Global Warming/Climate Change Super Thread

[Weinie]

It’s -15 here with a biting wind. It’s not warm here.

But it would be -17 and a killing wind had the Liberals not intervened with their carbon tax.

 

[Quirky]

But it would be -17 and a killing wind had the Liberals not intervened with their carbon tax.

I think it would be -13, because the world is too hot now from all our carboning. I'm already seeing climate change hysteria from the BC snowfall, somehow this is human caused? "Extreme" weather events can now be blamed on humans, because climate emergency. Instead of adapting to the rising sea levels for example, we keep building or rebuilding closer to the shoreline. When the infrastructure is destroyed, again, we can keep up the hysteria.

After Sumas lake re-appeared last year, were there any plans put in place for prevention other than thoughts and prayers?

 

[kev994]

High gas and heating prices will cause people and companies to be financially strapped and not afford expensive new technology to emit less emissions. When trucking companies don't make money they hang on to trucks for longer, older less clean burning trucks. When factories struggle they don't invest in scrubbing tech and research in ways to operate cleaner. People will not replace older furnaces and air conditioners when they don't know where their gas bill money will come from.

Laws demanding better emission technology will get ignored and cheated because life will be unaffordable otherwise. People will start burning wood, coal, garbage and whatever they can get to keep warm. This is especially true in poorer countries. How does this help the environment at all.

The liberal mindset is always toward more government to solve every problem. A lot of problems need less government and less taxes. This is one of those problems. Make environmentally friendly choices the cheapest option and People will choose it. Lots of people have updated their home hvac/insulation through the various incentive programs that have been offered.

It sound logical but I disagree. Companies DO invest to reduce their emissions because their emissions cost money. You’re suggesting that if there wasn’t a carbon tax then companies, out of the goodness of their hearts, would just invest their ‘spare capital’ into greener technologies just to feel good about themselves, rather than paying out a dividend. Are you kidding me? That’s insane, they’re going to do what’s more profitable, and with a carbon tax, it becomes increasingly more profitable to invest in more efficient machinery, especially when it’s due for replacement anyway.
There are currently incentives to improve your home insulation, especially for low income homes, it becomes more attractive to take advantage of these when the opportunity cost is higher. It’s free and people done bother, so maybe they will when it costs more to not do it.

 

[suffolkowner]

It sound logical but I disagree. Companies DO invest to reduce their emissions because their emissions cost money. You’re suggesting that if there wasn’t a carbon tax then companies, out of the goodness of their hearts, would just invest their ‘spare capital’ into greener technologies just to feel good about themselves, rather than paying out a dividend. Are you kidding me? That’s insane, they’re going to do what’s more profitable, and with a carbon tax, it becomes increasingly more profitable to invest in more efficient machinery, especially when it’s due for replacement anyway.
There are currently incentives to improve your home insulation, especially for low income homes, it becomes more attractive to take advantage of these when the opportunity cost is higher. It’s free and people done bother, so maybe they will when it costs more to not do it.

If cost isnt a mover than what is? Years ago when we bought a new piece of heavy equipment the fuel savings was 50000 a year over our least fuel efficient equipment. It was an quite a shock. Fuel was expensive that year but still

 

[Quirky]

How does a gasoline tax of 37c per liter by 2030 help the environment? You want to reduce vehicle use, tax it by $2 a liter to see real changes.

 

[kev994]

How does a gasoline tax of 37c per liter by 2030 help the environment? You want to reduce vehicle use, tax it by $2 a liter to see real changes.

I think the idea is to gradually increase the cost so that people can make decisions on whether to buy a more efficient vehicle as it’s due for normal replacement. The amount of people in this country who drive a giant pickup to their jobs downtown and never take them off the pavement is mind boggling.

 

[Weinie]

I think the idea is to gradually increase the cost so that people can make decisions on whether to buy a more efficient vehicle as it’s due for normal replacement. The amount of people in this country who drive a giant pickup to their jobs downtown and never take them off the pavement is mind boggling.

But that is their choice. Free choice shouldn't be predicated by a government mandated tax scheme that will enable the ruling government to spout "we are green" and mandating that everyone else should be green (or else). Thar be fascism.

