anyone who wishs to lead a democratic country ought to renounce his/her citizenship in any other country (where applicable). The counter example of John Turner doesn’t impress me much because John Turner was never elected as Prime Minister. He walked into the job and promptly lost it.
Well your logic doesn’t impress me very much. Turner became Prime Minister and his dual citizenship was not an issue. He ran for reelection and it was not an issue. Why is it now an issue for Dion who as yet has done neither? What logical principal applies here that distinguishes one case from the other?
The best explanation I have for your position is that you are being hypocritically deceitful. You don’t support Dion and/or the Liberals and you simply adapt whatever facts are available to you as a means of attack. I repeat, if it were Harper that had the dual citizenship it would never have occurred to you to make this an issue.
I take nothing away from Mr. Dion’s role in the unity debate although I think you give him rather too much credit for vanguishing Mr. Bouchard.
And why is that? Did Bouchard quit for some reason other than his belief that his case was hopeless in the face of the new situation brought about by the Clarity Act and the supreme court decisions engineered by Dion? Or was someone other than Dion more responsible for that state of affairs? Who?
I do hope you understood my comment about Bouchard’s leg was an attempt at humour. Admittedly a rather “lame” attempt. (Sorry, can’t help myself!)
But Mr. Bouchard himself ought to be proof enough that loyalties shift – sometimes quite dramatically – and Mr. Dion’s have gone through one significant shift already.
Bouchard himself proves no such thing. He demonstrated that he was never anything less than a hard (Quebec) nationalist.and never wavered from his seperatist sympathies.
As for Dion’s “significant shift”, I think you exaggerate his commitment to the seperatist cause. He was a 20 something student campaigning in the first referendum, possibly more through peer pressure than anything else, but at the very worst someone exploring and trying out “new” ideas. When he subsequently applied a long and rigourous intellectual examination to the issue he became a committed Federalist, has remained one ever since, and has acted accordingly. Exactly the attitude we want in a Prime Minister.
But even if he were a sincere and active seperatist at one time, it shouldn’t matter and may even be a positive. Someone who has genuinely changed a basic position typically is at least as sincere and active in championing their new position as those who never changed, and frequently even moreso. Take Guy Bertrand, at one time a true died-in-the-wool seperatist who, as a converted Federalist, took the PQ government to court. Or take me, I cringe to admit that at one time I supported the Harper Conservatives, although I never did anything more than vote. Now I support the Liberals financially and will do what I can to try to get a Liberal elected.
It’s odd that Dion himself has suggested that he’d give up his French citizenship if enough people thought it was a problem. Well, it seems that some people do think it’s a problem. Whether or not they meet his threshold of “enough” is an open question. What I find odd is how many people get irate when the subject comes up. No topic is taboo.
I don’t see anything odd at all in Dion’s position. His French citizenship is important to him, but it is more important that his Prime Ministership, if it comes to that, is not encumbered by significant, genuine concern over the issue. He has revealed a perfectly reasonable and logical hierarchy of value. IMO he would be well advised to keep the citizenship since the concern is not logical, is probably not authentic, and those expressing it are never going to support him anyway. Hopefully he can be creative enough to expose you for the hypocrites you are.
As for people getting irate about topics, well, I try to remain even tempered and logical. However, I admit to getting a tad irate when I sense deceit and hypocricy. And that’s exactly what I’m sensing from you.
Regards,
EhBC
What say you .. Liberal trools !!!
You have made the same post three times today. You are cut off. Hit the pavement. — Garth
By Harry S on 06.30.08 1:21 pm
Garth:
I sure hope “you are cut off” means never allowed to post on this blog again and that you will know if he uses another name. His negativity and ignorance will not be missed.
Now if we could just get rid of a few others……
Here are some interesting statistics about how much carbon the Tar Sands produce…
The Tar Sands emit approximately 40,000,000 tonnes of carbon annually. In year one of The Green Shift plan that would result in a carbon tax of $400,000,000 on the Tar Sands…. LESS THAN 1/2 OF THE SUBSIDIES THAT BIG OIL RECEIVES FROM THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT!
That is hardly an amount of money that is going to kill the Tar Sands now is it? Especially the Federal government is already giving big oil more than double that amount now.
Carbon emissions from the Tar Sands are rising dramatically and are expected to hit 80,000,000 tonnes by 2011.
In year four of The Green Shift the Tar Sands COULD face a carbon tax of $3.2 Billion, assuming of course that they do nothing and just keep on spewing out the massive amounts of carbon as they do now. (hopefully they will change their ways).
Canadian tar sand plants, depending on whether they use fluid coking or delayed coking processes PRODUCE ONE TONNE OF CARBON EMISSIONS FOR EVERY 6 TO 11 BARRELS OF CRUDE OIL PRODUCED. And this is ONLY at the plant level… it does not include all of the carbon burned by machinery involved in the mining and transportation aspects of production.
By the way, a barrel of crude contains 42 gallons, and after refining a barrel of crude produces about 28 gallons of gasoline. So, depending on the process used, a tar sands plant in Canada spews out one tonne of carbon for every 252 to 462 gallons of crude it produces. Those gallons of crude eventually are refined into 168 to 308 gallons of gasoline (and yet more carbon is burned in that process too).
One US gallon of gasoline contains about 8.8 KG of carbon. For your family car to produce one tonne of carbon emissions you would need to consume about 113 US gallons, or about 94 Imperial gallons (about 427 litres) of gasoline.
For my subcompact car 427 litres of gasoline equals about 7,259 kilometers of driving (I average over 17 KM per litre of gasoline in fuel economy).
To calculate the amount of carbon your family car(s) are putting into the atmosphere divide the total distance you travel by car by your average fuel economy to get the number of gallons or litres of fuel you burn. Multiply each US gallon (3.78 litres) by 8.8 KG.
The bottom line on all of this is that the Tar Sands have been identified as the number one reason why Canada’s carbon emissions are rising rapidly. We need to put a price on carbon, put hard caps on all polluters, and institute a cap and trade system to bring this disaster under control.
Sheila ,
I don’t think many who post here have heard of Emerson or Thoreau , let alone read them . Good rant .
By Bill D. Cat on 06.30.08 5:51 pm
Bill D, I’m assuming you are being facetious.
By Gord G. on 06.30.08 4:26 pm
I am sure you would find it far more interesting than I do. When I make comparative statements it is because I see a clear and unmistakable correlation between the label and the person.
Do you also believe relating people to the Holocaust is politically incorrect? Lest we forget and repeat the same mistakes.
A duck is still a duck and a rose is still a rose.
My comparatives stand. And that is the end of this exchnage. Thank you very much for your comments.
By Sheila on 06.30.08 4:16 pm
I think people get angry with you because of your naivete.
In the real world individuals end up being controlled by other people or collectives whether it is government or some other private organization. There is no such a thing as the absolute freedom that you crave.
You assume that because we oppose your anti-government position that we have never participated in community. That we don’t work as volunteers or contribute to the society. We can because of the security we have achieved through our own efforts and those of government working together.
Most of those that hold your views live in an ivory tower, judging those less fortunate through a window distorted by distance and prejudice. You are correct that we “don’t want to forfeit the security of government” for the alternative the Darwinian jungle of the “survival of the fittest.”
The alternative to government is exploitation by whoever can establish power over others through whatever means available to them. Our success, and the success of democracies in general, is finding a balance that allows individual fulfillment within a secure structure.
Government provides structure because it can do much more than individuals, families, or communities working on their own.
The reason I believe that today individual creativity is being suppressed is that those who control global capital are out of control.
As noted in an earlier post the Tar Sands plants use either fluid coking or delayed coking processes. One method produces about 6 barrels of crude for each tonne of carbon emissions, the other method produces about 11 barrels of crude for each tonne of carbon emissions.
To put things in economic perspective, under The Green Shift plan the most worst polluting Tar Sands plants would face a $40 carbon tax IN YEAR FOUR of The Green Shift plan (based on the current price for a barrel of oil of $140 and 6 barrels per tonne of carbon emissions… $40/(6 x $140).
The most efficient Tar Sands plants would play a carbon tax of about 2.6% IN YEAR FOUR of the Green Shift Plan ($40/(11 x $140).
Again, this is assuming that they do not adopt new technology and reduce their carbon emissions. Hopefully they would show some social responsibility and take action.
By comparison, labour rates in Alberta have been rising by 4% to 5% on an ANNUAL basis.
Putting a price on carbon is not going to ‘kill’ the Tar Sands by any stretch of the imagination.
“While massive amounts of wealth flow every week from East to West thanks to record energy prices…”
posted by Garth Turner on 06.29.08 @ 11:00 pm
Do you know what you are saying here Garth? The east is subsidizing the west? The west can’t function without the east?
Or, the green shaft. Its time to bring back that eastern money from the west.
How do you think your irrational statements will play out in the west? That is exactly what people believe the green shaft to be. A wealth redistribution from the west to the east.
That type of plan may resonate with Toronto but it sure rustles the feathers of hard working westerners.
John Gormley, the voice of talk radio in Saskatchewan, has always viewed western separatism as a small group of fanatics. After his interview with Dion, which you really must hear in order to get a clear understanding of the convoluted plan the libs have, the responses in email and phone ins were overwhelmingly in favour of a referendum should Dion become PM and attempt to implement this tax.
Rae and Iggy must be just howling at the stupidity of Dion. Let him hang himself and then another battle for the leadership. Only this time Garth, after putting all your eggs in Dion’s tax grab bag, you’ll be out looking for another party. You know that neither of those guys will want you in caucus. Thats if you can win another election.
Let’s actually be accurate about my comment, in its context: “While massive amounts of wealth flow every week from East to West thanks to record energy prices, while the oil sands conglomerates, now largely foreign-owned, create a moonscape in northern Alberta and pump tons of carbon into the atmosphere, along comes Stephane Dion with an idea. Drop taxes on what you earn, raise taxes on what you burn. Shift the burden, gradually, with lots of economic offsets, to begin lessening our reliance on fossil fuels.” As for winning the next election, that’s about as funny as you being a woman. — Garth
WW from today’s KDC (plus, it’s brutally hot after being cold to moderate for most of the year):
“Financing is the art of passing money from hand to hand until it finally disappears.” — Robert W. Sarnoff
Anyone recall the IT debacle? If harpo and dimdum had said beforehand that IT’s were going to be taxed at 10%, the GST raised to 10% and fed. income tax rates lowered to offset the increases, chances are CRAP would have won a majority in the upcoming election.
But their master here is Carney, who then follows DC’s directives, which explains why so many were caught off-guard — no one ever expected it, and now their retirement money has been put through the washer.
When the election is called, the price of things in the market (continuous food price increases, fuel and utility costs, housing market slowdown, etc.), that will be time to bring out CRAP’s long, long list of failures, and how they have impacted Cdns. negatively.
