Starting with the premise that Canada's record on climate change is "a crime against humanity's future," the manifesto argues the country needs to make the leap to getting 100 per cent of its electricity from renewable resources within 20 years and weaning itself entirely off fossil fuels by 2050.
As much as that manifesto is mumbo jumbo, I can get behind this as a goal to strive for. I don't think its crazy to want to wean ourselves off of having to burn coal to power our cities.
There are a few towns in the US who are already getting all of their energy from renewable sources...ie Aspen is now running entirely on renewable energy http://thinkprogress.org/climate/201...ewable-energy/. Yes, small (and usually rich) places for sure, but a small step forward that shows that things are possible.
It would be nice if Canada had some ambitious environmental goals to shoot for. All we ever seem to do is stick our head in the sand and point fingers at others. Some leadership and ambition would be nice for a change. I think shooting for our major cities to use only renewable energy is a great goal, that even if it's never fully reached, would be a great achievement.
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Table 5 For This Useful Post:
If you research it, this is actually a pretty interesting idea. I know it would never fly in our current political environment, but it would be more affordable than you think (you can do away with a lot of the current hit/miss welfare programs) and depending on where you set the number, still provides a strong incentive to work.
It's also true that most of the work falls to women. If anyone is interested in some of the academic literature behind it, do a search for papers on reproductive labour.
As much as that manifesto is mumbo jumbo, I can get behind this as a goal to strive for. I don't think its crazy to want to wean ourselves off of having to burn coal to power our cities.
Canada is most of the way there, with more than 60% of electricity from hydro and a further 15% of CO2-free nuclear, giving it the 2nd lowest CO2 intensity electricity in the G7. Basically, all Canada really needs to do is replace its coal plants with nuclear and replace natural gas with hydro where environmentally practical.
Quote:
There are a few towns in the US who are already getting all of their energy from renewable sources...ie Aspen is now running entirely on renewable energy http://thinkprogress.org/climate/201...ewable-energy/. Yes, small (and usually rich) places for sure, but a small step forward that shows that things are possible.
The city is buying enough electricity from renewable sources to match its annual usage, but it's not running off purely renewable sources 24/7 because it's impossible to do so, unless the location has a large source of hydro power.
Canada is most of the way there, with more than 60% of electricity from hydro and a further 15% of CO2-free nuclear, giving it the 2nd lowest CO2 intensity electricity in the G7. Basically, all Canada really needs to do is replace its coal plants with nuclear and replace natural gas with hydro where environmentally practical.
There has been some good momentum on that front for sure, which is exactly why I think having a long-term plan that aims for 100% renewable electricity could be a worthy endeavour.
Federal Information Commissioner is taking the PMO office to court because they are withholding documents pertinent to the Duffy trial. They were asked to disclose the full documents but refused to comply fully with the order forcing the commissioner to pursue a court order to get the information released. Why work against an active criminal investigation when there is nothing to hide?
Quote:
TORONTO — The information commissioner is taking the Prime Minister’s Office to court, accusing it of refusing to release documents about four senators embroiled in scandal.
The Canadian Press filed an access-to-information request to the Privy Council Office, the central bureaucracy serving the prime minister and cabinet, in August of 2013 asking for any records created since March relating to senators Mike Duffy, Mac Harb, Patrick Brazeau or Pamela Wallin.
The PCO identified 28 pages of responsive records, but withheld 27 of those pages, releasing just two emails in which its staff discussed similar access-to-information requests.
PCO claimed every single word on every single one of those 27 pages might jeopardize solicitor-client privilege, or reveal personal information, or third-party information, or details on secret deliberations.
The Canadian Press went to the federal information commissioner, who found the complaint well-founded and recommended the prime minister release “a significant amount” of additional information.
But the Prime Minister’s Office withheld the “vast majority” of the records and the information commissioner is now asking Federal Court to order the prime minister to disclose any records that don’t warrant being withheld under certain sections of the Access to Information Act.
So I guess TSN has always had it right. Toronto is Canada's most important city.
Mulcair agrees. Again.
He must assume he has the Vancouver vote in the bag. It seems strange to reiterate his TO love while there. He must be trying to buy the Toronto vote like he bought the Quebec vote with the 50% plus 1.
Sorry Tom. You are wrong. Alberta drives the Canadian economy. If Alberta is good, Canada is good. Toronto lags behind.
