Jump to content
Political Discussion Forums

Recommended Posts

So now it's Canada that has agreed(not the Tories),along with ALL countries.Did I mention ALL countries? Sorry, you did too.

What does the green guy who couldn't (Dion) of the Liberal party say about Canada's signing, and signing with the United States on side?

How is this environmental advancement going to help the green guy who couldn't (Dion) win the next election?

The Tories were not trying for an agreement. They were hoping for a collapse but felt the heat just as the U.S. did for having the entire Bali conference collapse. Now, the real pressure to do something on emissions will be placed on the Tories.

For those who don't believe in global warming because some scientists are skeptical, this must be very frustrating.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 60
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Some on the right don't want to move in any way shape or form on emissions.

Many more lefties stuck in the middle and really concerned about the environment, will see this as a chance to vote for a party that actually made a move for their environment cause, and will say forget the green guy who couldn't(Dion) because with him it was all talk.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Some on the right don't want to move in any way shape or form on emissions.

I don't see why they wouldn't. I wouldn't mind cleaner air, and a chance to make some money off of the environmental thing. I don't buy much into the global warming thing due to vairous variations of temp and CO2 levels during Earth's 4.5 billion year history. But I don't mind removing some of the crap that's in the air.

Link to post
Share on other sites
I don't see why they wouldn't. I wouldn't mind cleaner air, and a chance to make some money off of the environmental thing. I don't buy much into the global warming thing due to vairous variations of temp and CO2 levels during Earth's 4.5 billion year history. But I don't mind removing some of the crap that's in the air.

Pollution in the air is a separate issue from global warming. The Tories tried to confuse the issue when they first introduced legislation. It didn't work then and it won't work now.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Many more lefties stuck in the middle and really concerned about the environment, will see this as a chance to vote for a party that actually made a move for their environment cause, and will say forget the green guy who couldn't(Dion) because with him it was all talk.

Doubtful they will see the Tories as that party. It is probably why Green support is up so dramatically.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Doubtful they will see the Tories as that party. It is probably why Green support is up so dramatically.

Not those with smarts,who also know economics is just as important,something they won't see in the Greens,NDP and especially the Liberals.

The Conservatives are doing something, unlike Dion who just moves his mouth and talks a lot about how bad Harper is doing(much like you) but never actually having a plan or a solution that solves any problems(just like you).

Dion is done,the next election will show it.

Time for the Liberals to put in a leader who knows how to get it done(unlike you). :rolleyes:

Link to post
Share on other sites
Not those with smarts,who also know economics is just as important,something they won't see in the Greens,NDP and especially the Liberals.

The Conservatives are doing something, unlike Dion who just moves his mouth and talks a lot about how bad Harper is doing(much like you) but never actually having a plan or a solution that solves any problems(just like you).

Dion is done,the next election will show it.

Time for the Liberals to put in a leader who knows how to get it done(unlike you). :rolleyes:

There is that personalizing again. I don't know why you feel the need to do it aside from the fact you are obviously upset.

Edited by jdobbin
Link to post
Share on other sites

Here's a presentation on Fusion relating to a project called ITER. Canada is one of several countries participating. Fusion is a benign, non-GHG power source that will be able to wean all countries off of fossil fuels - perhaps not entirely but certainly to replace Coal and Nuclear power. The timeframe for commercial use is anywhere from 30 to 50 years.......but the point is - well before the end of this century, the use of fossil fuels will be marginalized. Massive amounts of clean energy for everyone. It's not Science Fiction. It's happening today.

Why do we not hear about the ITER project and another fusion undertaking called the Demo project? Why is Kyoto and the UN not pleading for more scientific research and rapid development of this technology? Why indeed.

Fusion Power: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fusion_power

Link to the ITER Project presentation: http://cna.ca/english/Seminar2003/speakers...ons/SMurray.pdf

PS: Jdobbin - you started this thread. Usually, people start threads so that other people can share their thoughts. I noticed that half the posts in the thread are yours. There's a tee-shirt I once saw that you might look for - on the front it says "Everyone's entitled to my Opinion".

