Just Curious

[FlamesAllTheWay]

Kyoto is a joke if countries like Russia, the U.S.A and India aren't on board. Canada produces something like 1% or .1% of the world's pollution, so whether we adhere to Kyoto or not will make little to no difference on the environment as a whole.

There are probably many other better ways to help preserve the environment besides Kyoto...

[Flame On]

Originally posted by Cube Inmate+Oct 14 2004, 09:08 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Cube Inmate @ Oct 14 2004, 09:08 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>

Yeah!

There is no way we should take steps to combat pollution, environmental degredation and global climate change if it would mean hurting Alberta's economy.

Way to be an inside-the-box, small-picture thinker

Seems like pretty inside-the-box thinking to believe that Kyoto is the answer. Any treaty which attempts to balance the needs of polar opposites to achieve some goal is necessarily a pretty lousy compromise.

But David Suzuki says it's the way to go, so it has to be!

Edit: Oops...OT...oh wait, there isn't a topic!! [/b][/quote]
So is that worse than Cube saying it's not the way to go? Hmm some random poster on a board who's probably got personal investment somehow in the oil industry be it directly or indirectly, says that it might not be the way to go. Right ok then. Oh and by all means if there's a problem with something give up on it all together. I mean if it isn't a perfect system then just scrap it and do nothing until one falls out of Hogwarts magical land, onto our laps, thanks to Harry Potter. That'll help.
It would be better if you just said, I don't care about environmental degredation or pollution or rising cancer rates, just as long as we make buckets of money and gas is a little cheaper. The hell with future generations.
By your thinking you wouldn't hunt down terrorists cause you didn't know where they all were. So why start.

[Mike F]

Originally posted by Cube Inmate+Oct 14 2004, 02:08 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Cube Inmate @ Oct 14 2004, 02:08 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>Seems like pretty inside-the-box thinking to believe that Kyoto is the answer. Any treaty which attempts to balance the needs of polar opposites to achieve some goal is necessarily a pretty lousy compromise.
[/b]

Oh ya, that's a brilliant stance.

Let's do nothing until we come up with a plan that solves everything and that everyone agrees with :stupid:

Originally posted by FlamesAllTheWay@
Kyoto is a joke if countries like Russia, the U.S.A and India aren't on board. Canada produces something like 1% or .1% of the world's pollution, so whether we adhere to Kyoto or not will make little to no difference on the environment as a whole.

Canada produces about 3.3% of the emissions regulated under Kyoto. By your logic no one should ever do anything about the problem because no one person or country is by itself is a big enough problem to make a significant difference

<!--QuoteBegin-FlamesAllTheWay
There are probably many other better ways to help preserve the environment besides Kyoto...[/quote]

Whew Thank god you weren't at the conference. That sort of bulletproof logic would have stopped the whole effort dead in it's tracks.

[Thunderball]

Simply put... Kyoto won't work if the Ontario Auto Industry (biggest pollutant in Canada last I heard) is exempt. Kyoto is a Made-in-Europe solution that can only work in Europe. The US and Russia recognize this... hell, even Kerry won't ratify it.

We need to address the environment... no questions asked... but we have to do it in a logical way that doesn't devastate the economy, while leaving the biggest polluter opted out.

Large cash infusions into R&D is one thing we should really be doing... efficient designs have already started to lower pollution levels, especially in vehicles. If there's no economy left to fund research into clean industry, then all we do is sentence ourselves to stagnation indefinitely.

Added: That being said, I think each region/country should come up with their own clean air solutions that straddles the line between real improvement and economic stability... and it is possible.

[FlamesAddiction]

Originally posted by FlamesAllTheWay@Oct 14 2004, 09:21 PM
Kyoto is a joke if countries like Russia, the U.S.A and India aren't on board. Canada produces something like 1% or .1% of the world's pollution, so whether we adhere to Kyoto or not will make little to no difference on the environment as a whole.

There are probably many other better ways to help preserve the environment besides Kyoto...

Per capita, Canada is the largest contributor to green house emissions however.