So I guess TSN has always had it right. Toronto is Canada's most important city.
Mulcair agrees. Again.
He must assume he has the Vancouver vote in the bag. It seems strange to reiterate his TO love while there. He must be trying to buy the Toronto vote like he bought the Quebec vote with the 50% plus 1.
Sorry Tom. You are wrong. Alberta drives the Canadian economy. If Alberta is good, Canada is good. Toronto lags behind.
So I guess TSN has always had it right. Toronto is Canada's most important city.
Mulcair agrees. Again.
He must assume he has the Vancouver vote in the bag. It seems strange to reiterate his TO love while there. He must be trying to buy the Toronto vote like he bought the Quebec vote with the 50% plus 1.
Sorry Tom. You are wrong. Alberta drives the Canadian economy. If Alberta is good, Canada is good. Toronto lags behind.
I'm as big of a supporter of Alberta and the energy sector, but no, we do not "drive" the economy more than Ontario or likely even Toronto.
We (Alberta) have a big impact on exports and Fx rates through oil, but Toronto basically still runs all banking and capital markets, and thus, the economy. And that ignores the fact the GTA alone has more people than all of Alberta.
Toronto's GDP has historically been close to ours (Alberta) when oil was at $100. I imagine they're stomping us now.
So no, Vancouver doesn't matter (votes or economic wise) and neither does Calgary in comparison to Toronto. Ridiculous amount of votes and seats in an area.
Consider also that, as the Bank of Montreal pointed out in March, that nine in 10 net new jobs in the past year were created in Alberta. In other words, 90 per cent of the new jobs in Canada were created in a province with 11 per cent of the population.
One would have to be dumb not to realize that Alberta (or probably more accurately, the oil industry) hasn't been a huge driver of the national economy. Unemployed people from other provinces were going there for work. Ontario has been lagging for pretty much as long as the Alberta boom was happening. Just based on geography and population, there will always be a lot of commerce in Ontario, but with manufacturing and soft wood lumber getting decimated over the past few years, they don't have the economic clout they used to.
In regards to that graph though, doesn't the separation of the lines in recent years suggest that Alberta is becoming less of a driver, or am I reading that wrong? Of course there is still a direct proportional difference between the 2, but that would be true no matter which provinces you compared.
__________________
"A pessimist thinks things can't get any worse. An optimist knows they can."
One would have to be dumb not to realize that Alberta (or probably more accurately, the oil industry) hasn't been a huge driver of the national economy. Unemployed people from other provinces were going there for work. Ontario has been lagging for pretty much as long as the Alberta boom was happening. Just based on geography and population, there will always be a lot of commerce in Ontario, but with manufacturing and soft wood lumber getting decimated over the past few years, they don't have the economic clout they used to.
In regards to that graph though, doesn't the separation of the lines in recent years suggest that Alberta is becoming less of a driver, or am I reading that wrong? Of course there is still a direct proportional difference between the 2, but that would be true no matter which provinces you compared.
Yeah. Plus I was drunk when I wrote the original post, and marginalized 'Toronto' over much.
The graph shows that the resource economy now has a far greater effect on national unemployment than previously, or perhaps more correctly the oil boom did - which isn't limited to Alberta.
Hmm looks like the LPC might need my vote more than NDP in order to try and prevent a CPC seat in my riding. I don't really like having to vote against someone rather than vote for someone.
Hmm looks like the LPC might need my vote more than NDP in order to try and prevent a CPC seat in my riding. I don't really like having to vote against someone rather than vote for someone.
Then grow a set and vote for who you want to win.
And I'm in the same boat as you. None of the candidates are appealing to me, and there is one party who I really don't want to see win, but this constant negative campaigning is mitigated when people get to the booth and actually vote for who they want to win.
__________________
"OOOOOOHHHHHHH those Russians" - Boney M
The Following User Says Thank You to killer_carlson For This Useful Post:
And I'm in the same boat as you. None of the candidates are appealing to me, and there is one party who I really don't want to see win, but this constant negative campaigning is mitigated when people get to the booth and actually vote for who they want to win.
Yeah, the last few weeks have me leaning more towards LPC than NDP anyway. It's pretty close between those two for me, which is why a poll like that makes me think LPC is the way to go. A bit of a tie-breaker I guess.