Link to post
Share on other sites
Here's a presentation on Fusion relating to a project called ITER. Canada is one of several countries participating. Fusion is a benign, non-GHG power source that will be able to wean all countries off of fossil fuels - perhaps not entirely but certainly to replace Coal and Nuclear power. The timeframe for commercial use is anywhere from 30 to 50 years.......but the point is - well before the end of this century, the use of fossil fuels will be marginalized. Massive amounts of clean energy for everyone. It's not Science Fiction. It's happening today.

Why do we not hear about the ITER project and another fusion undertaking called the Demo project? Why is Kyoto and the UN not pleading for more scientific research and rapid development of this technology? Why indeed.

Fusion Power: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fusion_power

Link to the ITER Project presentation: http://cna.ca/english/Seminar2003/speakers...ons/SMurray.pdf

PS: Jdobbin - you started this thread. Usually, people start threads so that other people can share their thoughts. I noticed that half the posts in the thread are yours. There's a tee-shirt I once saw that you might look for - on the front it says "Everyone's entitled to my Opinion".

The super rich guy with power and influence will donate money to the "save the wet lands" - but will not as so much as raise their voice as far as climate destruction..because that would be that their companies would have to back off production and their wealth would deminish - so it is ironic that the onces who say they are naturalists and envorionmentalists - are really not what they present themselves to be - don't they know if they do not take a stand on global climate disruption and destruction that there will be no "wet lands" to dump a few million bucks into saving? What are these guys -? Crazy? This is common - with Canadian naturalist families that support foundations to perserve the wild - they look good socially and appear to be benevolent towards nature and actaually believe they are good - yet their companies and investiments in China destroy the earth - talk about delluded - this elite that runs the government is wacko - do you hear me Jimmy?

Link to post
Share on other sites
Here's a presentation on Fusion relating to a project called ITER. Canada is one of several countries participating. Fusion is a benign, non-GHG power source that will be able to wean all countries off of fossil fuels - perhaps not entirely but certainly to replace Coal and Nuclear power. The timeframe for commercial use is anywhere from 30 to 50 years.......but the point is - well before the end of this century, the use of fossil fuels will be marginalized. Massive amounts of clean energy for everyone. It's not Science Fiction. It's happening today.

Why do we not hear about the ITER project and another fusion undertaking called the Demo project? Why is Kyoto and the UN not pleading for more scientific research and rapid development of this technology? Why indeed.

Fusion Power: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fusion_power

Link to the ITER Project presentation: http://cna.ca/english/Seminar2003/speakers...ons/SMurray.pdf

PS: Jdobbin - you started this thread. Usually, people start threads so that other people can share their thoughts. I noticed that half the posts in the thread are yours. There's a tee-shirt I once saw that you might look for - on the front it says "Everyone's entitled to my Opinion".

I have no problems hearing more on fusion. It is an interesting concept that I hope is developed further.

The U.S. and Europe have a plan to commercialize fusion by 2050.

http://www.state.gov/g/oes/rls/rm/54306.htm

As for for the rest of your comment, why personalize things? I have never shut down any line of discussion you raised. I certainly never thought you would feel the need to insult.

Link to post
Share on other sites
I have no problems hearing more on fusion. It is an interesting concept that I hope is developed further.

The U.S. and Europe have a plan to commercialize fusion by 2050.

http://www.state.gov/g/oes/rls/rm/54306.htm

As for for the rest of your comment, why personalize things? I have never shut down any line of discussion you raised. I certainly never thought you would feel the need to insult.

Even with government subsidies to get it going...

There is one problem with fusion that I might have trouble with and that is economic spin-off. The oil industry is the main reason why the Canadian economy is doing so well right now. Implementing this might tank it. Also if it is made from Hydrogen, what would we do with all that Helium produced???

Link to post
Share on other sites
I have no problems hearing more on fusion. It is an interesting concept that I hope is developed further.

The U.S. and Europe have a plan to commercialize fusion by 2050.

http://www.state.gov/g/oes/rls/rm/54306.htm

As for for the rest of your comment, why personalize things? I have never shut down any line of discussion you raised. I certainly never thought you would feel the need to insult.

It's kind of tongue-in-cheek - my wife tells me to buy the same tee-shirt. Did not mean it as an insult - probably more of a tribute to your tenacity on the environment.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Even with government subsidies to get it going...

There is one problem with fusion that I might have trouble with and that is economic spin-off. The oil industry is the main reason why the Canadian economy is doing so well right now. Implementing this might tank it. Also if it is made from Hydrogen, what would we do with all that Helium produced???