BTW, Sandy said that celery, along with a lot of veggies are now quite expensive; celery is just shy of $3 / bunch.
—————————————-
Joke for the day . . .
Young King Arthur was ambushed and imprisoned by the monarch of a neighboring kingdom. The monarch could have killed him but was moved by Arthur’s youth and ideals. So, the monarch offered him his freedom, as long as he could answer a very difficult question.
Arthur would have a year to figure out the answer and, if after a year, he still had no answer, he would be put to death.
The question? What do women really want? Such a question would perplex even the most knowledgeable man, and to young Arthur, it seemed an impossible query.
But, since it was better than death, he accepted the monarch’s proposition to have an answer by year’s end.
He returned to his kingdom and began to poll everyone: the princess, the priests, the wise men and even the court jester. He spoke with everyone, but no one could give him a satisfactory answer.
Many people advised him to consult the old witch, for only she would have the answer.
But the price would be high; as the witch was famous throughout the kingdom for the exorbitant prices she charged.
The last day of the year arrived and Arthur had no choice but to talk to the witch. She agreed to answer the question, but he would have to agree to her price first.
The old witch wanted to marry Sir Lancelot, the most noble of the Knights of the Round Table and Arthur’s closest friend!
Young Arthur was horrified. She was hunchbacked and hideous, had only one tooth, smelled like sewage, made obscene noises, etc. He had never encountered such a repugnant creature in all his life.
He refused to force his friend to marry her and endure such a terrible burden; but Lancelot, learning of the proposal, spoke with Arthur.
He said nothing was too big of a sacrifice compared to Arthur’s life and the preservation of the Round Table.
Hence, a wedding was proclaimed and the witch answered Arthur’s question thus:
“What a woman really wants”, she answered, “is to be in charge of her own life.”
Everyone in the kingdom instantly knew that the witch had uttered a great truth and that Arthur’s life would be spared.
And so it was, the neighboring monarch granted Arthur his freedom and Lancelot and the witch had a wonderful wedding.
The honeymoon hour approached and Lancelot, steeling himself for a horrific experience, entered the bedroom.
But, what a sight awaited him. The most beautiful woman he had ever seen lay before him on the bed. The astounded Lancelot asked what had happened.
The beauty replied that since he had been so kind to her when she appeared as a witch, she would henceforth, be her horrible deformed self only half the time and the beautiful maiden the other half.
Which would he prefer? Beautiful during the day, or night?
Lancelot pondered the predicament. During the day, a beautiful woman to show off to his friends, but at night, in the privacy of his castle, an old witch? Or, would he prefer having a hideous witch during the day, but by night, a beautiful woman for him to enjoy wondrous intimate moments?
What would YOU do?
What Lancelot chose was that he would allow HER to make the choice herself.
Upon hearing this, she announced that she would be beautiful all the time because he had respected her enough to let her be in charge of her own life.
The moral?
If you don’t let a woman have her own way, things are going to get real ugly.
By TS on 06.30.08 5:32 pm
Wow, TS … did you whip out all those statistics and stuff by yourself .. or did you have it ready in the Liberal Death Star Green Shift HQ ..??!!
You must be assigned full time to our MP Garth’s fine forum to provide all that stuff for Garth because it’s heavy stuff to know …
TS .. is that for Tor Sidious (and we know that Siths come in pairs too).
Btw .. the S in Harry S might just be ‘Skywalker’ .. so watch out …!!!!
KPN ,
When I trudge through the comments here and see how most post , no , I’m not being facetious . I’m 43 and cannot fathom how the average Canadian is willing to accept less and less for more and more in regards to our government . The less and less , of course , being their responsibility to US . The more and more ….. well , vote liberal , all it costs is one vote , plus tax ……….. lots and lots of tax . When the average Canadian was brainwashed into believing that government works for us , not the other way around , we all lost .
Hey, Cat, make sure y’all come back and tell us how your world is when you’re 63. — Garth
Thank you very much for your comments.
By Bill-Muskoka on 06.30.08 6:10 pm
Your welcome, I was surprised you kept digging for so long.
Gord.
“Garth:
I sure hope “you are cut off” means never allowed to post on this blog again and that you will know if he uses another name. His negativity and ignorance will not be missed.
Now if we could just get rid of a few others……
By Bonnie L on 06.30.08 5:53 pm”
Perfect….let’s turn it into a real echo chamber where no dissention is allowed. Then all us wonderful Garthites can marinate in our own back-patting and never figure out how others think. Yep…just about perfect!!!
Charles Oxley,
thanx for the moral. Ain’t it the truth!
Barb,Bill,Garth,Charlie,Dube,SLG,KPN,and the rest of the blogsters .
HAPPY CANADA DAY !
Men With Hats,12:31 pm
And to you, as well as all centre-based, realistic folk here, mes amis!
****************************************
“. . . it’s about destroying the middle class . . .”
By ex-Canadian on 06.30.08 11:37 am
Ask Garth what happened when CRAP was elected, how harpo came out with his hidden agenda to screw regular folk and make the rich richer; Canada will be in much better shape once the Libs. take office later this year.
Although we are very quietly controlled by US-led interests, when the political change takes place shortly, only then will the middle class be able to recover from CRAP’s US-driven policies.
These are the ones who have sent the middle class into a tailspin.
CO2+H2O+sunlight =FOOD
Maybe Liberals like Dion and Turner think they can eat taxes. Like Lalonde eventually confessed Trudeau’s NEP was meant to stop the shift of economic power from central Canada to the west,nothing to do with energy. Somehow tweedle dee Dion and tweedle dumber Turner think they can buy Ontario and Quebec votes with Alberta and Saskatchewan Dollars. Why not they fell for it before. When do we in Alberta get our $100 billion back.
I think you need another dip in the gene pool. — Garth
The reason I believe that today individual creativity is being suppressed is that those who control global capital are out of control.
By C. B. Innes on 06.30.08 6:11 pm
The World Bank and the IMF control the capital and now they have political power: that you might say is out of control.
Iraq is the perfect example of an economic occupation by the World Bank against the will of a sovereign country.
In fact it is quite illegal and I am very glad that Chretien told Bush to GTH.
TS. Don’t mean to be picky but out here we call it the Oilsands. Not sure who started referring to it as the tarsands.
Unless China,India and USA and Russia get on board what we do in Canada will do very little to improving climate change. The whole friggen world must be totally involved before any noticeable improvement will take place. Anybody who thinks other is acting like an ostrich with their head stuck in the ground.
Dion’s or any other Canadian plan will only piss a bunch of people off as BC’s Campbell’s carbon tax on gas is already doing and it takes effect tomorrow July 1st.
Dion has a lot to convince the three territories, Alberta, Saskatchewan and Manitoba because so far they have come out against his plan. It would appear all his plan is succeeding to do is to pit areas of Canada against one another. This is not the way to implement anything and especially something as important as climate change.
What will Dion do to get those countries I mentioned on board because as it stand under KYOTO they get a free ride so to speak?
By TS on 06.30.08 5:58 pm
Here are some interesting statistics about how much carbon the Tar Sands produce…
……………………………….
Okay, TS … you had better provide the forum with the source for all those numbers you are throwing about on the tar sands and also the Green Shift as it applies to the tar sands. You just can’t post unsourced statistics and expect credibility … and you should also confirm that you are stationed in the Liberal Death Star Green Shift HQ and give us your title there … ya hear ..??!!!
Wow, TS … did you whip out all those statistics and stuff by yourself .. or did you have it ready in the Liberal Death Star Green Shift HQ ..??!! By Harry S on 06.30.08 6:28 pm”
Yes Harry, I did find out all those facts by myself.
Unlike you, I do spend time to research issues and find out real facts for myself so I can educate myself on the facts and logic of an issue, before I make posts on Garth’s blog.
The information regarding the amount of carbon emitted by the two types of Tar Sands plants (fluid coking and delayed coking) can be found on the Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique web site.
I did the calculations on the number of barrels of crude oil produced per tonne of carbon emissions. My calculations were 0.09 tonnes per barrel x 11 barrels = 1 tonne, and 0.16 tonnes per barrel x 6 barrels = 1 tonnne. Per barrel emissions are quoted on the Centre National web site.
Estimates on the amount of carbon emissions from the Tar Sands currently and by 2011 is found on the Green Peace web site.
I did the calculations on the potential maximum carbon tax that would be paid by the Tar Sands using per tonne information contained in The Green Shift plan, and using the total carbon emission data from the Tar Sands on the Green Peace web site.
The amount of carbon contained in a gallon of gasoline (or any fossil fuel for that matter) can be found in a wide range of sources, the US EPA is one such source.
For interested readers on Garth’s blog, I have been doing some additional research on the Tar Sands and I will be posting some additional, factual information for all of you very soon.
Hey, Cat, make sure y’all come back and tell us how your world is when you’re 63. — Garth
My point G , is simple . When Joe and Jill Canadian can get off their complacent asses and look in the mirror , instead of at government to solve all of life’s problems we will be on the right path as a country . As far as twenty years go , when this plundering of every last Canadian’s wallet accomplishes what it’s intended to do with regard to our environment which is precisely NOTHING where do I go to get my money back ?
Canada’s Carbon Emissions Harming the World
http://www.tarsandswatch.org/canadas-carbon-emissions-harming-world
This is a very interesting article.
REPORT: U.S. POISED TO SHIFT MOST NEW REFINING CAPACITY TO DIRTIER TAR SANDS OIL EMITTING THREE TIMES MORE GLOBAL WARMING EMISSIONS IN EXTRACTION
http://www.environmentaldefence.ca/pressroom/viewnews.php?id=411
global warming, climate change, whatever it’s called this week, is a fake issue which has been rejected overwhelmingly by the scientific community….
Hey Ex, Are you really an ex-pat or a wannabe? I’m betting wannabe. Well go, there are lots of choices but I recommend Zimbabwe.
To quote Bugs Bunny, ‘What a maroon’.
Non-partisan readers of Garth’s blog may find this article revealing, i.e. the natural gas used to produce ONE BARREL of crude from the oil sands could heat a Canadian home for 2-4 days.
Here are two quotes of interst:
“The tremendous energy required to bring the sand to the surface for separation is largely provided by natural gas. (Oil sands consume about 500 million cubic feet of natural gas a day, an amount likely to increase to 1.25 billion cubic feet daily by 2016. The process is so inefficient that the natural gas required to produce one barrel of tar sands oil could heat a family home for two to four days. This process uses a relatively clean fuel to assist in the production of a dirtier one, prompting oil analyst Matt Simmons to describes the process as “making gold into lead.”
