Metals mines association, accounting for most federal enviro assessments, OK with Bil

[jazz]

Why do socialists bash the very thing that provides for their socialism? Talk about sadist.

Oil is one of the reasons you can walk into a hospital and not have to pay to get treated. And we want to kill this off and natter about a few govt benefits given to the industry and then dream some green fairy tale.

You guys are nuts.

Did you read the article. We need to build 2 hydro dams a year to offset oil. Or billions of solar panels or millions of windmills. It will never happen.

[the big wheel]

Why do socialists bash the very thing that provides for their socialism? Talk about sadist.

Oil is one of the reasons you can walk into a hospital and not have to pay to get treated. And we want to kill this off and natter about a few govt benefits given to the industry and then dream some green fairy tale.

You guys are nuts.

Did you read the article. We need to build 2 hydro dams a year to offset oil. Or billions of solar panels or millions of windmills. It will never happen.

Oil had its day its on the way out. Get in touch with the reality of what the rest of the world is doing they are leaving us behind our paid off representatives want to suck out the last dollars they can meanwhile everyone else moving forward. It’s so dumb beyond belief how sheep follow.
The last oil boom doubled our farm expenses can’t you see that? The pst is still paying for the last boom and the walk to the hospital. Lmao.

[Hamloc]

On the CBC national Thursday night Rosemary Barton was interviewing environment minister Catherine McKenna. Rosemary brings up that the Parliamentary Budget Office had released a report that the carbon tax would have to be $102 a tonne by 2030 for Canada to meet the targets it agreed to under the Paris accord. Rosemary asked the minister why the federal Liberal's had stated that they wouldn't raise it above the planned $50 a tonne and how Canada would meet its targets? Well the minister talked about the plastics ban and electric cars and then she said this(from memory) that the carbon tax was only going to get us 20% of the way to our targets anyway!!!! This to me is quite a revelation when on national television the environment minister who has recently announced the imposition of a federal carbon tax on Alberta as of Jan. 1,2020, because in her words there has to be a price on pollution says that the carbon tax will make such a small difference. So in reality it is just another useless tax!!!!!!

[the big wheel]

On the CBC national Thursday night Rosemary Barton was interviewing environment minister Catherine McKenna. Rosemary brings up that the Parliamentary Budget Office had released a report that the carbon tax would have to be $102 a tonne by 2030 for Canada to meet the targets it agreed to under the Paris accord. Rosemary asked the minister why the federal Liberal's had stated that they wouldn't raise it above the planned $50 a tonne and how Canada would meet its targets? Well the minister talked about the plastics ban and electric cars and then she said this(from memory) that the carbon tax was only going to get us 20% of the way to our targets anyway!!!! This to me is quite a revelation when on national television the environment minister who has recently announced the imposition of a federal carbon tax on Alberta as of Jan. 1,2020, because in her words there has to be a price on pollution says that the carbon tax will make such a small difference. So in reality it is just another useless tax!!!!!!

I agree the whole issue of pollution and global warming are 2 different things being stated as the same thing on purpose. we know pollution is something we don’t want so maybe if global warming is caused by pollution then we won’t want that either so we ll pay for it with a tax is the deception. And many have fallen for that bukkshit. Use the tax to bring along the other technologies to lessen pollution and it would have merit. As it is it’s a joke claiming to save our world when all it is a money grab.

[chuckChuck]

The price of oil and gasoline went very high during the boom and that was okay?

Not a peep from Conservatives leaders about how it was going to cost consumers and kill the economy. It cost my farm many extra thousands of dollars. Consumers were hit hard by higher prices. Gasoline prices often jump 5-10 cents a liter before holiday long weekends. But that's okay?

Put a small carbon tax of 4.5 - 11 cents cents a liter to encourage conservation and innovation and its the end of the world! Quite the double standard.

Brad Wall spends 1.2 billion dollars of taxpayers money on an expensive and unproven system for carbon capture and storage at Boundary that taxpayers and consumers will pay for. In essence a another form of a carbon tax and that's okay?

The Sask Party, UCP and the Conservatives have so many double standards it hard to keep up.

Moe and Kenney defend the oil industry but hardly a peep about the crisis in agriculture.

Moe doesn't want any agri recovery programs or enhancements to agri stability because that will cost the province hundreds of millions in costs sharing with the federal government. Farmers are going to get very little attention and the oil industry gets all the oxygen!

The oil industry are these governments priority. Everbody and everything else are not important.

[chuckChuck]

Taxes are used to pay for education, healthcare, infrastructure, roads, a justice system, social programs, OAS, GIS, the military, subsidies to agriculture............ the list is long.

Just because you don't believe there is climate change, or that carbon dioxide is a pollutant in excess if it changes the climate, doesn't make a carbon tax any different than all the other taxes you and I pay. It's one tool to fight climate change. Energy already has numerous taxes applied.

