Why the kyoto agreement wont work

[Krusher]

Too bad for Alberta.. huh?

Kyoto sucks

This is a prime example why the US should ignore the whines and never ratify the damn robin hood plan.

[john9001]

sorry , there is no way to fit 51 stars on the flag, wait a min , if we give hawaii it's "freedom" we have room for alberta.

cool , trade hawaii for alberta , hawaii dosn't want to be a state anyway.

[Thrawn]

"Canada can exceed Kyoto and save $200 billion: study

Last Updated Wed, 02 Oct 2002 13:59:37
OTTAWA - Canadians can more than meet the emissions target in the Kyoto Protocol and save $200 billion by conserving energy, according to a study released Wednesday.


INDEPTH: Canada and the Kyoto Protocol

The study was done by the David Suzuki Foundation and the Climate Action Network of Canada.

Ralph Torrie

It sets out steps Canada can take to cut greenhouse gas emissions by 50 per cent by 2030. The Kyoto Protocol calls for emissions to be reduced to six per cent below 1990 levels. "

http://cbc.ca/stories/2002/10/02/kyoto_suzuki021002

You don't know much about Canada or Alberta, do you?

[Thrawn]

Originally posted by john9001
sorry , there is no way to fit 51 stars on the flag, wait a min , if we give hawaii it's "freedom" we have room for alberta.

cool , trade hawaii for alberta , hawaii dosn't want to be a state anyway.

How about Cali for Quebec?

[Gman]

Ya and Thrawn, the "saving 200 billion" is an outright lie.

I work in the environmental monitoring end of the oilpatch, right at the tip of the spear, don't think you're winning ANY argument regarding Kyoto with me, as I know for an absolute fact that those in favour of it have cooked up BS figures using a ridiculous scientfic method.

Just regarding the $ factor, Petro Canada, BP, Exxon/Mobile, and EVERY other major company has ALREADY begun plans to cut spending and exploration not to mention completions DRASTICALLY.  We're talking billions upon billions here in LOSES, not gains.  The oilsands project is already flirting with cancellation, and this SINGLE event could cause the Alberta economy (btw, the ONLY profitable one in the Country, IE the rest of the provinces survive off OUR transfer payments) to tank overnight.


As I said earlier, I work in downwind security and surveillance/detection specifically for all the gases Kyoto is targetting, and I've done it in a number of different countries.  Canada is by far the LEADING country in self policing the releases of regulated emissions.  Hell, it has been 2 years since I've had to write up a violation of any kind, when in the mid 90's I was writing several PER DAY.


Also, you want to split this county up (BAD for non Albertans), there is no quicker way to do it then try to implement Kyoto in it's current abortive form.  The liberals know with absolute certainty that even if Canada takes the most DRASTIC measures in curbing emmissions that there is NO POSSIBLE way for us to meet the criteria.  This results in a huge HUGE penalty that we'll be forced to pay.

Want to be paying 3$ a liter for gas and 30$ a unit to heat your house?  If so by all means support Kyoto.

Again, Canada is one of the if not THE least offensive country in terms of the protocol, yet we are the ONLY ones who are planning on fully implementing it, and shafting ourselves along the way.

I've been pissed off at out government (federal) for many things, but this absolutely takes the cake.  Yes, we need a plan to better our environment, no argument here, but you DO NOT destroy your nation in order to implement a crappy plan that has no chance of success.

Seperation is a very hot topic out West here right now, and I have family in both Provincial and Federal (MP) government from out west here, and believe me, it is not only being discussed, but planned as a possible unavoidable option, no matter what you read in the National Post.  If Kyoto is ratified before the New Year, watch for a nice refferendam shortly thereafter.  The Provincial government has made a TON of overtures through trade missions and other relation building excercises with the USA in the last few years for this exact reason:  It was only a matter of time until Ottawa got its chance to diddly us.

THe minister in charge of this debocale freely admits, almost gloats, that 100,000+ jobs will likely be lost in a matter of a couple weeks once ratification/implementation begins.  When asked by a reporter what they planned to do about this, he said "these workers can be retrained in new industries like solar (doesn't work worth toejam), wind (less than 100 towers in all of Alberta, and already overstaffed) and wave (we're diddlying landlocked,  no oceans nearby) forms of energy production".  In other words, tough toejam card guys, welcome to Newfoundland 60% unemployment, have fun making 1200$ a month.  These workers are the BIG earners in western Canada, the driving force in the retail economy.  When their money is gone, a ton of trickle down effects will occur, and many more layoffs will come about.