A quote in the article from Jeffrey Simpson of the Globe & Mail:
“They are voracious users of freshwater,” continues Simpson. Extracting the bitumen (crude oil) from the thick and sticky mix of clay, sand and water is no easy feat and for every barrel of oil extracted, somewhere between two and four-and-a-half times as much water is needed to thin-out the mixture and separate the bitumen from the sand. To obtain this staggering volume of water, whole streams and rivers in the region have been drained and diverted. We don’t need Erin Brockovich to tell us something is wrong with the water; sucked out for the extraction process and then spat out again, most of it ends up contaminated with acids, mercury and other toxins. This wastewater has left Northern Alberta studded with toxic dumping pools, better known as ‘tailing ponds.’ Not only are the tar sands being blamed for Western Canada’s first ever bout of acid rain, the residues pumped into the Athabasca River have increased cancer rates downstream, particularly among First Nations communities dependent upon the waterway. The history of oil extraction has always been the history of suffering and the tar sands are no exception.
More is found at:
http://www.dominionpaper.ca/articles/1472
Well that settles it. The comment from “ex-Canadian” made at 11:37AM is total nonsense.
These guys from the Conservative Party Headquarters who come to this blog to make comments from their Talking Points Booklet, are the best advertising the Liberals could possibly ask for. Where’s the integrity? The new conservative party is so insulting to people’s intelligence. These Cons have made Canada look so bad. I’m not surprised so many Canadians are saying they are now ashamed to be Canadian.
By TS on 06.30.08 6:15 pm
Putting a price on carbon is not going to ‘kill’ the Tar Sands by any stretch of the imagination.
……………………………….
Fair enough, TS … but why penalize the AB Oilsands at all with a carbon tax, since we know it’s currently difficult for them to reduce their GHG emissions because of technology lag. They are vulnerable to a carbon tax and really can’t do much about it other than pay.
Besides, the AB oilsands expanded entirely under the Chretien-Martin-Dion governments unhindered .. and now Dion wants to carbon tax them to achieve the Kyoto targets???
They are talking about CO2 sequestration for the oilsands process, so why not exempt them from any carbon tax provided they pour the money into continued research??.. because as it stands now, Dion’s carbon tax is just a blatant tax grab by Ottawa.
If Ontarians flock to the Liberals in any next election because of Dion’s Green Shift sucking money out of AB and SK, that will only confirm the Liberals and Ontario have launched an economic war against Alberta and Saskatchewan.
TS. Don’t mean to be picky but out here we call it the Oilsands. Not sure who started referring to it as the tarsands.
By Ron p on 06.30.08 7:35 pm
Back in the 1950s or early 1960s one of our school science text books referred to them as the “tar sands.”
For interested readers on Garth’s blog, I have been doing some additional research on the Tar Sands and I will be posting some additional, factual information for all of you very soon.
By TS on 06.30.08 8:14 pm
Ok TS we appreciate your input, it’s a lot of work but remember they’re called the OILSANDS.
Nobody here is minning tar.
http://www.environmentaldefence.ca/reports/pdf/TarSands_TheReport.pdf
The link above will take you to a PDF copy of “Canada’s Toxic Tar Sands: The Most Destructive Project on Earth”.
It is a very interesting read. Non-partisans will be upset with both Federal (Liberal and Conservative) and Alberta governments.
“I hate to break it to you, but you aren’t a mouthpiece for FN’s, Sheila. Try reading the words of the Phil Fontaines of the world and accurately ‘quote’ their words and you might have a chance of forming an opinion that has a chance..” By brain on 06.30.08 4:22 pm
brain, it might interest you to know that I was personally invited to be part of a special event sponsored by the Assembly of Manitoba Chiefs to honour Phil Fontaine on Monday, June 16, just five days after he accepted the apology in the House of Commons.
I have met the man personally, and I also grand chiefs and chiefs and band council members from many First Nations. I am a personal friend of Elijah Harper, and other First Nations leaders. In fact, I will be attending a Gathering of First Peoples leaders in Ottawa (Inuit, First Nations and Metis) in mid-July, so there is no need to talk down to me as an ignoramous on First Nations issues.
However, let’s put all that aside, and enjoy Canada Day celebrations together as fellow Canadians all.
As I have previously mentioned, my Canada is big enough to include you. I trust that your Canada is big enough to include me.
As for winning the next election, that’s about as funny as you being a woman. — Garth
Thats what Kim Campbell said. Remember how that turned out.
About as well as Reform in Ontario. — Garth
This link will take you to an Edmonton Sun article regarding toxin levels downstream from the oil sands in Fort McMurray:
http://edmontonsun.com/News/Alberta/2007/11/08/4641399.html
The Alberta government’s study found arsenic levels 17 to 33 times higher than is considered safe.
A study done for Suncor found arsenic levels in moose meat in the tar sands was 453 times the acceptable limits for causing cancer.
http://oilsandstruth.org/alberta-health-fort-chip-only-eating-moose-17-33-times-safe-arsenic-level
If Ontarians flock to the Liberals in any next election because of Dion’s Green Shift sucking money out of AB and SK, that will only confirm the Liberals and Ontario have launched an economic war against Alberta and Saskatchewan.
By Harry S on 06.30.08 8:35 pm
How provincial of you Harry. We all need to get along. Do I complain when I get my heating gas bill when I’m watching the Calgary Flames or the Edmonton Oilers play hockey on a real cold winters night, here in Ontario.
No sir!
I am only too pleased to help my western brothers and sisters continue to live in a province where there is no provincial sales tax.
Haven’t heard anyone thanking me yet for doing my part to make it all possible.
Has anyone thanked you Harry?
There is just only so much that individual entrepreneurs like me can stand.
As I have stated in a previous post Harry S., I have never belonged to a political party and I have never made a political donation.
By TS on 06.30.08 4:33 pm
TS, Garth must be disappointed that you haven’t sent your contribution to the Liberal Party of Canada. Heck even why not just help pay off Stephane Dion’s leadership debts. Then, and maybe then, Stephane Dion will have the stones to vote against the government and try selling his schtick during an election campaign.
I am disappointed in you.
When Joe and Jill Canadian can get off their complacent asses and look in the mirror , instead of at government to solve all of life’s problems we will be on the right path as a country . As far as twenty years go , when this plundering of every last Canadian’s wallet accomplishes what it’s intended to do with regard to our environment which is precisely NOTHING where do I go to get my money back ?
By Bill D. Cat on 06.30.08 8:14 pm
It is amazing how some people, just like the unrepentant King Midas and E. Scrooge, cannot see anything beyond money.
Money is nothing more than a worthless piece of paper without government to assign it some value.
Now if we could just get rid of a few others……
By Bonnie L on 06.30.08 5:53 pm
Of course Bonnie – let’s just round them up and through in special re-eduction camps, so that they can repeat the typical Liberal mantra.
“Ok TS we appreciate your input, it’s a lot of work but remember they’re called the OILSANDS.
Nobody here is minning tar.
By Ron p on 06.30.08 8:38 pm”
Hi Ron, I think that is a matter of semantics re: Tar Sands or Oil Sands. The term Oil Sands certainly sounds far less onerous than Tar Sands so I can understand why the industry would want that term used.
From: http://ostseis.anl.gov/guide/tarsands/index.cfm
“Tar sands (also referred to as oil sands) are a combination of clay, sand, water, and bitumen, a heavy black viscous oil. Tar sands can be mined and processed to extract the oil-rich bitumen, which is then refined into oil. The bitumen in tar sands cannot be pumped from the ground in its natural state; instead tar sand deposits are mined, usually using strip mining or open pit techniques, or the oil is extracted by underground heating with additional upgrading.”
Since the Alberta projects involve strip mining and moving large quantities of ‘tar sand’ for processing I use the old adage… if it looks like a duck, quacks like a duck, and waddles like a duck… it’s a duck.
“TS, Garth must be disappointed that you haven’t sent your contribution to the Liberal Party of Canada. Heck even why not just help pay off Stephane Dion’s leadership debts. Then, and maybe then, Stephane Dion will have the stones to vote against the government and try selling his schtick during an election campaign.
I am disappointed in you.
By Catherine on 06.30.08 8:55 pm”
I like my independence.
And, btw…I couldn’t care less what you think of me.
The link at the end of my posting will take readers to a PDF version of “Tar Sands Feeding U.S. Refinery Expansions with Dirty Fuel”.
There is growing public concern in the US about the environmental disaster we call the Oil Sands and there is a growing lobby to try and restrict the import of ‘dirty’ Alberta oil.
If you download the PDF, have a look at the picture on the front cover. You will be truly horrified by what you see.
Here is a telling quote from the report, “Finally, when the “oil rush” currently visited upon the tar sands of Alberta comes to the oil shales of Colorado, Utah, Wyoming, North Dakota, and Montana, (as well as to the tar sands of Utah), the U.S. government must act to protect the United States from the staggering destruction already wrought in the pursuit of Canadian tar sands.”
http://www.environmentalintegrity.org/pubs/Tar%20Sand%20Report_FINAL_6%202%2008.pdf
Hi Gord G. on 06.30.08 10:53 am,
I guess you still haven’t bothered to see this 10 min video yet!
‘How It All Ends’
http://wonderingmind42.com/?page=1
C. B. ,
Good to see the government is working for you . Your definition of money seems vaguely similar to some thing else , hmmmmmmm ……… give me a second , let me think about this for a while …….. assigning value to hold on ……. the air we breathe ? What do I win ? Do the worthless pieces of paper the government seem to value so much , get me off the hook for my evil ways ? BTW , if you’re flush with all this worthless paper , feel free to send it this way ….. my friends in Nigeria will be contacting you personally by e-mail ,shortly
Hi Gord G. on 06.30.08 11:07 am,
Bill-Muskoka on 06.30.08 10:56 am
is closer to the truth that you are willing to accept.
Have you ever read,
Plato’s “Allegory of the Cave”.?
Here it is read to you will modern images for you, 7 min.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-Ei7LqbYb8M&feature=related
An VERY interesting article about the OECD report on Canada and the Tar Sands (yes, internationally it is referred to as tar sands).
http://www.progressive-economics.ca/2008/06/22/the-oecd-and-the-tar-sands/
Highlights as follows:
…The 2008 OECD Survey of Canada incorporates a long and surprisingly critical overview of developments in the energy sector, with a major focus on the tar sands.”
…the Canadian “oil boom” is mainly a price effect. Real output of the energy sector has, in fact, lagged the economy as a whole, 2003-07, and productivity in the sector has sagged as large new investments have yet to generate significant increases in output.
“….conventional oil and gas production have both peaked and are in decline, and that future oil sands output will be severely constrained by rising natural gas prices, limited availability of water, requirements to reduce carbon emissions, and rising development costs.”
…..the main economic benefit as a short-lived construction boom. Looking forward, the construction boom is not expected to last long.
…The report calls for the elimination of remaining tax subsidies to the oil sector, including the end of the 100% write-off for the intangible costs of development of tar sands mines and special treatment of exploration and development expenses.