 

[Colin Parkinson]

I think it would be -13, because the world is too hot now from all our carboning. I'm already seeing climate change hysteria from the BC snowfall, somehow this is human caused? "Extreme" weather events can now be blamed on humans, because climate emergency. Instead of adapting to the rising sea levels for example, we keep building or rebuilding closer to the shoreline. When the infrastructure is destroyed, again, we can keep up the hysteria.

After Sumas lake re-appeared last year, were there any plans put in place for prevention other than thoughts and prayers?

Much lauding about the "heroic efforts to protect the critical pumping station" Of course our media after the fact does not ask "Why did there need to be heroic efforts to protect something that should have been protected?"

In my job we were always forcing people to build their bridges to build to the Q100 (100 year flood event) Much wailing and gnashing of teeth. After the Rutherford Creek highway and rail bridge blew out thanks to a 200 year event, with a number of deaths. Suddenly BC Highways saw the light and now builds to the Q200. Nothing like a mini-disaster to say "I told you so".

 

[suffolkowner]

But that is their choice. Free choice shouldn't be predicated by a government mandated tax scheme that will enable the ruling government to spout "we are green" and mandating that everyone else should be green (or else). Thar be fascism.

government influences behaviour through taxes all the time and adjusts it accordingly

 

[Kat Stevens]

I think the idea is to gradually increase the cost so that people can make decisions on whether to buy a more efficient vehicle as it’s due for normal replacement. The amount of people in this country who drive a giant pickup to their jobs downtown and never take them off the pavement is mind boggling.

And those of us who are rural use those trucks every day for hauling everything from lumber to feed to god knows what else should take it in the ass because of those urban cowboys, right? Mmmm, pillows taste good.

 

[Weinie]

government influences behaviour through taxes all the time and adjusts it accordingly

Meh. See above.

 

[kev994]

But that is their choice. Free choice shouldn't be predicated by a government mandated tax scheme that will enable the ruling government to spout "we are green" and mandating that everyone else should be green (or else). Thar be fascism.

But there are costs to society that aren’t being paid by the individuals making these choices (externalities), this is just the monitization of these costs. You may disagree, and that’s your choice.

 

[OldSolduer]

I drive a Dodge Ram because I want to. I own guns cause I want to.

Governments don't like either of those - we do live in a free society, right?

 

[Weinie]

But there are costs to society that aren’t being paid by the individuals making these choices (externalities), this is just the monitization of these costs. You may disagree, and that’s your choice.

First world problems/considerations. And I would rather live in the first world.

 

[kev994]

And those of us who are rural use those trucks every day for hauling everything from lumber to feed to god knows what else should take it in the ass because of those urban cowboys, right? Mmmm, pillows taste good.

And in Manitoba and Ontario (I haven’t lived in the other provinces) your larger carbon tax rebate accounts for that.

 

[kev994]

I drive a Dodge Ram because I want to. I own guns cause I want to.

Governments don't like either of those - we do live in a free society, right?

You can do that, you just need to pay for it

 

[Good2Golf]

From the same source:

• In 2019, Canada was the highest GHG emitting country per capita among the top 10 emitting countries with 19.6 t CO2 eq

View attachment 75199

Interestingly Canada would drop to 3rd per capita behind US and RUS if we stopped shipping all the BC coal ripped out of the Rockiness and sold to China and Asia for their steel production.

Math: 27 megatonnes of coal exported by Canada in 2021, which at 2.68 tonnes CO2 per tonne of coal burned = 72 megatonnes CO2/yr or approx 2mt/capita, so 19 - 2 = 17mt per capita.

Coal, monthly production and exports

Data presented at the national and provincial levels, by coal types and uses (bituminous, sub-bituminous, etc.) and by volume of production and exports. Not all combinations are available.

www150.statcan.gc.ca

 

[OldSolduer]

You can do that, you just need to pay for it

I don`t mind that - as long as the taxes are reasonable.

 

[suffolkowner]

Meh. See above.

you find solutions or you dont and others do. I doubt theres too many people on this site that have bought and used as much fuel as I have. I never tried to waste it though

 

[Weinie]

And in Manitoba and Ontario (I haven’t lived in the other provinces) your larger carbon tax rebate accounts for that.

I don't get a carbon rebate tax, because apparently I make too much money.