With the release of the Spacing “Green” issue, we have faith that many solutions to the widely-acknowledged-climate-crisis will come at the local level — but there are times when solutions, and leadership, must come from the Federal government. This week Canada is increasingly the target of worldwide scorn as we are seen as a major roadblock in moving forward on climate change. From the Globe and Mail:
The federal government is under withering criticism for its negotiating stance at the Bali conference — and not just from environmental activists. The latest attacks are coming from respected scientists and from Canada’s fellow negotiators.
Rajendra Pachauri, head of the climate science panel that was awarded a Nobel Peace Prize Monday, has blasted the Harper government for its climate stance.
“This particular government has been a government of skeptics,†said Mr. Pachauri, chairman of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, which shared the Nobel Prize with Al Gore.
“They do not want to do anything on climate change,†he added in a published interview in New Delhi.
In the Toronto Star, David Suzuki called the Harper government’s spin on the issue “humiliating” and “ludicrous” while former editor-and-chief of CBC News Tony Burman says there is serious damage is being done to Canada’s global reputation.
Avaaz.org has set up an online petition — 47, 511 names at this moment — and will launch a cross-country advertising campaign soon with the final number in hopes of changing our Prime Minister’s tack on this issue. Go here to add your name.
Photo by fortinbras.
14 comments
These people are an embarrassment to Canada and to themselves. I can only hope there is an election pretty soon and hopefully they will get kicked out. I can’t understand how people can vote for a guy who is so pro oil industry and wanted Canada to follow Bush into Iraq. These are just two of many reasons why Harper doesn’t belong in a progressive society like Canada. But hey, what do I know?!
Reading the news out of Bali this week makes makes me both infuriated and ashamed.
I hope this helps Canadians understand that Stephen Harper is actually a very very bad person – as in evil. Maybe not Robert Pickton evil, but evil nonetheless, and with a lot more power…
Since I posted it less than an hour ago the list has grown by 3000 people. The web sure flies….
Since I posted it less than an hour ago the list has grown by 3000 people. The web sure flies….
It was the first thing I did after reading – even before posting my comment.
You obviously have great power, Shawn, so keep using it wisely…
“reports of my power have been greatly exaggerated” — I didn’t mean to imply credit for that, this petition has been flying around the web all day via emails and facebooking. The Spacing post is just one more in a Canadian chorus.
Canada’s position makes perfect sense when you consider the country’s reliance on the automobile manufacturing and oil extraction industries, not to mention the potential riches to be gained from shipping across the soon-to-be ice-free Arctic. Quebec recently agreed to adopt California’s carbon emissions standards for autos; Ontario earlier declined to do so because of their supposed deleterious effects on the auto industry. The oil sands are a well documented environmental catastrophe, as bad as anything happening in China, yet there is hardly any discussion of stopping or even slowing down their development. Canada is a country that likes to think of itself as progressive, but when it comes to the environment, is a shameless raper and pillager. I think a lot of people here are still in denial about that.
As we know, the big argument that the Conservatives are (somewhat successfully) using is that developing countries such as China, whose greenhouse gas and pollution levels are climbing fast, must shoulder the same absolute emissions targets as the rest of us. In an op-ed in the National Post, Mr Baird mentioned studies that show that even if Canada ceased to emit ANY greenhouse gasses, China would make up for it in 18 months. This stance elicits positive reactions from many Canadians, who justifiably believe that booming economies such as China and India need to be part of the “climate solution”.
On one hand, I think that it is fair to want these countries, who have become absolutely flagrant polluters, to participate in global emission reductions. Certainly this is a global issue.
On the other hand, however, we must know that they will never, never participate if we can’t show a good example – and unlike Canada, the Chinese government doesn’t exactly have to worry about local public opinion on environmental issues quite yet.
But for me, the most convincing argument comes when you look at per-capita GHG emissions (i.e. emissions per person), a category in which Canada is shamefully near the top, and China is still near the bottom. It reminds me of a quote from Ontario Green leader Frank de Jong, after he was challenged by a listener on a talk radio show who obviously sympathises with the Conservative position. De Jong’s response was this: “If you have 15% of the world’s populations, as China does, are you not entitled to produce 15% of the world’s emissions?”
Didn’t we as consumers create the chinese industry?We buy their products,we forgive their emissions and then say we have done enough.Well eventually we will have to turn to a bicycle type economy where we only use propulsion vehicles for essential travel.The oil sands project and the few remaining coal fired generators are basically at the top of our emmision list.Unfortunately Harper came to power because Jack Layton and the NDP refused to continue the coalition government that was actually working.This government doesn’t.If there is another election it is conceivable that the tories could form a majority,then what?You can forget any emmision reduction whatsoever.But in the meantime we must pay at least a penalty for consuming “made in china” products to finance the emmision reductions around the world.
Last time I looked it up, Mars and most planets in our solar system where going through a temperature increase also?
Damn us and our green house gas.
You folks have to step out of your party rhetoric and look up(the sun) what is really going on with the planet.
The HARPER party represents the interests of their planet-raping, carbon-addicted industrial backers and the other self-serving, climate change deniers who place their own short-term, economic gain over the health and welfare of the planet and its population.