…Most radically, the OECD questions the wisdom of making provincial resource royalties deductible for federal corporate income tax purposes (p.88.) This undermines the capacity of the rest of Canada to benefit from tar sands developments, and accentuates regional inequalities, especially if Alberta does not impose sufficient royalties. “In particular, insofar as provinces fail to capture pure resource rents via their royalty systems, deductions for royalty payments from the federal corporate income tax should be curtailed.” (P.88.)
…Even more importantly, the OECD clearly favours strong action to reduce carbon emissions, and is critical of the federal and Alberta government view that it is sufficient to reduce the emissions intensity of the tar sands. They cite the relative merits of carbon taxes over cap and auction system, but clearly want much stronger federal government action on climate change issues.
So, there you have it folks… the OECD strongly favours the imposition of carbon taxes rather than a cap and trade system. The OECD realizes that Alberta’s tax policy restricts the rest of Canada from benefitting from oil sands development, and Alberta is leaving far too much money on the table – putting its residents at risk once the current boom ends.
Looks like a rather damning report on ineffective provincial and federal handling of the issue.
Hi ex-Canadian on 06.30.08 11:37 am
‘global warming, climate change, whatever it’s called this week, is a fake issue which has been rejected overwhelmingly by the scientific community….’
What planet have you been living on?
The vast majority of the good scientists on this planet have been warning us about Man Made Global climate Change for several decades now! The evidences has become overwhelming in the last few years!
What kind of world do you what to live in, and leave for your family?
PMSH doesn’t care about his own kid’s future. Do you really think he cares about you and your family?
So what has changed?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_Cu3rfoBXx4
Hi John Duddy on 06.30.08 12:21 pm,
Thanks for the link.
PMSH signing the SPP deal is an act of treason!
Hi Scotty on 06.30.08 12:14 pm,
Very good piont.
Van 7:37
What is so hard to understand that the U.S. is moving hard on the environment and when they do it will include ALL countries. The fact that they are already talking about dirty oil and coal versus clean sources of energy is a clear indication where the thinking is going. They have made it clear with legislation in front of congress that if they are going to clean up their act the rest of the world will too or they will put up tarriffs on goods coming in untaxed.
Think about it, they are bankrupt, the fastest way out is to reverse their trade deficets and tax the hell out of products coming in while opening oportunity to rebuilding their manufacturing capacity to replace the cheap goods from outside.
Globilization is dead and in the coming economy cheap food, goods, energy and housing will disappear and replaced with local foods, quality products and a growing use of alternative power sources.
Twenty years ago nobody believed me when I questioned how we can have free trade without a common minimum wage and a common set of rules to cover all aspects of production. Today few would question that statement, maybe you would.
The key to surviving the future is to ignore the popular thought and ways of life of today and look to the past for solutions that work. That piece of philosophy also makes predicting the rough path that the future will take pretty easy.
Hi Harry S on 06.30.08 1:21 pm,
I don’t usually agree with what you talk of, but it’s your nickel, within reason.
A nice walk today would do you or anyone good. J
I suggest a nice nature trail through some woods if possible. Get a nice dinner, and a good sleep! Try a different thread tomorrow.
I failed to see the relevance of the USA presidential race on this Canadian political blog.
Just my two cents.
Hi kpn on 06.30.08 1:36 pm,
I agree. So what can we do about it?
Any ideas, anyone?
Gee, people make it sound like any sort of ‘national energy plan’ is pinko, whacko, commie! The truth is the US has one.
http://www.doe.gov/about/nationalenergypolicy.htm
we are all going to suffer horribly unless we elect dion and garth to save us. then they can cash in.
why nothing about restricting immigration (much cheaper for the surfs, cuts pollution at the nub) or making afghanistan an issue?
another phony election abetted by the phony media coming up! no real or important issues.
Hi Gord G. on 06.30.08 2:13 pm,
How old are you?
We are into the tar sands because we are running out of oil, peak-oil.
Have you rented this movie yet?
A Crude Awakening The Oil Crash. 2006
The extra stuff on th eDVD is also good.
This sight has some links to other information.
http://www.oilcrashmovie.com/
“but why penalize the AB Oilsands at all with a carbon tax, since we know it’s currently difficult for them to reduce their GHG emissions because of technology lag. They are vulnerable to a carbon tax and really can’t do much about it other than pay. By Harry S on 06.30.08 8:35 pm”
Well, right off the bat we have two types of tar sand plants – one type emits about 40% LESS carbon than the other type for the same level of production. There are choices that can be made. Right now the oil companies have no incentive to do the right thing, so they will continue on their current path. Just like the cigarette companies tried to do in the 1970’s and 1980’s.
The tar sands is the single biggest source of carbon emissions in the country and it is the primary reason why we are having trouble meeting our Kyoto obligations.
Putting a price on carbon AND giving companies in the tar sands the Accelerated Capital Cost Allowance for green technologies, AND making the SR&ED Tax credit 25% refundable are all measures to help encourage companies in the tar sands make the transition to reducing carbon. Those initiatives, PLUS a reduction in corporate taxes, make for a good, pragmatic package.
Just because the previous Liberal government and the current Harper government have mishandled the tar sands issue specifically, and climate change in general, in the past, is no reason to continue bad decisions into the future.
The tide is turning against Alberta’s tar sands and companies that try to hide from their environmental responsibilities…
U.S. mayors join call for ban on oil sands-based gasoline:
http://www.cbc.ca/canada/calgary/story/2008/06/23/us-mayors-oilsands.html?ref=rss
Obama’s fight against ‘dirty oil’ could hurt oil sands:
http://www.nationalpost.com/most_popular/story.html?id=610810
Put oil executives on trial, says leading climate change scientist
In a speech before Congress on Monday, leading climate scientist Jim Hansen called for the chief executives of large fossil fuel companies such as ExxonMobil and Peabody Energy to be put on trial for high crimes against humanity and nature, for their role in
actively spreading misinformation about global warming.
Read the story:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2008/jun/23/fossilfuels.climatechange
Scientists make climate plea to Harper
In an open letter sent to the prime minister, opposition leaders and Canadian premiers, 130 climate scientists from the academic, public and private sectors warned that the
federal government’s climate change plan will fail to address the dangerous impacts of global warming. They want to see absolute emission caps and a price put on GHG emissions.
Read the story:
http://www.canada.com/topics/news/story.html?id=cec1bdbb-4818-40ab-98bd-255d8375331d
Read the letter:
www .climateactionnetwork.ca/e/issues/letter-climate-science-06-2008.htm l
Voyez la lettre ici:
http://www.reseauactionclimat.ca/f/issues/lettre-changements-climatiques.html
Have you ever read,
Plato’s “Allegory of the Cave”.?
Here it is read to you will modern images for you, 7 min.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-Ei7LqbYb8M&feature=related
By Greg W., Oakville on 06.30.08 9:24 pm
Why don’t you summarize it for me in you own words?
Gord.
Hi brain on 06.30.08 5:30 pm,
Thanks for the links to the articals.
Tar comes from crude. It is the more viscous form of crude. Therefore, the so-called ‘oil sands’ are, in reality, tar sands.
Semantics are so much for for purporting the delusion of nicety.
For further information of the various components of ‘tar sands’ I suggest reading Tar Sands
or more specifically Athabasca Oil Sands
Hi Bonnie L on 06.30.08 5:53 pm,
Nice thought, but what of free speech???
Garth, to put it bluntly, you are an idiot. I, living in Saskatchewan, am supposed to feel guilty because my house has increased in value? The NEP? We don’t need “political opportunists” to “fan the flames”. There are more than enough who went through the job losses, bankruptcies, forclosures, divorces, and even suicides that resulted from Pierre Trudeau’s raping and pillaging of the Alberta economy to buy Ontario votes. If your Canada means plundering the economies of some regions to buy votes in another, then goodbye, we don’t want your Canada, we don’t need your Canada.
Ah, Mike, it’s actually about the environment. And explain this ‘plundering’ thing, when a full-implemented carbon tax would mean a 2.6% increase in oil sands overhead, even without any techno upgrades thanks to the corporate tax cuts, refundable tax credits and innovation fund which are also part of the plan. Oh yeah, and income tax cuts for you and your house. Have you been listeing to Gormley again? — Garth
Several posters have mentioned they don’t know who started or when the Athabaska oil deposits became named Tar Sands and that they are really Oil Sands. Well for starters, I grew up in and around Lloydminster in the 40s and 50s where I always heard them referred to as the Tar Sands.
I also recall that there was a Depression era (1930’s) make work project that was the first use of these ashfaltic sands where they mined and shipped out to ‘Edmonton on the Northern Alberta Railway. This was the first pavement laid on Hyways # 2 and # 15 from outside Edmonton Southerly and NorthEasterly. This pavement was not up to today’s standards since it was too soft and malleable in Summer heat plus cracked in Winter and was subject to “frost boils” in the Spring thaws due to the poorly constructed road beds of the era. The last of this inferior grade pavement was still evident on #15 East near Fort Saskatchewan into the early 1970s.
Also for your information, both the greater Lloydminster and Cold Lake Oil Fields are essentially underground extensions of the Athabaska deposits but have far less sand in comparison. Up in the Peace River Country there are more deposits that are much farther under the over burden and with higher sand content, making them more difficult to extract profitably.
I will concede that it is more correct to refer to them as oil sands, but once the oil is extracted, hydro or catalytically cracked, then fractionally distilled, the remaining residual bottom end product is asphalt or tar. Husky Lloydminster used powdered slate rock from Washington State to blend with this tar in “blow” drums to produce pipeline enamel. We used to chew this like gum until a new Chemist arrived to work for Husky and warned everybody not to do this because it contains carcinogenous phenols amongst other nasties. Now you know the rest of the story and I am not related to Paul Harvey, but have been accused of sounding like him over the CB Radio! Goooood Dayyyyy, Eh!
I read a link a couple of days ago on therawstory.com, which stated that there are around five to eight thousand foreclosures per day across the US.
Now, this comment about the California wildfires from whatreallyhappened.com (no link). This poses an interesting question, which will probably never be answered.
“. . . suggesting that some of these fires may be people facing foreclosure deciding to cash in their fire insurance.”
A while back, people were trashing their foreclosed homes, so there would be very little to recover.
If the original owners were never found, it would leave banks liable for repairing the damage, and then re-selling the homes.
And the lawyers? Well, they make zillions, don’t they?!
****************************************
Microjunk stops selling XP this Monday, and it is a system that actually works. HP and Dell are the only major sellers of XP, because Vista smells like skunk breath, it’s that awful.
Smaller “mom and pop” versions will be available for a couple of years.
Hi TS on 06.30.08 8:14 pm,
Thanks for your efforts and post.