There is helium shortages now. Helium is affected by the oil crunch.

http://www.cbc.ca/consumer/story/2007/09/2...m-shortage.html

I have no problem with research and development money coming from government. It does not subsidize one industry over and another. I'd agree to the same research fund for hydro to address electrical degradation along the poles or research into carbon sequestration.

What I disagree with is long term subsidies for ethanol or the oil industry. Even Harper is trying to cut the spigot off for the oil industry. The high oil prices should dictate they fund their own production and distribution costs.

Link to post
Share on other sites
It's kind of tongue-in-cheek - my wife tells me to buy the same tee-shirt. Did not mean it as an insult - probably more of a tribute to your tenacity on the environment.

Thanks. I'd love to hear more about fusion as the research comes in. It seems that fusion is about 40 years from being a commercially dominant energy source. It would be great if Canada was on the cutting edge of that.

Link to post
Share on other sites

More on Fusion Power. Quite interesting.

1) Much like the Olympics, there was a bidding process to see which country would host the Fusion reactor. Canada withdrew from the bidding process in 2003. Here's a link to a Toronto Star article: http://www3.sympatico.ca/n.rieck/docs/iter...a_20031209.html

2) Here's the Iter website that will bring you up to date on what's happening - lots of material in here including waste and waste management - the News Archives will help bring you current as there seems to be lots of stuff happening lately: http://www.iter.org/

3) The Sierra Club, Canada's foremost environment critic, is vehemently opposed to the Fusion Project - but putting humanity's progress aside, it's always wise to listen to the other side of an argument: http://www.sierraclub.ca/national/programs...ign.shtml?x=313

Although some people might say "but that's 35-40 years down the road!"....let's not forget that we are setting Kyoto targets for 2050. If we can moderate our fossil fuel usage over the next 50 years and phase in Fusion after 2050, we should be in pretty good shape......and it makes sense that we should be able to do that. Necessity is the mother of invention. The real hope for humanity is that the entire world could have access to an unlimited supply of relatively clean energy. Imagine what a Fusion station could do in the middle of Siberia, or Zambia, or Bangladesh. And imagine removing the blight of oil politics.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Jdobbin - you started this thread. Usually, people start threads so that other people can share their thoughts. I noticed that half the posts in the thread are yours. There's a tee-shirt I once saw that you might look for - on the front it says "Everyone's entitled to my Opinion".

Oh Dobbin is doing nothing new...he does it three times a day. He's pissed because the Tories hulled the Good Ship HMS SinkaLib, again, leaving it floundered, listing to port, and dead in the water, so the best he can do is try to start a mutiny on the privateers. It seems to have backfired, what with Dobbin backed up against the mast with a dozen cutlasses trimming his beard...

Link to post
Share on other sites
Oh Dobbin is doing nothing new...he does it three times a day. He's pissed because the Tories hulled the Good Ship HMS SinkaLib, again, leaving it floundered, listing to port, and dead in the water, so the best he can do is try to start a mutiny on the privateers. It seems to have backfired, what with Dobbin backed up against the mast with a dozen cutlasses trimming his beard...

On a related and light-hearted subject, I watched the third "Pirates of the Caribbean" movie - The Edge of the World. It wasn't anywhere near as good as the first two. It was long, disjointed, and somewhat boring. For anyone who's interested, there's a terrific kid's pirate movie called "The Goonies" - it's 20 years old but is still one that you shouldn't miss watching with your 9-12 year old kids.

Edited by Keepitsimple
Link to post
Share on other sites
Oh Dobbin is doing nothing new...he does it three times a day. He's pissed because the Tories hulled the Good Ship HMS SinkaLib, again, leaving it floundered, listing to port, and dead in the water, so the best he can do is try to start a mutiny on the privateers. It seems to have backfired, what with Dobbin backed up against the mast with a dozen cutlasses trimming his beard...

I don't know why you feel the need to personalize in your postings.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Although some people might say "but that's 35-40 years down the road!"....let's not forget that we are setting Kyoto targets for 2050. If we can moderate our fossil fuel usage over the next 50 years and phase in Fusion after 2050, we should be in pretty good shape......and it makes sense that we should be able to do that. Necessity is the mother of invention. The real hope for humanity is that the entire world could have access to an unlimited supply of relatively clean energy. Imagine what a Fusion station could do in the middle of Siberia, or Zambia, or Bangladesh. And imagine removing the blight of oil politics.

