Trudeau and climate blondie took something like a 360 person entourage to Paris, and all they did was agree with the status quo.
What Trudeau, climate blondie and the Liberal Party Government didn't do for Canada was defend, lobby for, argue for, persuade any allowances for Canada,
- because of Canada's northern latitude, but not just latitude, but land locked latitude. Here I'm speaking of the differences say between the weather in AB, SK, MB, most of ON and QB. England and Scandinavia have our latitude but require less winter heating due to their location next to the ocean. Russia would also be land locked in the same way.
- because of Canada's carbon sink. Vast areas of untouched forest and grasslands. Argue that Canada's grain industry would have a neutral carbon output due to crops grown.
- because so much of what Canada produces is exported and consumed in other countries, and that carbon used to bring in and export these goods are the responsibility of those using them. Whether it's lumber, oil and gas, grains anything manufactured etc.
- because Canada has been working on a method to reduce/eliminate carbon from coal powered electrical plants. Which would be a useful in places like China and India.
- because of Canada is spread so far and wide, long distances are involved in public transportation and the transportation of exported goods used by others around the world. Those carbon cost should be borne by the end user.
I'm sure others here can add to this list.
Why wasn't that entourage lobbying for Canadians, lobbying for lower commitments in Carbon output? How can every country in the world have the same commitment when conditions vary so widely?
Oh yes, weren't China and India excused from doing anything?
What Trudeau, climate blondie and the Liberal Party Government didn't do for Canada was defend, lobby for, argue for, persuade any allowances for Canada,
- because of Canada's northern latitude, but not just latitude, but land locked latitude. Here I'm speaking of the differences say between the weather in AB, SK, MB, most of ON and QB. England and Scandinavia have our latitude but require less winter heating due to their location next to the ocean. Russia would also be land locked in the same way.
- because of Canada's carbon sink. Vast areas of untouched forest and grasslands. Argue that Canada's grain industry would have a neutral carbon output due to crops grown.
- because so much of what Canada produces is exported and consumed in other countries, and that carbon used to bring in and export these goods are the responsibility of those using them. Whether it's lumber, oil and gas, grains anything manufactured etc.
- because Canada has been working on a method to reduce/eliminate carbon from coal powered electrical plants. Which would be a useful in places like China and India.
- because of Canada is spread so far and wide, long distances are involved in public transportation and the transportation of exported goods used by others around the world. Those carbon cost should be borne by the end user.
I'm sure others here can add to this list.
Why wasn't that entourage lobbying for Canadians, lobbying for lower commitments in Carbon output? How can every country in the world have the same commitment when conditions vary so widely?
Oh yes, weren't China and India excused from doing anything?
Comment