Have you been listeing to Gormley again? — Garth
By Mike on 06.30.08 10:25 pm
He was probably listening to Dion. Did you listen to that Garth? People are supposed to follow that?
Not likely.
Ah, Mike, it’s actually about the environment. And explain this ‘plundering’ thing, when a full-implemented carbon tax would mean a 2.6% increase in oil sands overhead, even without any techno upgrades thanks to the corporate tax cuts, refundable tax credits and innovation fund which are also part of the plan. Oh yeah, and income tax cuts for you and your house. Have you been listeing to Gormley again? — Garth
Garth, tar sands seems to be the word of choice today so I guess your focus on it doesn’t surprise me, what of farmers and the tax on diesel? Anyway you slice it how can you take that much money from our economy and say it will be neutral?
Gord.
Gord G. on 06.30.08 10:09 pm,
What are your life goals, especially why are you even posting hear at all?
Are you an A.I. program that can simulate a conversation?
Perhaps paid for by the PMSH death star just to ‘screw everyone’ that’s trying to find a better why? The why we are going in a dead end!
Since you know it all Gord, you must be one of the F***KING know it alls!
You are part of the problem, not part of the solution, but I guess you already know that.
You must have been given fluoridated water as an infant! It will lower your IQ permanently.
I hope you don’t have a family because you will F**K there future with your total lack of knowledge, and your lack of critical-thinking.
‘Believe in myth avoid the discomfort of thought.’ No one is coming to save us from ourselves, not even you.
If we all don’t pull together and listen to the best and brightest, man kind will be doomed, as well as most life on our only planet, home.
Don’t bother replaying to me again. You don’t seem to need any of my suggestions to increase your personal knowledge and growth.
You can simple skip over my post in future, it seem to be a waste of yours and my time!!!
Ignorance is not bliss, its just ignorant.
just my two cents.
Dear Garth,
Spoken like a true Liberal. After all, why waste too much time appeasing the west when there are no votes there? Do you seriously, for one cotton pickin minute believe that Trudeau’s NEP was due to a desire to create a “made in Canada’ price. Silly boy! It was because he needed the cash to re-engineer society in his Liberal image. And he knew, just as you and Mr. Dion know, that votes out west simply do not count. Now don’t give us the old tired, “we are the Liberal Party and we know what’s good for you” line. We’ve been there and done that and the West will never forget. We also know a bum deal when we see one. So take your carbon tax and tax my ass because that’s what you’ll see if you clowns get in. Because an NEP II will result in only one thing, The Republic of Western Canada. If memory serves, I think the quote was, ” Let the eastern bastards freeze in the dark.”
Now if you REALLY want to clean up the environment and save the world for Polar Bears and future cuddly Ontario Liberal voters, tax India and China!
Have a nice Canada Day.
Since the Alberta projects involve strip mining and moving large quantities of ‘tar sand’ for processing I use the old adage… if it looks like a duck, quacks like a duck, and waddles like a duck… it’s a duck.
By TS on 06.30.08 9:02 pm
I copy you loud and clear. Good point. As a Calgarian I’ve only known it as the Oil Sands. As you state,the term Oil Sands certainly sounds far less onerous than Tar Sands. And now the new descriptive is quickly becoming “Dirty
Oil”.
Here’s the link to the,
Honda FCX Clarity – Hydrogen powered fuel cell sedan.
http://automobiles.honda.com/fcx-clarity/
By TS on 06.30.08 10:07 pm
I hear ya, TS … and Garth did say:
… it’s actually about the environment. And …. a full-implemented carbon tax would mean a 2.6% increase in oil sands overhead, even without any techno upgrades thanks to the corporate tax cuts, refundable tax credits and innovation fund which are also part of the plan.
………..
Now, 2.6% increased cost to the oilsands seems not unreasonable to me. However I recall reading that about 50% of all GHGs are due to transportation, with the greatest contributer being personal automobiles.
If the Green Shift was truly an environmental plan, there would be no exemption for gasoline, just because the current federal 10¢ per litre excise tax was the equivalent of ~$40/tonne carbon tax.
In B.C. a harmonized provincial and Dion federal carbon tax would be ~$40/tonne in the second year, and in the fourth year it would be $70/tonne of carbon emissions. If B.C. and Dion use carbon taxing as the preferred method, perhaps Ontario should bring in carbon taxing on it’s population of polluting cars too.
If the AB oilsands is to be taxed, along with heating fuel oil and such, I believe gasoline should also bear some of the carbon tax to contribute to some of the $15 Billion to be collected.
To truly be an environmental plan, Dion’s Green Shift should also propose the taxing of gasoline in the first year, considering that it is such a heavy contributer to Canada’s overall GHGs. Gasoline should not be exempt whatsoever. Agree .. disagree ..??
It is my understanding that Canada produces 2% of the worlds gh gases. We can shut down all of Canada, no heating ,no gas, no electric, and the world will be 2% better off. Yep lets do it.I’m tired of paying bills anyway.
There is way too much sniping going on here. A simple fact is that people need energy to survive. Everyone agree,I hope.Taxing energy and sending the money to anything but cutting pollution or emissions will not help the enviroment. Everyone agree,I hope.Dion’s green shift and lizzie may’s plan send the monies elsewhere. Do we agree,I hope so.Therefore,both plans are a farce. Agreed,I hope so.
You guys just have to read this post,
Garth, the shift has hit the fan!
http://www.smalldeadanimals.com/archives/009014.html#comments
Gord.
“To truly be an environmental plan, Dion’s Green Shift should also propose the taxing of gasoline in the first year, considering that it is such a heavy contributer to Canada’s overall GHGs. Gasoline should not be exempt whatsoever. Agree .. disagree ..??
By Harry S on 06.30.08 11:51 pm”
Hi Harry, since gasoline already has a Federal excise tax on it that is equivalent to a carbon tax of $42 a tonne, gasoline is exempt in The Green Shift plan. Diesel, which has a much lower excise tax on it, is only exempt for year one of the plan.
http://www.foecanada.org/index.php?option=content&task=view&id=288&Itemid=2
Harry, in 2004 passenger cars and trucks in Canada accounted for 9.7% of our total carbon emissions. Since the Tar Sands have dramatically increased the level of our carbon emissions I suspect that the % from passenger cars and trucks has declined since 2004.
An emerging trend is personal ‘carbon rationing’, i.e. individuals are allowed a personal carbon ration and each time that they consume fossil fuels on a personal basis, it comes off their carbon ration. Carbon use is tracked electronically.
Once an individual has used up their personal ration they must purchase additional carbon credits from a central bank. People who do not use up their carbon ration can sell it back to the central carbon bank.
Sound like a crazy idea? Maybe not… Britain is looking at implementing this exact kind of system.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/money/2006/jul/19/environment.ethicalmoney
The key to surviving the future is to ignore the popular thought and ways of life of today and look to the past for solutions that work. That piece of philosophy also makes predicting the rough path that the future will take pretty easy.
By William Dahl on 06.30.08 9:52 pm
Your post was like a breath of fresh air–something I miss, living in stinky, suburban southern Ontario. I can still recall the wonderful smells of a summer morning–now all I smell is pollution. We DO need to look to the past for solutions that worked. We also need to put some money into research and development. Where that money will come from, however, is anyone’s guess.
Perhaps if we got out of Afghanistan, the money saved there could be used to help us clean up the environment–and the air quality.
If this horrible, terrible, enviornementally challeneged Tory governmenet doesn’t deserve to be in power, as the Liberals keep telling everyone, then why didn’t they defeat them and then have this discussion during a leadership debate and let the people decide once and for all during an election?
No chance of that until Parliament resumes, and I hear Mr. Harper wants to delay that until the end of November. Please ask him what he is afraid of: pm@pm.gc.ca. — Garth
You guys just have to read this post,
Garth, the shift has hit the fan!
http://www.smalldeadanimals.com/archives/009014.html#comments
Gord.
By Gord G. on 07.01.08 2:57 am
So THAT’S what the dark side looks like! Excuse me while I go wash off the CRAP I just stepped into.
If this horrible, terrible, enviornementally challeneged Tory governmenet doesn’t deserve to be in power, as the Liberals keep telling everyone, then why didn’t they defeat them and then have this discussion during a leadership debate and let the people decide once and for all during an election?
No chance of that until Parliament resumes, and I hear Mr. Harper wants to delay that until the end of November. Please ask him what he is afraid of?
It is too late now. Why didn’t they do it months ago?
Don’t bother replaying to me again. You don’t seem to need any of my suggestions to increase your personal knowledge and growth.
You can simple skip over my post in future, it seem to be a waste of yours and my time!!!
Ignorance is not bliss, its just ignorant.
just my two cents.
By Greg W., Oakville on 06.30.08 11:17 pm
Hi Greg, sounds like your pissed at me, I guess I should have explained myself better to you, if you want me to follow a link, you have give a better into than, I guess you haven’t read this or that, watched this video or that, you should summarize what your link is about. I know I was mocking you regarding the things to be afraid of but seriously man, I’ve had it up to here with the next doomsday scary things that’s going to kill me or make me stupid. When I worry, it’s about real things like “are my kids coming home safe tonight”? You seem to want to scare the crap out of me and think I should worry about what you do. I will make a pledge to you though, if you stop trying to scare me, I’ll stop trying to mock you.
Gord.
So THAT’S what the dark side looks like! Excuse me while I go wash off the CRAP I just stepped into.
By Lana on 07.01.08 8:56 am
Hey Lana, I come over here to find out what you guys are thinking, I thought you guys might like to see the what the other side thinks too, I hope your going to be OK, reality can be a bitch.
Gord.
By Charles Oxley on 06.30.08 10:32 pm
Seems Big Bad Bill Gates has lost his following with his new Vista? Could it be people do not like, and will not accept his Big Brother Spyware disguised as a ‘new and Improved Operating System?’
I know I will NOT!
The schools are still demanding students use XP as they are not going to spend millions on new software and training programs. Typical Microslop tactics IMO.
Came across this today and its worth thinking about. The point being that were we to completely shut down CO2 emissions in Canada the impact would be minimal at best.
“Man produces 3% of all C02. The other 97 % is produced by nature.
So Canada produces 2% of 3%, or .06% of global C02.
Since the total amount of all C02 in the atmosphere is only .038% (or 380 parts per million), if we multiply .06% by total C02 .038% we get a very tiny number .0000228%. (equivalent to 1/5 of 1 part per million), and Canada’s total contribution to atmospheric C02.
If Canada completely ceased any burning of fossil fuels, thats the difference in atmospheric C02 that would be achieved .
If you break it down regionally, to provincial emissions, you get an even more insignificant number.” Oh and Bob, in the next election the “environmentally challenged Conservatives” will kick ass thanks to Dion’s divisive tax.