I was never convinced that Chretien was all that eager about fusion. Many of the his Ontario caucus was pushing for more nuclear but even that has been slow in coming. It seems all Ontario was interested in doing in 2003 was picking away at its deficit and perhaps the federal government didn't want to be on the hook for the whole thing. I never did hear the reason.

Link to post
Share on other sites
I was never convinced that Chretien was all that eager about fusion. Many of the his Ontario caucus was pushing for more nuclear but even that has been slow in coming. It seems all Ontario was interested in doing in 2003 was picking away at its deficit and perhaps the federal government didn't want to be on the hook for the whole thing. I never did hear the reason.

I vividly remember being a kid in the 60's who was addicted to science. I read and heard a great deal about fusion.

I also clearly remember how it was said to be 40 years from commercial development.

Wonder what kids will be hearing 40 years from now?

Meanwhile, we could already be enjoying cheap solar power from space-based satellites, if we had of had just a bit more vision...

Link to post
Share on other sites

Stephane Dion made an impromptu call to the Michael Harris' CFRA open line show this afternoon. In putting forward his concept of Canada's international role in fighting global warming he said "We have to share the wealth". I bet he bit his tongue after letting that gem slip out. He also made the point that the Liberals had a plan but shucks, it could not be implemented because "along came Harper".

He also appeared on MDL later. Wisely, the "share the wealth" statement was omitted but the Liberal plan torpedoed by the Conservative win received mention.

At the end of the interviews he offered wishes for a happy new year. What I found noticeable was the absence of Merry Christmas wishes to either interviewer, even after Michael Harris wished him a Merry Christmas. It looked quite intentional to me. I suppose it's the safe thing to do if you don't want to offend the sensibilities of non-Christians.

Link to post
Share on other sites
All countries have signed on to it. No hard numbers were agreed upon but that in 2009, those numbers are to be drawn up. Several countries are continuing Kyoto objectives. Some will meet those objectives. Canada has agreed to work on getting the world on board and coming up with hard numbers. There will be additional pressure to start now rather than later to achieve those numbers whatever they are.

Unless the developing countries (China-India, etc) are involved why would Canada, Australia, the U.S., work on or agree to any numbers by 2009 according to the agreement signed in Bali?

http://www.nationalpost.com/todays_paper/s....html?id=175177

In Bali, the Anglosphere nations have in effect drawn a red line in the sand: Unless developing countries agree to mandatory emissions cuts themselves, much of the Western world will henceforth reject any unilateral burden imposed by future climate deals.

and,

The success of the major Anglosphere nations at last week's United Nations climate conference in Bali marks the beginning of the end of the age of climate hysteria.

It also symbolizes a significant shift of political leadership in international climate diplomacy from the once-dominating European continent to North America and its Western allies.

This power shift has perhaps never been more transparent and dramatic than in Bali, when Australia's Labour government, under the newly elected Prime Minister Kevin Rudd, announced a complete U-turn on the thorny issue of mandatory carbon dioxide emissions targets. Only days after Australia's delegation had backed Europe's demand for a 25% to 40% cut in emission by 2020, Mr. Rudd declared (his signature under the Kyoto Protocol wasn't even dry) that his government would not support such targets after all.

Indeed, Australia's position hardened further when Trade Minister Simon Crean announced that developing countries like China and India would have to accept tough binding emissions targets before Australia would ever agree to any post-Kyoto agreement beyond 2012.

It must have have come as quite a shock to all of those eco groups with M. Dion visiting Bali to find the new Australian Prime Minister, after much media attention signed the Kyoto Protocol, then to immediately declare in Bali his government would not agree to such targets. Strange that M. Dion has not treated the Australian Prime Minister to the same criticisms he has launched against Canada's Prime Minister for his stance on the Kyoto impossible targets for Canada. Partisan politics as usual.

`

Link to post
Share on other sites
Time for the Liberals to go to plan B, and that's getting a new leader.
You'd be playing the Grinch that stole Christmas. I want so badly to watch Dion in the English Leadership Debate.
Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Announcements




  • Tell a friend

    Love Political Discussion Forums? Tell a friend!
×
×
  • Create New...