From the first article:

It's time, they say, for Alberta to sacrifice a little for the greater good.

I'd like to punch whoever said that in the face.  We get raped by the Federal Government and other provinces on the transfer payment "deal".  We already give a lions share of the profits in order to keep this misgoverned piece of toejam country running.  Talk about missing the forest for the trees, this is the most obvious case of bitting the hand that feeds you in free world history, yet few of the Easterners see it, much less really care.

Well, welcome to the terror dome.  At the very least the east can expect extreme guerilla buisness practices once Kyoto ratifies, much like the NEP of a couple decades ago.  Lots of shallow depth gas wells, and lots of 50$ a unit gas going to Ontario/Quebec.  When people start going bankrupt like we'll be, maybe it'll get reversed.

Whatever else happens, Kyoto will represent a significant transfer of wealth from Canada to Russia.)

Again, just like our gun laws, this appears to be UN backed/based.  Nothing like a little disarmament/wealth redistribution experiment up here in "peacefull" Canada, to see how it will play in the primary target (USA, you betcha).  Think I'm nuts?  Heh, stay tuned to the news over the next few years.

[SirLoin]

NIce post Gman...


I don't know how you can put a dollar value on pollution though...Also coal power plants should be banned now.(I know they are being phased out..but do we need another hole in the ozone before things get done outright?)

[easymo]

How about Cali for Quebec?

How would we tell the difference?

[Gman]

As a sidebar:  A radio show (770, most listened to AM station here) ran a four day call in /email poll regarding seperation from Canada and sucession from Confederation over Kyoto.

26% responded they'd immediately want to leave.

69% responded that they are currently very unhappy with Alberta and the west's treatment from Ottawa, and would consider seperation as a possible solution if Kyoto is ratified.

I don't know about you, but in terms of keeping this country together, those aren't very optimistic numbers.  People out here may be redneck, but they aren't stupid.  A Republic of Alberta selling the USA natural gas, oil, and water would be a pretty profitable place to live, so seperation isn't even being considered as a "worst case scenario" any longer by its many detractors.

[Gman]

How would we tell the difference

Well, both places have boatloads of hot chicks, but Quebec is the only place I've seen in the Western world where it is "OK" for straight guys to dance one on one together in the bar.

[SirLoin]

Separate all you want Gman...When the next generation of cars come out,all you gonna have left to push on the rest of Canada is natural gas and the CFL.

[Gman]

Well, since natural gas is 15x more profitable and easier to produce, store, and control, and drill for, I don't see what the big disadvantage will be to Alberta eventually getting out of the "oil" buisness.

Also, for the next 20 years while this "wonder" tech which is electric cars/power cells start to become mainstream, your province, Ontario, will be sucking hind tit without our transfer payments, to the point of likely collapsing.  Maybe you misunderstood me:  I DONT want to seperate, I just wish for a federal government that isn't retarded.  Unfortunately, the opinion that I have regarding seperation is becoming less and less popular out here, and with Kyoto waiting in the wings, it will be inevitable I fear.

[easymo]

where it is "OK" for straight guys to dance one on one together

I was once tramatized by the sight of straight, Vietnamize guys walking down the street holding hands.  This may push me over the edge.

[Thrawn]

Gman, it's good to hear input from an Albertan.  Ontario doesn't recieve Fiscal Equalization Payments.  We are quite a rich provence also.

http://www.fin.gc.ca/news01/data/01-020_1e.html

You will notice that two other western provences do, however.  I'm on my way to meet some friends, but I will post tomorrow  regarding the other points you bring up.

[Gman]

Thrawn, it's nice to see a lot of people in Ontario who in fact are interested in debating the issue, not just following the pack.

Sorry, in the previous post it should have read Ottawa and not Ontario.  I draw a huge distinction between the federal government and even the city of Ottawa, and an even larger one between the feds and the rest of Ontario.  Sometimes it justs slips out as "Ontario" when we westerners refer to the feds.  I lived in Toronto and Ontario when I was in ATC, and I love the people and cities there, so don't take anything I say as "anti-east" or anything.

This is taken from westcan.org.

Alberta contributed $165 billion more to Ottawa than it received over the past 30 years, says a University of Calgary economist.

That nearly matches the extra benefit Quebec has received from Ottawa from 1961 until 1991, said Bob Mansell, who has studied and charted transfer payments to and from Ottawa.