By TS on 07.01.08 8:12 am
By TS on 07.01.08 8:20 am
By TS on 07.01.08 8:34 am
Thanks for that clarification on passenger cars being only 9.7% of total GHG emissions. Perhaps, the “50%” number was the GHG emissions by the individual .. that is, half the personal GHG emission by individual Canadians is through their car. That just about sounds right, doesn’t it ??
If correct, then shouldn’t gasoline be heavily carbon taxed to motivate individual Canadians to reduce their car use?? This falls in line with the concept of rationing too.
FYI .. here is the harmonized B.C. Liberal plus Dion Carbon Taxes:
Year 1 — $15 + $10 = $25/tonne
Year 2 — $20 + $20 = $40/tonne
Year 3 — $25 + $30 = $55/tonne
Year 4 — $30 + $40 = $70/tonne
There may be some different overlap, but this is the end result. In B.C. under this schedule, gasoline would be lower at $42/tonne by the third year.
Why doesn’t Dion go the full monty and carbon tax gasoline on top of the current excise tax to reinforce reducing use??
Do you think that a Dion Liberal government should impose gasoline rationing on Canadians if they don’t reduce their gasoline use by say the second year of his Green Shift ??
How far is a Dion Liberal government willing to go to force Canadians to reduce their GHG emissions … what is Dion’s ‘hidden agenda’ on GHGs and Kyoto too … because Canadians will want to know now ..??!!!
Henry David Thoreau said it best, “Simply, simplify, simplify.” If all of us did that in our lives we’d be less stressed, healthier, and I dare say – happier.
The oil crunch that is upon us is a good thing from many perspectives.
It forces us to rethink how we personally consume the earth’s resources.
It challenges us to review our value system and to get back in touch with those things that are most important in our lives. Things like family, health, spiritual fulfillment, and personal development.
It makes us slow down. It makes us use our creative and innovative abilities as we struggle to find solutions in our personal lives.
It makes us all richer by consuming less.
Not Again. Trudoh! screwed the west with the NEP, it will not happen again. The west will not permit another Bonehead Frenchman to rape our economy. Saskatchewan and Alberta will be quite comfortable as US States, selling Ontario and Quebec oil at World Prices. Buying cars produced in America, and thumbing our noses at the Canadian Wheat Board. Once we leave, do you believe the remainder of the west will stay? Not a chance. Ontarians have a choice now. Vote Conservative, or prepare to pay their own way. What you have to realize is that You need us a lot more than we need you.
Hey Fellow Bloggers,
The Green Shift may have some trouble catching on, new poll at Yahoo Business, 72% against right now, you guys better get over there and vote.
Do you agree with the Liberal proposal for a carbon tax?
Yes – So long as it’s revenue neutral
No – It’s just a massive tax grab
Gord.
Given the low level of discourse on this site I don’t know if it’s even worth my while to comment but here goes….
Speaking as a student of monetary history, I used to have a lot of respect for the opinions of Garth Turner and John McCallum when they were private sector commentators. Unfortunately, that respect has largely evaporated since their election to parliament.
Now I realize that Garth is an ardent environmentalist as is his right in a free country. However, I have difficulty in understanding his fervor for Dion’s carbon tax due to the fact that the underlying premise of the tax flies in the face of some inconvenient truths.
Number 1 inconvenient truth is that there is virtually no hard scientific evidence to connect the rise in global CO2 levels to temperature. The Aqua satellite has shown that surface temperatures are dropping if nothing else and have been for over a decade. The 3,000 sensors of the Argo Project have revealed that there is no increase in deep ocean temperatures which is contrary to AGW gospel.
But for the sake of discussion, let’s assume there is a connection between CO2 and global warming. Number 2 inconvenient truth is that according to Al Gore in his eco flick, Canada generates about 3% of global C02. That doesn’t even rank high enough to make a talking point. We could shut down our country entirely and hold our collective breaths and our minuscule C02 output would be steamrolled by China/India/USA within an matter of weeks. Therefore, no amount of carbon “sequestration” in this country will make a whit of difference on the global scene.
I don’t have a problem with alternative energy but they all have their shortcomings and some are quite glaring.
As for Garth’s Sierra Club rantings about polar bears, coastal flooding, melting ice caps (due to submarine volcanic action) etc, etc, take ‘er from this old Manitoba farm boy Garth, “it’s all horse crap pardner”.
For a monetary historian you enthuse credibility as an environmentalist. Thank goodness we have you. — Garth
By TS on 07.01.08 11:52 am
………………………………..
Green Shift will save money on gas?
This is just me brainstorming, but it seems that the Green Shift would encourage car manufacturers to sell more fuel efficient cars, which will actually save consumers money because they will have more low gas mileage cars as options to buy. They wouldn’t do this because gas prices are going up under the Green Shift (since the Green Shift doesn’t affect gas prices). They would do it because a vote for the Green Shift would be a sign that Canadians are demanding environmentally friendly products in general.
Does that make sense?
Posted by Jason Cherniak at 10:38 AM
………………………………
Arch-Liberal Jason Cherniak seems to apply poor logic to justify Dion’s Green Shift. I think Liberals should get their shift together on carbon taxing gasoline .. whether during process manufacturing or at the gas pump … Canadians want to know now …!!!!
I hope your going to be OK, reality can be a bitch.
Gord.
By Gord G. on 07.01.08 10:45 am
Oh, I’ll be just fine, Gord. I like it in the centre. It gives me a 360 degree view.
The reality I read on that blog is not my reality, but perhaps it’s yours, and that is your RIGHT.
The reality I read on that blog is not my reality, but perhaps it’s yours, and that is your RIGHT.
By Lana on 07.01.08 1:34 pm
Hi Lana, thanks for the comment,
By reality I meant that the post at SDA pretty much sums up the sentiment in Saskatchewan, regardless of what Garth and Stephane might have you believe.
Gord.
Bill Muskoka,
I’m impressed by your logic: Tar comes from Oil, so Oil is Tar. Impressive.
I will give credibility to you and Dion’s Green Shaft when all Liberals and greenies walk the talk.
That means you divest yourself of all your goods and you dwell in a cave, wear a loin cloth, and use primitive tools to obtain food. Of course, you will have to eat everything raw as fire is not allowed due to that pesky CO2 problem.
Until then, you are just increasing your carbon footprint with all this verbal diarrhea!
As for Garth’s Sierra Club rantings about polar bears, coastal flooding, melting ice caps (due to submarine volcanic action) etc, etc, take ‘er from this old Manitoba farm boy Garth, “it’s all horse crap pardner”.
Loosen your tin-foil pith helmet . It is giving you brain cramps .
I don’t imagien it’d be overly difficult to put a process in place to assure offsets accrue to the provinces most impacted by the carbon tax. If the argument is that this’ll cause a big outflow from certain provinces to other provinces it seems reasonable to lessen that. Why not focus the, notional, “green manufacturing” sector in the west?
No chance of that until Parliament resumes, and I hear Mr. Harper wants to delay that until the end of November. Please ask him what he is afraid of: pm@pm.gc.ca. — Garth
Garth sometimes you are so full of it I can smell your all the way out here on the West Coast. Why don’t you come clean for a change and tell us why Dion and the Liberals refused to bring down the government on so many occasions when you and the Liberals kept telling us that the Conservatives didn’t deserve to govern. Dion wasn’t thinking about the people when he told his caucus to either not vote, not show up or walk out of the chamber during confidence votes. That my dear friend is fear and will come back to haunt Dion and the Liberal party during the next election. Secondly, if Dion is staking his leadership upon the Carbon Shift program, I am afraid he is not destined to be the Liberal leader for very much longer when he loses the next election.
The Liberals have had all sorts of opportunities to push an election for several months. I’m a little surprised Garth forgets so quickly.
Being “afraid” of an election seems pretty much the norm among our so-called “leaders” these days.
Garth…..excellent job…..the more you blog the more incensed we get out west….you are greatly assisting our cause of getting the Great Green Shaft tossed in the ditch.
A word of caution however….when your little Dufus Dion comes to the Stampede you should advise him to wear a raincoat and a catcher’s mask…..he runs the risk of being covered with something that might not smell too good…..after all there are a lot of horses and cows around around!
One more thing we won’t tell him to Piss Off….we will tell him to Fuck Off!!!!!
Yes, respect. Something we can all feel for one another, regardless of our differences. It’s part of what makes Canada work. — Garth
keep in mind that Garth is a salesman; his blogs are meant to sell himself, his politics, his party and so forth so he might be a little over-the-top at times. The real issue on the “Green Shift” is whether or not it makes sense and is equitable to all Canadians when all the details come out.
Eg:
What is the strategy to make sure some regions and citizens aren’t unduly punished by the plan?
What’s the fallback in the event revenues, which aren’t guaranteed, meets the need to match tax cuts, which appear to be far more specific.
And on it goes.
Boys With Hats on Backwards: I got a brain cramp after reading Tim Flannery’s book “The Weather Makers”. Then I watched Gore’s flick for some more cramps. Then I read more climate scare books. I’m not a climate scientist but I have to admit when I went on a little mission to search out some facts I was astonished and appalled at what I found. There is plenty of solid evidence out there to more than counter any of your climate scare arguments as well your childish ad hominenism.
Garth has a right to present his arguments for a carbon tax, fine and dandy, I respect his opinion. I stated a few of the real world reasons why I feel that one is unnecessary. It’s just more Trudopian social engineering and will influence nothing in the environment.
As for polar bears, rising oceans, melting icecaps and the lot I still feel that you are full of those little “green” balls that are found in the barnyard.
By Van on 07.01.08 4:30 pm
… if Dion is staking his leadership upon the Carbon Shift program, I am afraid he is not destined to be the Liberal leader for very much longer when he loses the next election.
…………………………………
Van … Dion may not make it to any next election as Liberal leader because after he finishes his cross-Canada summer tour ’selling’ his Green Shift tax scheme there will be a lot of polling done on that issue. If Dion’s personal popularity continues to plummet (it’s gone from the 10-15% range down to 5% in a recent SC-CTV poll), and the Liberal party is not more popular than the Conservative party … well, you know what that will mean … political assassination and/or resignation, and looking for a new Liberal leader come September-October .. believe it..!!
By mooner on 07.01.08 5:10 pm
BENORD!!! (short for Gord & Ben) Mooner said the ‘f’ word! Leasa
As for polar bears, rising oceans, melting icecaps and the lot I still feel that you are full of those little “green” balls that are found in the barnyard.
By Free Thinker on 07.01.08 6:16 pm
From ABC News:Both ends are melting
According to the National Academy of Sciences, Earth’s surface temperature has risen by about 1 degree Fahrenheit in the last century, with accelerated warming during the last two decades. Most of the warming over the last 50 years is attributable to human activities through the buildup of greenhouse gases — primarily carbon dioxide, methane and nitrous oxide. Although the heat-trapping property of these gases is undisputed, uncertainties exist about exactly how Earth’s climate responds to them.