[sjwalter]

Originally posted by arsenal@Oct 13 2004, 06:33 PM
Gotta spread the love of hockey somehow

Same here, i just don't understand how football can be more entertaining the hockey. Damn i miss the Flames.

[sjwalter]

Originally posted by Mike F+Oct 14 2004, 12:27 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Mike F @ Oct 14 2004, 12:27 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-albertGQ@Oct 14 2004, 12:36 AM
I hope they dont' get along.# They are both in favour of the Kyoto Accord.# If this thing ever gets ratified, Alberta's economy will take a major hit.# The Kyoto Accord will make the NEP look like a walk in the park

Yeah!

There is no way we should take steps to combat pollution, environmental degredation and global climate change if it would mean hurting Alberta's economy.

Way to be an inside-the-box, small-picture thinker [/b][/quote]
Global Climate Change? You mean 3 Degree's Fahranheit over the next.....what....100 years? To me its all BS and besides the liberals have nothing better to do.

Including Russia, they should be ashamed for making this their first proirity ahead of avenging the children that were slaughtered. No wonder the people are so p*ssed off at their government.

And yes i believe Klein will never allow something like this to be passed in Alberta.

[Hockey_Rules_22]

I love football too, but hockey is # 1 and will always be #1.

[sjwalter]

Originally posted by Conroy_Chick@Oct 14 2004, 08:41 PM
I love football too, but hockey is # 1 and will always be #1.

I guess i only lived in the States for three years and i was quite young at the time so football never grew on me. Thats the only reason i am saying what i am.

I Love the Stampeders........when they're winning of course.....

[arsenal]

I watch NFL. I find it much more entertaining. They have more of a chance to put a drive together with the extra down. I do not like the CFL. I try to watch it, but I just can't get into it. I will watch the Grey Cup, but regular season CFL games.. can't stand them.

Hockey still is, will always be my first love of sports.

[Flame On]

Originally posted by Thunderball@Oct 15 2004, 02:04 AM
Simply put... Kyoto won't work if the Ontario Auto Industry (biggest pollutant in Canada last I heard) is exempt. Kyoto is a Made-in-Europe solution that can only work in Europe. The US and Russia recognize this... hell, even Kerry won't ratify it.

We need to address the environment... no questions asked... but we have to do it in a logical way that doesn't devastate the economy, while leaving the biggest polluter opted out.

Large cash infusions into R&D is one thing we should really be doing... efficient designs have already started to lower pollution levels, especially in vehicles. If there's no economy left to fund research into clean industry, then all we do is sentence ourselves to stagnation indefinitely.

Added: That being said, I think each region/country should come up with their own clean air solutions that straddles the line between real improvement and economic stability... and it is possible.

Yeah that's all good, but has to be tempered with actual action and deed. The environment isn't going to respond to "um yeah if you could wait to drastically change, we're working on it, promise".
That's obvious.

[Flame On]

Originally posted by sjwalter+Oct 15 2004, 03:38 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (sjwalter @ Oct 15 2004, 03:38 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>

Yeah!

There is no way we should take steps to combat pollution, environmental degredation and global climate change if it would mean hurting Alberta's economy.

Way to be an inside-the-box, small-picture thinker

Global Climate Change? You mean 3 Degree's Fahranheit over the next.....what....100 years? To me its all BS and besides the liberals have nothing better to do.

Including Russia, they should be ashamed for making this their first proirity ahead of avenging the children that were slaughtered. No wonder the people are so p*ssed off at their government.

And yes i believe Klein will never allow something like this to be passed in Alberta. [/b][/quote]
Something like this? Why is Klein then paying lip service to needing to make change but it will be a made in Alberta change? On some level even he admits there's a problem. But your scientific "it's BS", that's what we should listen to

[Thunderball]

Originally posted by Flame On+Oct 14 2004, 10:00 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Flame On @ Oct 14 2004, 10:00 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-Thunderball@Oct 15 2004, 02:04 AM
Simply put... Kyoto won't work if the Ontario Auto Industry (biggest pollutant in Canada last I heard) is exempt. Kyoto is a Made-in-Europe solution that can only work in Europe. The US and Russia recognize this... hell, even Kerry won't ratify it.