The sum, although huge, reflects the political reality of Canada: Alberta lacks effective representation at the federal level to protect its interests, he said Tuesday.

Over that period, Alberta has been the only net contributor — though its per capital income is less than in Ontario and British Columbia.

The provincial government has often raised fears of another National Energy Program. Mansell, who estimates that program accounts for $70 billion of the $165 billion in excess contributions, said those fears could be justified.

"Where does the federal government go if it needs more money? To Central Canada? No, because of the population base. So they'll go to Alberta.

"There's a real danger unless this is corrected."

A number of factors account for the remaining $95 billion in excess contributions, say Mansell and Liberal MLA Mike Percy:

This province has a relatively low unemployment rate, meaning it doesn't get a big transfer in unemployment insurance.
Federal offices and purchases of goods and services are low here compared with Ontario and Quebec.
Federal expenditures are handed out as political favors, meaning they'll more often go to the heavily-populated areas than to the West.
Transfer payments to the so-called "have" provinces — Alberta, British Columbia and Ontario — are lower than to the "have-not" provinces and some of these payments are also capped at a certain limit.
Alberta's main industries — agriculture and energy — are capital intensive and thus subject to the federal capital tax.
The province has a richer personal tax base that's fuelled by the youngest and best-educated workforce in Canada. Per capital, Alberta also has the highest participation in the workforce.
Mansell dismissed figures cited in a recent Canadian Tax Journal article showing Alberta contributed $32.9 billion more than it received between 1977 and 1992. They're only rough figures from Statistics Canada that don't include the necessary adjustments, such as the cost to Alberta of the National energy Program.

But factoring in those adjustments doesn't make the picture any better, he said.

"What it means is that the situation is far worse than it seems from Alberta's point of view. It has been by far the largest net contributor on a per capita basis."

According to Mansell's figures, in 1992 Alberta contributed $4.1 billion more than it received, while Ontario contributed $3.6 billion more than it received.

While it isn't unfair that Alberta should be a net contributor, since it has a strong economy, the province should ask why it isn't being treated fair relative to other provinces, Mansell said.

"When we boom, we should pay in and when we bust, we should take out.

"In the case of Alberta, it's been a one-way street. It should be an insurance policy, but it isn't. Why should Alberta be the biggest net contributor when it isn't the highest income province?"

Those sentiments were echoed by Percy, who raised the Canadian Tax Journal figures to demonstrate the system is "not as sensitive to the unique features of Alberta as it should be."

For example, when oil prices dropped in the 1980s, Alberta should have received more than it contributed.

"If you look at it as an insurance policy, it would be nice to think you can draw down on it, " Percy said.

The MLA said he wasn't raising the figures in an effort to bash Eastern Canada, but to show they indicate the system could be fairer.

Premier Ralph Klein said the system is as fair as it can be and it's no surprise Alberta contributes more than it receives.

"It just shows we're willing to do our fair share for Confederation," he said Tuesday. "I just hope we're not punished unfairly for being generous and prudent."

As for Ontario being a wealthy Province, that may be so from some aspects, but Ontario's debt is a lot higher per capita than Alberta, and overall debt is far higher.  In the year 2000, Ontario's Net debt was 107.4 Billion.  Alberta's was 2.5.  Alberta's GDP per capita is also 5000$ per person higher than Ontario.  In 2001 Alberta had a 7.4 Billion budget surplus while Ontario only had 324 million.  We can agree that both provinces are fairly well off, but on a per capita and debt basis, Alberta is better off at the present time.  


Also, ONT may not get direct transfer or equilization payments from us, but with most of the Liberal party being residents of Ontario, and their ridings being there, with all the bilking and hiding/stealing/mismanaging of our money, you can bet a HUGE part of the billions who send to Ottawa end up in Ontario's basket in addition to the poorer provinces, including the western ones like Manitoba and Saskatchewan.  The dozens and dozens of stories broken by the media of Liberal spending sprees and pet projects are all the proof I think anyone needs:  The money has to come from somewhere, and as everyone can plainly see, Alberta contributes the most, and not the most per capita, the MOST, with 1/4 the population of Ontario to boot.

[Krusher]

Originally posted by Thrawn
[BYou don't know much about Canada or Alberta, do you? [/B]

I know the article was written by a Canadian and published on a Canadian web site. I know I have 3 squaddies from Alberta who are not real thrilled by Kyoto. And I know you are a putz

does any of that count ?