Scheer, Moe, and Kenney want to use regulations to reduce carbon emmisions (another form of tax) which also have costs that consumers and business will pay for.

Scheer, Moe, and Kenney want to do as little as possible and let taxpayers pay for the all the damage from climate change and the cost of mitigation.

Their goal is to protect the interests of the oil industry and socialize the costs of climate change. In effect privatize the profit and socialize the harmful effects!

Many people want all the benefits and protection of living in a developed country but don't want to pay for it. They are wannabe free riders.

[chuckChuck]

I agree the whole issue of pollution and global warming are 2 different things being stated as the same thing on purpose. we know pollution is something we don’t want so maybe if global warming is caused by pollution then we won’t want that either so we ll pay for it with a tax is the deception. And many have fallen for that bukkshit. Use the tax to bring along the other technologies to lessen pollution and it would have merit. As it is it’s a joke claiming to save our world when all it is a money grab.

Burning fossil fuels causes air pollution and release massive amounts of carbon dioxide.

Carbon dioxide in excess is a pollutant and unwanted byproduct of burning fossil fuels. The natural carbon cycle provides enough carbon dioxide to sustain life.

Releasing millions upon millions of tons of stored carbon annually into the atmosphere in addition to the natural carbon cycle is unsustainable.

Only a small number of ill informed idiots think you can keep burning massive amounts of fossil fuels for thousands of years and not cause massive changes to the climate. Harper said we we would stop using fossil energy by 2100 for this reason.

Water is essential to life just like Carbon dioxide. Excess water in the wrong place will damage your property, kill your crops and you.

[furrowtickler]

Burning fossil fuels causes air pollution and release massive amounts of carbon dioxide.

Carbon dioxide in excess is a pollutant and unwanted byproduct of burning fossil fuels. The natural carbon cycle provides enough carbon dioxide to sustain life.

Releasing millions upon millions of tons of stored carbon annually into the atmosphere in addition to the natural carbon cycle is unsustainable.

Only a small number of ill informed idiots think you can keep burning massive amounts of fossil fuels for thousands of years and not cause massive changes to the climate. Harper said we we would stop using fossil energy by 2100 for this reason.

Water is essential to life just like Carbon dioxide. Excess water in the wrong place will damage your property, kill your crops and you.

You are the climate cult leader ... lol

[fjlip]

All hail the infallible leader...

[jazz]

Interesting the people who support climate change and its BS also hate the oil patch. So basically the only reason they support the carbon tax is they beleive its a wealth distribution to their pocket from corportations. So envy and socialism again. nothing to do with climate change. Cant create socialism ditectly because its a death cult, so slip it in the back door.

[furrowtickler]

Interesting the people who support climate change and its BS also hate the oil patch. So basically the only reason they support the carbon tax is they beleive its a wealth distribution to their pocket from corportations. So envy and socialism again. nothing to do with climate change. Cant create socialism ditectly because its a death cult, so slip it in the back door.

That is 100% correct in every word 👍

[AlbertaFarmer5]

Burning fossil fuels causes air pollution and release massive amounts of carbon dioxide.

See, you are learning, pollution and CO2 are not the same thing, this is progress, well done, our efforts have not been in vain.

Carbon dioxide in excess is a pollutant and unwanted byproduct of burning fossil fuels. The natural carbon cycle provides enough carbon dioxide to sustain life.

One step forward, two steps back. But don't give up, it takes time to break old habits when something has been brainwashed into you for so long, just keep trying. And no, the natural carbon cycle is a sink, which was well on its way to taking CO2 to levels that will no longer support life.

Releasing millions upon millions of tons of stored carbon annually into the atmosphere in addition to the natural carbon cycle is unsustainable.

Absolutely, and on this issue we both agree. We are releasing CO2 into the atmosphere at highly unsustainable rates, and given the short residence time, there will be little easy stored beneficial CO2 left for future generations to release, to maintain crop yields and the greening of the planet. Any other source of CO2 such as limestone will require massive amounts of energy to liberate, to maintain our standards of living, at a time when energy will be in very short supply.

Only a small number of ill informed idiots think you can keep burning massive amounts of fossil fuels for thousands of years and not cause massive changes to the climate. Harper said we we would stop using fossil energy by 2100 for this reason.

Exactly, because at current rates of growth, only an idiot would think that we have enough economically accessible fossil fuels to last for thousands of years. Case in point...

Water is essential to life just like Carbon dioxide. Excess water in the wrong place will damage your property, kill your crops and you.

And I've asked you before, ( and provided the answer) at what level does CO2 become excessive enough that the detriments outweigh the benefits, and how practical is it that we could achieve such lofty levels?