We need to address the environment... no questions asked... but we have to do it in a logical way that doesn't devastate the economy, while leaving the biggest polluter opted out.

Large cash infusions into R&D is one thing we should really be doing... efficient designs have already started to lower pollution levels, especially in vehicles. If there's no economy left to fund research into clean industry, then all we do is sentence ourselves to stagnation indefinitely.

Added: That being said, I think each region/country should come up with their own clean air solutions that straddles the line between real improvement and economic stability... and it is possible.

Yeah that's all good, but has to be tempered with actual action and deed. The environment isn't going to respond to "um yeah if you could wait to drastically change, we're working on it, promise".
That's obvious. [/b][/quote]
I couldn't agree more. There has to be action. You know I'm a pretty centre-right conservative, and I would devote a pile of resources and tough pollution laws... I just wish more people realized the importance.

That being said, Kyoto isn't the answer.. at least not in this part of the world.

[Flame On]

Originally posted by Thunderball@Oct 15 2004, 05:03 AM

Well that's good to hear, and I agree. But the problem is we need those actions if not now, then soon, instead of bickering about a proposed solution that not everyone is ever going to agree on.
Added: That being said, I think each region/country should come up with their own clean air solutions
That's a little bit of a pipe dream though isn't it because what's to stop a country not really entering into it to gain economic advantage? If everyone is left to their own devices, how will it be overseen, if at all?
I know Kyoto isn't perfect, at all. I mean why should Canada pay so much cause we have to heat our homes, and say, Spain, doesn't? But walking away from the table like the US, for largely economic reasons, but shrouding it with reasons of not being an effecient system, is a dire course. It's a similar tactic to their walking away from the UN war crimes "act" I guess I'll call it. Frankly if American troops, or anyone else for that matter is committing attrocities, they should be halled up for it. Either that or they're admitting they're likely to do them and need to a get out of jail card.
Wow, I've digressed, sorry about that Conroy Chick. By the way, it's your countries administration I don't like. Not the people there, although we have differences at times. But seems like half your population isn't that keen on the admin either.

[Mike F]

125 countries have ratified or acceded to Kyoto.

It is not the answer but it is a huge step in the right direction, and one that we can take right now to at least slow the problem while we look for the answer.

If you abandon anything that doesn't fix everything you'll never get anywhere.

[Cube Inmate]

I won't argue that the science is BS, as some do.

I'll just never believe that it serves the environment any good to have Canada buying "emission credits" from some tropical country while continuing to emit at the same levels. This money could be better spent IN CANADA, researching ways to actually decrease our emissions.

That's the point...the goal is important, but the method is BS.

Some will argue that if we don't commit to a global protocol, there's no incentive for others to do so. If we're not committed, then why should all these other countries be? Two problems with that stance:

1) US and out, along with other major polluters.
2) A better form of international pressure would be to lead by example, develop our own solution, and implement it, rather than just following along like sheep.

Edit:

Regarding my "lousy compromise" statement, how could it not be? Assume some tropical island with no need for heating, a clean source of hydroelectricity, and no industry besides tourism is in on this protocol. Compare them to Canada and Russia, with heavy industry and winter 11 months of the year. You think they're going to agree on methods to reduce greenhouse emissions? Nope, hence the ridiculous emission credit trading thing. Stupid compromise.

[Flame On]

Originally posted by Cube Inmate@Oct 15 2004, 06:06 AM
I won't argue that the science is BS, as some do.

I'll just never believe that it serves the environment any good to have Canada buying "emission credits" from some tropical country while continuing to emit at the same levels. This money could be better spent IN CANADA, researching ways to actually decrease our emissions.

That's the point...the goal is important, but the method is BS.

Some will argue that if we don't commit to a global protocol, there's no incentive for others to do so. If we're not committed, then why should all these other countries be? Two problems with that stance:

1) US and out, along with other major polluters.
2) A better form of international pressure would be to lead by example, develop our own solution, and implement it, rather than just following along like sheep.