“The warming ocean comes underneath the ice shelves and melts them from the bottom, and warmer air from the top melts them from the top,” said NASA glaciologist Jay Zwally. “So they’re thinning and eventually they get to a point where they go poof!”
As for polar bears, rising oceans, melting icecaps and the lot I still feel that you are full of those little “green” balls that are found in the barnyard.
By Free Thinker on 07.01.08 6:16 pm
Can you breathe underwater ! Glug,glug,glug .
One more thing we won’t tell him to Piss Off….we will tell him to Fuck Off!!!!!
By mooner on 07.01.08 5:10 pm
Wow! Outstanding erudition ‘Moonie’ the moron .Very sophisticated .
Yer’ mother know you talk,like this, on the web?
Eh, tough guy ? Ya’ loser !
By Harry S on 07.01.08 6:41 pm
Harry, you still have not told me if you like subsidizing Albertans where they pay no provincial sales tax, thanks to others like you and me.
What’s your answer?
Dion has been counted out before. With the Quebec separatists.By Paul Martin. For the Liberal leadership. He’ll bounce back from the carbon tax.
Hey Garth. Aren’t you the dude that gave the sound advice to buy up Nortel at like 40 bucks or something
I’m live in Alberta, formerly from Ontario. I see myself as an Albertan and reading your spew on here makes me laugh. For starters, let’s talk NEP. I can’t imagine that Ontario would sell us Westerners SUV’s at “cost” because we’re Canadian. That’s what we did for you in the 80’s under a Liberal government.
Secondly, let’s talk greenhouse gas emissions. We produce oil, YOU buy it. You burn it. I live in Calgary, I’m hard pressed to find someone that commutes more than 20 kms to work. I lived in Ontario and it was common to see people commute 100 kms to work from places like Cambridge or Brantford. So we’re the dealers and you’re the junkie. You can’t be a pimp and a prostitute too.
BC, Alberta, and Sask are now have provinces Garth. We produce wealth and a whole bunch of Easterners (like me) work out here and we like it. And if you think your Liberal asses are going to come out here and change things I’ve got some news for you
It’s called the Republic of Western Canada/Alberta. Imagine how well the GDP of Canada would do without us around. Imagine how much wealthier Alberta would be on it’s own. Now imagine a guy born near London Ontario saying that. Cause that’s how I feel.
It’s common to see signs in Alberta that says “More Alberta, Less Ottawa”. It’s common to see our “flag” flying next to the Canadian flag. Take a look at a Calgary Flames jersey and you’ll see that blue emblem with the rockies & wheat fields. We’re a united province buddy, we’ve never asked for a handout & we send a whole pile of money your way
And if you think you’re going to destroy our party again, well I’ll happily vote “YES” in the next “should we be a republic” in the next referendum
Go back to telling people what lousy stocks they should buy.
Irvine
Calgary, Alberta, Canada
More nation-building from the Repub of Alta. Is this your first boom there, Mark? You’ll learn. — Garth
No Garth, actually this is my 3rd time around living here. The first time was stopped because my dad lost his job due to the NEP and we had to move back to Ontario.
Funny Garth, it’s you that lives in Milton, a sprawling suburb that requires ENORMOUS amounts of travel to get anywhere. Travel = auto use & auto use means green house gases. It’s a little ironic, isn’t it? Tell me Garth, how far do you drive in a year? How many planes do you ride on? How large is your house? In the humid summers of Ontario, do you use Air Conditioning?
Remember this Garth-o, the west doesn’t need the east. We sell our products globally. But more important, remember this. The oil pipeline goes North South, so when Peak Oil hits you and Venezuela & the Middle East cut off imports you’ll have nothing to heat your home out there in suburbia.
Irvine
Calgary, Alberta, Canada
Is that a threat, cowboy? — Garth
Hmmmm…..first time I’ve ever agreed with [you] ever .
By Barb the proof-reader on 06.30.08 5:22 pm
How do we do it? By telling the truth when they mention the propaganda, like the NEP crashing the Alberta oil industry. Or too many taxes lost because of IT’s, etc
As for Albertans or Saskatchewans leaving Canada…. ROTFLMAO…. Not even 1% of the population is interested in separation.
My riding in Calgary elected a Liberal in the last provincial election so I know that it is not impossible to change the political landscape.
The TRUTH is what will do it.
Opec and the USA ruined the oil industry in the early 80’s with their high interest rates, etc and NEP was trying to keep the oil industry Canadian. Instead the CONS in Alberta allowed big oil to scew us all. Look at the billions of $$$ in oil every year and the QE is a disgrace, hospitals are mismanaged and not able to meet the needs of the people. We still pay income tax and health care premiums, and school taxes, plus our streets are pluggled with the homeless and the sick and those needing a hand up. Alaska has no income tax and better living conditions. When are ALbertans going to get tired of bending over for big oil and the CONS? When they see the truth.
The tax leakage of ITs began after Harpo and his Dimdam ministers ruined ITs. Now the big ones are owned by pension plans that pay no income tax and foreign investors who also pay no income tax.
The media in Calgary is financed from the east or it wouldn’t exist. Nobody reads the Herald and barely the Sun.
So don’t try and blow smoke up my gazoo.
LOL, Cowboy? I thought it was you that sold off your life to buy a Harley & your accompanying cowboy boots?
As for my “threat”, why not cancel a press conference or chat with some media type and actually do some research on what I say. The pipeline flows to the South, NOT to the east. Oil sands crude heads directly to the USA, so if you need some (in the case where Chavez or the Saudi’s can’t supply) you’ll have to ask Washington. Somehow I doubt they’ll share with you.
Noted is that you still haven’t answered any of my questions. How much energy do you consume Garth? What’s your carbon footprint ? Are you aware of the Peak Oil? Do you and your buddies in Ottawa (Harper included) have any idea how the oil industry works.
Now dude, get on that Harley, fill it up with petroleum & keep the west working. We thank you for that.
Irvine
Calgary, Alberta, Canada
By Mark Irvine on 07.01.08 11:46 pm
You like getting screwed by big oil? How come you’re still paying provincial income tax while Slimy Eddie and his buds give themselves 40% raise and leave billions on the table for the oil companies to ruin the province? And you yattering about the Republic of Alberta?
How about us Calgarians just run you across the border on a rail, eh? Cause you ain’t taking our Canada anywhere and we’re getting rid of the CONS one by one and next it will be big oil.
Irvine
Calgary, Alberta, Canada
Is that a threat, cowboy? — Garth
By Irvine on 07.02.08 12:19 am
This asshole isn’t smart enough to threaten anybody .
Ever read the clarity act moron ? I suggest you do before you spot off about your fantasy separation .
*chuckles*
Well Emilie, I don’t know what Stelmach has to do with this. I never voted for him, I live in Calgary Currie and voted for Dave Taylor, Liberal. He is my MLA
Secondly, let me educate you on “big oil”. 80% of the worlds oil industry is nationalized (government), the remaining 20% is private. It’s simply not feasible that 20% of an industry calls the shots.
As for the high prices of oil, that’s due almost entirely to the demand supply model. We are entering Peak Oil, which is the maximum world production level. We’ve sat around 85 to 86 million barrels a day for the past 3 years. The “increase” from the Saudi’s is just the Saudi’s returning to the levels they had 2 years ago AND they’re shipping Heavy Sour Crude which is the rind of the pig. You don’t ship the rind when you can sell the bacon..unless you don’t have any bacon left (sweet light).
Much of the anger toward the West is simply envy. Ontario, once an economic powerhouse, has entered a stage of perpetual decline. It built it’s world around big trucks and car manufacturing and now (outside of Cambridge and Alliston), the market’s caved in. It’s going to take 2 decades to retool, all in the face of oil prices that will continue to climb
Welcome to Peak Oil Garth, all your whining and anti Alberta rhetoric won’t save you. And if you think I’m just some whackjob westerner mouthing off about this Peak Oil thing, Google it. There are hundreds of Geologists in the industry that know it’s happening and dozens of major oil players (Boone Pickens included) that acknowledge we’re there.
As I see the criticisms here and elsewhere of The Green Shift and the new BC Carbon Tax program, it seems that people just don’t get it – we are facing a global crisis that is beyond the comprehension of most except the scientists who have tried for decades to warn us about the dangers of continuing to plunder this planet.
When the BC Carbon Tax plan was first announced, a majority of BC residents approved of it. But the NDP confused the issue with their shameful campaign to provoke controversy, and now support has dropped dramatically. The NDP have served no one’s purpose but their own because they are more interested in their political agenda than in fixing the problem of global warming. It speaks to the shame of the NDP that they choose to ignore the fact that this issue goes beyond partisan politics.
Unless and until everyone, including political parties, takes ownership of this problem and it’s solution, we will have only ourselves to blame for letting partisan politics get in the way of saving the planet.
we are facing a global crisis that is beyond the comprehension of most except the scientists
By orlebar on 07.02.08 1:44 pm
You have faith in the AGW religion, I’ll give you credit for that.
Gord.
How is Canada with only a 2.93% contribution to total CO2 going to save the earth by reducing emissions 20% to 2.34% of the total CO2? I mean the difference between 2.93% and 2.34% is negligible in terms of any significant reductions , yet genius Dion is poised to wreck the Canadian economy for essentially nothing gained.
Sure, screw the environment. That should be good for the long-term economy. — Garth
You know what is so laughable about you Turner? Don’t you represent Milton? Last time I was in Milton, it was a sprawling suburban wasteland of cookie cutter houses & shopping malls. The carbon footprint in that place must be HUGE. What percentage of the city uses a car to commute to their jobs & how far do they drive ?
And here you are whining about the oil sands yet it’s your own constituency that’s consuming all the fuel for their cars or the Natural gas to heat their homes. For the record Garth, the reason Alta produces so much CO2 is because bitumen (the oil sand) is dug from the ground and in laymens terms it’s “cooked” so the oil and dirt are separated. To heat it up, they use natural gas & alot of it. It’s then goes to an upgraded where it becomes synthetic crude, gets cracked at the refinery then ends up in the gas tanks of cars in Milton. Blaming Alberta for your woes is like blaming Rothmans for giving you lung cancer because you smoked.
And seeing you like answering these comments Garth. Let me ask. How do you heat your home? Do you have a gas furnace? Or do you use Geo Thermal ? And do you buy Bullfrog Power? With all your ranting perhaps it might be a good idea to have the media stop by your house and see how “environmental” you are. Just like they did to Al Gore a while back. We’ll also audit your car, your Harley, your lawnmower & the number of times you fly in an airplane.
