Canada’s commitment to reduce greenhouse gas emissions is as much about principle as practicality. Although Canadian emissions represent just 1.6% of the global total, we remain among the world’s top 10 emitters and have a particularly high rate on a per capita basis. There is also a moral argument that people who consume the world’s resources should pay their fair share, and do their best to mitigate any damage they produce.
While a compelling argument, it runs into trouble when measured on effectiveness. If one community works to clean up a river, while several much larger communities continue to overwhelm its efforts by dumping in raw sewage a few metres away, does the struggle still make sense? Especially if it entails a substantial economic cost on the well-meaning community?
Canada now faces this dilemma, as President-elect Donald Trump is on record as claiming climate change is a “hoax†and has pledged to scupper steps taken by the outgoing Obama administration to reduce U.S. emissions.
The effectiveness of anti-emissions efforts was open to question even before Trump’s election. China, the world’s biggest emitter, has continued to build new coal-fired power plants at an astonishing rate. According to the New York Times, last year alone 155 new plants were approved. India, the world’s third-biggest emitter, has likewise continued to increase its use of coal. Last year New Delhi indicated nearly 600 new coal plants were planned, according to reports.
There have been indications both countries would curb those schedules, though mainly due to overcapacity rather than concern about environmental impact. Both are dealing with economic issues that have reduced their immediate needs. But the problems are considered short-term, and a revival would quickly give both countries reason to fire up their coal plants again.
Add the United States to this list, and Canada’s efforts look increasingly fanciful. One estimate indicated Trump’s proposals would increase U.S. emissions 16% within eight years, far outpacing any reductions Canada could hope to make.
That argument becomes much more potent in light of the Trump agenda. “It makes no sense for our federal government to push ahead with imposing a national carbon tax, when our biggest trading partner – and our biggest competitor for investment and jobs – is not going to have one,†said Saskatchewan premier Brad Wall.
His point is sound. Finance Minister Bill Morneau maintains U.S. plans are “speculative†and won’t respond substantively to queries on Ottawa’s response. But sticking its fingers in its ears is unlikely to get the government very far. Everything about Trump is “speculative†at this point; that does not free Trudeau of the responsibility to prepare the country to deal with the consequences.
Pressing ahead with a costly program that is likely to have negligible impact while undermining Canadian competitiveness and endangering jobs is not a responsible or sensible way to act. Ottawa is going to have to accept that life has changed since last Tuesday’s election, and it has no choice but to recognize that reality.
So in a Nut shell lets see add a huge cost to every single thing we produce and sell in canada and then try to compete against countries who are not introducing a wealth distribution tax or are saying enough of this bull shit lets get back to making money and quit trying to please the Bull shit artists like David Kawasaki and Leo the Actor and others.
Our boy is going to go down as the worst Pm in history, I said it over a year ago and wow Im sad that prediction is going to come true.
Whats wrong with Jobs and Oil and wealth. Hm ask a Liberal who like No jobs get a check from Gov and Study.
While a compelling argument, it runs into trouble when measured on effectiveness. If one community works to clean up a river, while several much larger communities continue to overwhelm its efforts by dumping in raw sewage a few metres away, does the struggle still make sense? Especially if it entails a substantial economic cost on the well-meaning community?
Canada now faces this dilemma, as President-elect Donald Trump is on record as claiming climate change is a “hoax†and has pledged to scupper steps taken by the outgoing Obama administration to reduce U.S. emissions.
The effectiveness of anti-emissions efforts was open to question even before Trump’s election. China, the world’s biggest emitter, has continued to build new coal-fired power plants at an astonishing rate. According to the New York Times, last year alone 155 new plants were approved. India, the world’s third-biggest emitter, has likewise continued to increase its use of coal. Last year New Delhi indicated nearly 600 new coal plants were planned, according to reports.
There have been indications both countries would curb those schedules, though mainly due to overcapacity rather than concern about environmental impact. Both are dealing with economic issues that have reduced their immediate needs. But the problems are considered short-term, and a revival would quickly give both countries reason to fire up their coal plants again.
Add the United States to this list, and Canada’s efforts look increasingly fanciful. One estimate indicated Trump’s proposals would increase U.S. emissions 16% within eight years, far outpacing any reductions Canada could hope to make.
That argument becomes much more potent in light of the Trump agenda. “It makes no sense for our federal government to push ahead with imposing a national carbon tax, when our biggest trading partner – and our biggest competitor for investment and jobs – is not going to have one,†said Saskatchewan premier Brad Wall.
His point is sound. Finance Minister Bill Morneau maintains U.S. plans are “speculative†and won’t respond substantively to queries on Ottawa’s response. But sticking its fingers in its ears is unlikely to get the government very far. Everything about Trump is “speculative†at this point; that does not free Trudeau of the responsibility to prepare the country to deal with the consequences.
Pressing ahead with a costly program that is likely to have negligible impact while undermining Canadian competitiveness and endangering jobs is not a responsible or sensible way to act. Ottawa is going to have to accept that life has changed since last Tuesday’s election, and it has no choice but to recognize that reality.
So in a Nut shell lets see add a huge cost to every single thing we produce and sell in canada and then try to compete against countries who are not introducing a wealth distribution tax or are saying enough of this bull shit lets get back to making money and quit trying to please the Bull shit artists like David Kawasaki and Leo the Actor and others.
Our boy is going to go down as the worst Pm in history, I said it over a year ago and wow Im sad that prediction is going to come true.
Whats wrong with Jobs and Oil and wealth. Hm ask a Liberal who like No jobs get a check from Gov and Study.
Comment