Edit:

Regarding my "lousy compromise" statement, how could it not be? Assume some tropical island with no need for heating, a clean source of hydroelectricity, and no industry besides tourism is in on this protocol. Compare them to Canada and Russia, with heavy industry and winter 11 months of the year. You think they're going to agree on methods to reduce greenhouse emissions? Nope, hence the ridiculous emission credit trading thing. Stupid compromise.

I thought the emision trading "thing" as you put it, was quite a clever way to give the protocal some teeth. I've stated above why I don't think a regional/individual role or action will work, but if you can start trading in sounder environmental practices it brings a market to it. And the companies envolved are all real market types. Also I think individual companies can trade or get credit for improving their practices, as some have in the province already. That spells action and progress.
I'm with you that the method isn't the best perhaps, but you don't not put a bandage on someones bleeding head, because stitches would be better.

[Mike F]

Originally posted by Cube Inmate@Oct 14 2004, 11:06 PM
I won't argue that the science is BS, as some do.

I'll just never believe that it serves the environment any good to have Canada buying "emission credits" from some tropical country while continuing to emit at the same levels. This money could be better spent IN CANADA, researching ways to actually decrease our emissions.

That's the point...the goal is important, but the method is BS.

... hence the ridiculous emission credit trading thing. Stupid compromise.

The US instituted an emmission trading system in 1992 to try to reduce sulfer dioxide emmissions (a major component of acid rain) from power plants. It was the exact same system as is proposed here: You set a national (here global) cap, allocate allowances to each producer and allow for trading/sellng of those allowances.

The result: by 1995 the program not only met it's goals, but the plants had voluntarily reduced national emmissions 30% below what the cap required; acid rain was down 10-25%, they did it for billions less than what traditional programs were expected to take, there were no violations of the program by any plants, and emmissions reducing technology was greatly advanced.

Emmissions trading works. Kyoto (while not perfect) wasn't put together by a bunch of laymen pulling ideas out of their a**es

[sjwalter]

Originally posted by Flame On+Oct 14 2004, 09:04 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Flame On @ Oct 14 2004, 09:04 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>

Global Climate Change? You mean 3 Degree's Fahranheit over the next.....what....100 years? To me its all BS and besides the liberals have nothing better to do.

Including Russia, they should be ashamed for making this their first proirity ahead of avenging the children that were slaughtered. No wonder the people are so p*ssed off at their government.

And yes i believe Klein will never allow something like this to be passed in Alberta.

Something like this? Why is Klein then paying lip service to needing to make change but it will be a made in Alberta change? On some level even he admits there's a problem. But your scientific "it's BS", that's what we should listen to [/b][/quote]
Its BS to me because Canada is near the bottom of the world in terms of creating pullution. If the US doesn't agree to it and Russia had a hard time then there is a better way.

[Agamemnon]

Originally posted by sjwalter@Oct 15 2004, 03:38 AM
Global Climate Change? You mean 3 Degree's Fahranheit over the next.....what....100 years? To me its all BS and besides the liberals have nothing better to do.

Including Russia, they should be ashamed for making this their first proirity ahead of avenging the children that were slaughtered. No wonder the people are so p*ssed off at their government.

And yes i believe Klein will never allow something like this to be passed in Alberta.

Riiiight, double-shame for thinking about the economy, international relations, and the environment instead of focusing on killing. Also, I'm not sure, but I think the 'scientists' have been predicting massive global climate change, regardless of it's cause (pollution, natural rising temps, etc.). Though you're right, many 'liberals' are guilty of listening to 'scientists'.

Also, I guess I must have been out of school too long, but I could have sworn that Putin was (and is) wildly popular in Russia. The war in Chechnya has demoralized the hell out of many Russians (and you think Iraq is bad for the States), and yet Putin's approval ratings were at they're lowest 4 years ago, at 60%! At the end of September (after the school crisis) it was 72%. Explain how Russians are 'p*ssed off at their government'.

http://www.kommersant.com/page.asp?id=511043

And what is 'something like this' that Klein will never pass in Alberta? An international climate control treaty? Any environmental protection/progress at the expense of the economy?