At the time of this writing, talks in BALI are continuing overtime in hopes of reaching some sort of deal. While one hopes that a meaningful consensus can still be reached, a watered-down, non-specificly targeted agreement would only strengthen the Tories position in our overdue federal election (March?).
As it stands, Baird’s paw-pointing, attack-dog rhetoric loses more bite with each offering. And if he returns from BALI with no deal, one would hope that even the petty, fractured centrist-leaning left will be able to push them from office, everywhere save Fort McMurray perhaps.
But the real eco-lifting will again depend to on engaged and informed individual voters.
‘CON’ Canadians once, shame on you, Mr. Harper.
‘CON’ Canadians twice, shame on us, eh?
Last time I looked it up, Mars and most planets in our solar system where going through a temperature increase also?
When, exactly was it, that you last looked it up?
Damn us and our green house gas.
Yes, damn us indeed. The fact is, we are damning ourselves.
You folks have to step out of your party rhetoric and look up(the sun) what is really going on with the planet.
Damn you sun!
I’m always amazed at the depths the deniers go to; what conceivable political *or financial* gain could there be in advocating a slight diminution in our growth rate in the hopes of avoiding cataclysmic climate change? As for scientists making money, what do you think is more lucrative – working for millions for the oil companies who are desperate to advance the cause of the flat-earth society (aka climate change denial), or working for the crumbs that universities and environmental groups get?
I’m also curious how these people think they know better than the consensus of the entire scientific community…let me repeat that slowly:
The. Entire. Scientific. Community.
Gee, why didn’t they think about the influence of the sun…why was it up to Lance to think of this?
Damn you too, scientists!
(BTW, Lance, you know what happens when you look up at the sun? You get burned. You are a walking example of this.)
It’s all very frustrating and sad of course. Please don’t think though, that we in Toronto are really all that green despite some good things that are done. It’s set in a Canadian context – and there are some city stats that indicate we’re about 20% above the 1990 base line, the exact opposite of the Toronto Target, which is pretty unmentioned these days.
At least we’re actually hearing about the Fossil of the Day Awards going to Canada these days – it’s not a new “honour”.
The McKingford reference to being “ashamed” of Canada makes me think of Tooker Gomberg’s quite radical step of burning his Canadian passport at the Hague confab and how “extreme” this was.
And as I’m not nearly as “green” as I’d like to be, time for the “hamessh” to try to get to some of his own problem areas…
Currently 80% of electricity in China is generated from coal. In order to meet the insatiable demand, approximately 550 new coal-fired plants are being planned; one new plant every ten days or less.
India? 70% of electricity is generated from coal. Increased demand, in-efficiencies and zero alternatives are creating a future that will comprise 200 new coal-fired power plants.
USA? The world’s largest polluter may build 70 new coal-fired power plants.
How does this all equate and where are we now? Simply this:
1) No official treaty exists to curb green-house gas emissions.
2) By 2012, the USA, China and India will emit up to five times (2.7 Bn tons) as much carbon dioxide into the atmosphere as the Kyoto Protocol planned to reduce (0.48 Bn tons). This does not include the 350 coal-fired plants planned in all other countries combined.
3) Bali comes up with a frame-work and hope for 2008 and beyond. What will it be? 20% cuts? 40%? What can the world achieve? Don’t harp on Harper for suggesting 20% from 2006 levels. This estimate may actually be an achievable target. No matter how far off it is deemed to be from the various targets or ranges suggested, it could be a good start.
Considering that the world will build about 1170 coal-fired power plants within the next decade and scientists currently estimate that 500 new plants will push CO2 concentrations to a dangerous climate change level (400 ppm), any future climate change agreement MUST include the coal burning majorities of China, India and the USA. Regardless of the future advances in any alternative energy supply, the world must first act to minimise our reliance on coal and use new technology to reduce the emissions of future coal-fired plants for the next decade. Maybe 2010 to 2020 can then be called the decade of coal?
What can we do? I believe that all we can do is work towards establishing a binding agreement that is achievable in the future. Can we keep China and India and the USA in an agreement?
Hopefully that is what happened in Bali in 2007.
One continues to hear various opinions as to what reductions in emissions are actually possible by 2012. But what they really mean is what emission reductions are achievable while maintaining the bloated standard of living to which we North Americans have become accustomed.
I wonder what we could do if we were willing to sacrifice some of our expected over-privilege in order to serve a greater common good, the health of our poisoned planet. After all, the reason we are all in this mess, is because the developed world has not yet paid the real costs of our own 20th century avarice.
The HARPER Party has spent the first part of their minority mandate, doing nothing but blaming the previous government for their inaction.
And while the Liberals certainly didn’t do enough to address the issue, please remember that they were blocked at every turn by the HARPER Party’s refusal to even admit that the greatest crisis now facing our planet, even existed.
Canadians will demand change in the upcoming election. Let us all work that much harder to ensure that we don’t get CONned again.
PS/ I often wonder if HARPER’s defenders actually believe what he tells them to say, or if they are just protecting their own ‘tar sands’ portfolios.