Up for the challenge Garth ? You’re a man of numbers, arent you
I love it when you cowboys talk that way. BTW, yeah, I built Milton myself. — Garth
You never answered me Garth, let’s see how Green you are
Do you have wind power? Do you use Nat gas for heat or Geo Thermal? How do you heat that big house on Lake Erie. In the heat of summer Garth, how do you cool it? Do you have AC in the house Garth
Mr. Raymaker, The NEP was the key factor in the decimation of the oil industry in Alberta and Saskatchewan (although the oil industry was not as large in Sask.) and here is why.
NEP ensured that Alta. And Sask. only received 75% of the world price for oil. So when the world price collapsed, Alta. And Sask. received 75% of this collapsed price. This 25% was directly responsible for the economic collapse in the western oil industry.
This 25% that the Federal Liberal government stole from the west was then used to subsidize the purchase oil from the Middle East for the eastern provinces. Thus the east only paid 75% of the world price for oil.
Go ahead vote in the NEP II. The threat of Quebec separation will pale in comparison to the actual results of the referendum that will be held in Sask. and Alta. It will not be a threat it will be reality.
Energy-hungry India eyes the oil sands
NORVAL SCOTT
From Friday’s Globe and Mail
July 3, 2008 at 8:16 PM EDT
In its race to secure its energy supply, India is taking a new look at the oil sands.
State-owned Indian energy companies are looking to invest at least $2.5-billion (U.S.) and as much as $10-billion in Alberta’s oil sands as part of a national strategy aimed at fuelling India’s fast-growing and energy-hungry economy.
While they are technologically and environmentally challenging to develop, the oil sands are also one of the few remaining places in the world where companies can still acquire vast reserves of crude. For energy-poor, oil-thirsty India, the price may be starting to look better.
“In times to come, when we know that a resource base for oil and gas is drying up everywhere and the prices going up so high, this production from tar sands is a good commercial proposition,” Mr. Sharma said.
India’s economy is growing quickly, at about 9 per cent a year, as the country develops its manufacturing and service industries. However, energy is a huge concern; India’s 2008 oil consumption is expected to be about 100,000 barrels a day greater than in 2007, but the country has little in the way of domestic oil and natural gas.
Consequently, finding new oil supply sources is a priority if the country’s boom is to be maintained. India’s Oil Secretary, M.S. Srinivasan, told the Madrid conference that the companies are looking to pick up holdings rather than buy foreign firms, and are looking to invest between $2-billion and $2.5-billion.
As I said before China and India will want this Dirty oil if USA doesn’t want it.
Tankers are sent all over the world depending who wants to pay for its charter. Demand for oil thoughout the world is going up and the simple fact is that most of the know oil for Canada will be produce from the oil sands. Conventional oil supplies in Canada are declining expontentially.
Oil sand extraction is getting better with technology.
Petrobank use a process called THAI™ technology
THAI™ is a evolutionary new combustion process, that combines a vertical air injection well with a horizontal production well. During the process a combustion front is created where part of the oil in the reservoir is burned, generating heat which reduces the viscosity of the oil allowing it to flow by gravity to the horizontal production well. The combustion front sweeps the oil from the toe to the heel of the horizontal producing well recovering an estimated 80 percent of the original oil-in-place while partially upgrading the crude oil in-situ.
Lower environmental impact
-Negligible fresh water use
-50 percent less greenhouse gas emissions
-Smaller surface footprint and easier reclamation
Then their is TITANIUM CORPORATION INC.
TITANIUM CORPORATION is developing process technology to recover bitumen and titanium and zircon minerals from mined oil sand tailings in Fort McMurray,
Technology from these two canadian companies to help reshape the oil sand business to a better more environmental direction.
Another Canadian company that has excellent technology that will help the mining sector is:BIOTEQ ENVIRONMENTAL TECHNOLOGIES
BIOTEQ ENVIRONMENTAL TECHNOLOGIES INC. finances, builds, owns, and operates water treatment plants that remove metals and sulphate from contaminated water, primarily in the mining industry. The company’s technologies produce saleable metals and clean water that can be discharged to the environment.
Why not tax the consumer rather than the producer?
Here’s more new technology developed by Canadians at the University of calgary.
Microorganisms could help increase oil production
By Roger Highfield, Science Editor
Last Updated: 6:01pm GMT 12/12/2007
A way to harness microorganisms to wring up to 10 per cent more energy out of much of the world’s oil reserves is unveiled today by a British led team. The world has estimated oil reserves of about 3,000 billion (three trillion) barrels of which between one third and two thirds have been exploited and, given we consume around 30 billion barrels each year, there are worries that the planet’s supply of fossil fuel will be exhausted within decades.
Now oil companies are to test a proposal to use microbes to help extract methane from existing reserves and also from deposits of degraded, heavy oil deposits, some of which are in the form of “tar sands”, of which there are another six trillion barrels.
Although the team that reports the breakthrough is reluctant to speculate on how much more the world’s supply of fossil fuels can now be exploited, given the uncertainties over how well the process will work and the state of the world’s reserves, it believes that the implications are “highly significant.”
There are many known examples of these reserves, where the oil has been broken down into thick and sulphurous tar by bacteria, of which oil companies are only able to harness around 17 per cent using costly and polluting processes – such as injecting steam – to loosen the tar-like bitumen so it flows into wells and can be pumped to the surface.
But today, in the journal Nature, a team reports that it has found how oil is being broken down in these and traditional reservoirs.
If encouraged to accelerate, this naturally occurring mechanism could offer a route to economic production of up to ten per cent of this difficult-to-recover energy from heavy oil/oil sands in the form of clean-burning natural gas, leaving hard-to-handle bitumen and contaminants deep underground.
And they could, in theory at least, wring another ten per cent out of conventional reserves.
The advance comes because the team has found that crude oil in oil deposits around the world are naturally broken down by microbes in the reservoir, so long as it is not hotter than about 80ºC, a find that could revolutionise production and new ways to dispose of greenhouse gases.
Understanding how crude oil biodegrades into methane, or natural gas, opens the door to being able to stimulate them with fertiliser to produce more methane, and more quickly, and recover it directly from deeply buried oil sands deposits, says Prof Steve Larter, a Briton working at Calgary University, Canada. There may also be some hydrogen produced as well, depending on the conditions and bugs in the reservoir.
“The main thing is you’d be recovering a much cleaner fuel,” says Prof Larter, “Methane is, per energy unit, a much lower carbon dioxide emitter than bitumen. Also, you wouldn’t need all the upgrading facilities and piping on the surface.”
Working with Prof Ian Head and Martin Jones from University of Newcastle and Norsk Hydro Oil & Energy, Norway, the new understanding offers the potential of ‘feeding’ the microbes and rapidly accelerating the breaking down of the oil into methane. “It is likely there will be field tests by 2009,” said Prof Larter.
“Instead of 10 million years, we want to do it 10 years,” Prof Larter says. “We think it’s possible. We can do it in the laboratory. The question is: can we do it in a reservoir?” If it is possible, it would release “a very substantial amount of energy. It is a potential game changer.”
Prof Head said that the microbes are known as anaerobes – and those that inhabit subterranean environments, in total, weigh as much as the world’s plants and can survive and thrive in the absence of oxygen.
The degraded oils are denser ‘heavy oils’ often found in the form of tar sands. Well known examples include those in Athabasca, Canada, and the Orinoco tar sands in Venezuela. In UK waters, examples include the North Sea Alba field and the Clair field West of Shetland.
Advantages with this process:
Little or no water use
75% less carbon emission then the oil current oil sands production
No tailings
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/main.jhtml?xml=/earth/2007/12/12/scioil112.xml
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1938751/posts
Getting usable fuel out of the heavy oil of Canada’s tar fields takes a lot of energy.
Ian M. Head
Researchers have worked out how natural bacteria deep within the Earth break down crude oil and produce methane. This knowledge could help with projects to encourage these bacteria to covert more oil, faster. And it could point towards a way to produce hydrogen – an even cleaner fuel – by using these natural fuel-processing plants.
Microbes living on the crude oil in petroleum reservoirs usually start by biodegrading the simpler oil fractions, leaving behind a sticky residue called ‘heavy oil’. They will then start breaking down this heavier substance too, all the while producing methane as a product.
There are around six trillion barrels of heavy oil across the globe, lurking beneath the Earth’s surface, and it causes headaches for oil companies. “To get heavy oil out you’ve basically got to melt it,” says Steve Larter, a petroleum geochemist at the University of Calgary in Alberta, Canada. This means using energy to produce steam to extract the gunk, he says. “It’s like turning gold into lead.” Only 17% of the oil can usually be recovered.
Methane gas, on the other hand, simply rises to the surface. But it has been unclear how methane is produced by microbes in heavy-oil fields.
The first type of bacteria to attack crude oil can break down the long-chain hydrocarbons into acetic acid, carbon dioxide and hydrogen. In the second step of biodegradation, one set of microbes can turn acetic acid to methane, and another set acts on carbon dioxide and hydrogen to produce methane.
The bacterial way
To work out which process dominates in an oil field, Larter and his colleagues, recreated methanogenesis in the lab. They sealed different samples of oil from the Gullfaks field in the North Sea in glass jars, and watched them over a couple of years. They analysed the isotopic ratios of the methane produced and compared that to the methane produced by the actual oil field, and discovered that in the field the hydrogen route dominates. They think this to be true of all heavy oil fields.
“Why not just speed up the natural process by lobbing in some fertilizer?”
Steve Larter
Larter and his team have been working with oil companies to try and take advantage of their new-found knowledge. The micro-organisms in the subsurface reservoirs have plenty to break down, but not enough key nutrients such as phosphorous and trace elements. This is why the bacteria take so long to break down the oil. To recover more energy from the oilfields, more efficiently, Larter suggests encouraging the bacteria to biodegrade the oil more quickly and then collect the methane they produce. “We’ve got a process that naturally turns oil into natural gas,” he says. “Why not just speed up the natural process by lobbing in some fertilizer?”
Larter estimates that methane recovery could convert at least 20% of the heavy oil to methane. His team is hoping to run some field tests in 2009.
Gas collectors
The practicalities of such a methane-recovery scheme, however, are not straightforward. “How would you ever collect the methane?” asks Robert Burruss, a geologist at the US Geological Survey.
Should the problem of gas collection be solved, Larter’s team and Burruss both advocate an even more ambitious goal than collecting methane. “If you could stop the [hydrogen-using] methanogens, and speed up the other guys [the acetic acid-processing bacteria], you could get gas enriched in molecular hydrogen.” Hydrogen has long been touted as a clean fuel.
To get this to work will take a lot of extra research to understand how to manipulate the bacterial process, says Larter.
Burruss thinks an additional scheme might have merit: “perhaps CO2 could be added from an external source to be converted to methane,” he says. “If that could be done at the scale of a large depleted oil reservoir, then one could inject CO2, have the bacteria make methane, and have a renewable source of natural gas. That could be an interesting new aspect of geological sequestration of CO2.”