Alberta fumes over Chretien's promise to ratify Kyoto

[notyoueither]

Originally posted by Tingkai
Economic growth in places like China has not resulted in the impoverishment of developed countries nor has it led to an increase in pollution from countries like China.

Are you sure about this?

I've heard of cities in China where the air is very thick.

[Tingkai]

Originally posted by notyoueither


That's great! Then we can expect no taxes on production then.

No, please god, no. Don't even suggest anything to do with that three-lettered abbreviation.

[Tingkai]

Originally posted by notyoueither
Are you sure about this?

I've heard of cities in China where the air is very thick.

A 1997 report by the UN, IIRC (it might have been the World Bank) found that overall pollution levels had not changed between 1980-1995.

The reason is that as the Chinese economy developed, industry switched to newer, less polluting equipment. Natural gas is replacing coal-fired stoves in kitchens which is also reducing pollution.

However, you are right. Pollution is still a significant problem.

[blackice]

The same poll said 65% didn't know what Kyoto entails.

Actually it said 64% have read or heard of Kyoto. In that Ipso/Ried poll I can find no referance to what you said here, how about a link? Maybe we are viewing two different polls.

Leave it to the wonderful Chretien-funded CBC to leave that little detail out.

Read above.

In that same poll it appears most Albertans agree with some of what you have said here but most believe it is worth it.

I don't see how Ottawa can force Alberta to abide by it, and Alberta has vowed never to implement it.

Article 2
Section 1 clause (v) (v) Progressive reduction or phasing out of market imperfections, fiscal incentives, tax and duty exemptions and subsidies in all greenhouse gas emitting sectors that run counter to the objective of the Convention and application of market instruments;
When the British North America Act, Canada's original constitution, was enacted in 1867, the concept of environment did not exist as we know it today. The constitution did not stipulate who, between the provincial and the federal governments, was responsible for maintaining a healthy environment for Canadians. Rather, both levels of government were given powers that permitted them to pass legislation to deal with environmental issues.

Kyoto is strictly about resource control

Actually yes but it has several different components, interesting enough some of the components are similar in nature to parts of the NEP. Had those parts of the NEP been kept Canada would not be ranked so high today in pollution. Kyoto then would be a no show, you have to love some of them Albertans, always thinking of the rest of the world.

Kyoto is about restricting the use of these resources to the point of reducing pollution.

Part of the problem would you not agree, but that too is only part of the agreement.

it's only because the production has been moved out of that country to developing nations or other industrialized nations not under Kyoto's scope.

Well under Kyoto all nations must share the pollution cutting technologies "especially" with developing nations. So wrong again, they are also implimenting an agreement similar to the Montreal Accords that sees the IMF or the world bank fund these changes to developing countries. I think Asher is in that 20% that do not know what Kyoto is and what it does, must be that Klein government information he reads.

I can't think of any way for them to implement it without screwing over Alberta and to a lesser extent Ontario.

Interesting to point out here Ontario has the second lowest GHG, s and is predicted to continue that trend.

Other information Canada ranks 8th in the world for GHG's that include two developing countries btw China and India without them Canada would be 6th.

Canada ranks an increable 4th in per capita GHG emissions.

Industries in canada will have increased GHG's by 2010 by 10% 1990.

Transportation 34%

Fossil fuel industries an increadable 64% it appears Klein is doing lots.

Commercial 34%

Electricity generation 25%

GHG's by province Atlantic 23%, Quebec 11%, Ontario 17%, Manatoba 24%, Saskatchewan 40%, Alberta 40%, B.C. 36% these are projected forcast's from1990 to 2010.

It appears the province with the most cash could do more to enhance the energy based economy and reduce pollution. Maybe rather than putting money into the haritage fund for future use. Thye could put money into use today, a small percentage is all it would take.

[Boris Godunov]

Asher vs. Tingkai, Episode XXXVIII...

*makes popcorn*

[Urban Ranger]

Originally posted by notyoueither
You mean like the one that's been going on in S and SE Asia for 30 years now?

Per capita? Highly doubtful.

[November Adam]

Originally posted by Tingkai

Economic growth in places like China has not resulted in the impoverishment of developed countries nor has it led to an increase in pollution from countries like China.

Tingkai, you do realize there is a large cloud of pollution over Asia due to its growth. China doesn't have the most effecient pollution control, and it has a very large population of polluters.

Edit. nevermind I see this has been addressed.

[Giancarlo]

I thought I was alone in being against the illogical and fatally flawed Kyoto agreement here? Guess not. Really what does the agreement accomplish besides cutting back on future development?

The problem with China is they don't want to spend squat on energy development and are sticking to the use of coal. Can kyoto accomplish anything there? Absolutely not. Infact it will allow some countries to pollute more.

[blackice]

Really what does the agreement accomplish besides cutting back on future development?

Create future industries, a less polluted world just for starters. What future developement are you refering to?

The problem with China is they don't want to spend squat on energy development and are sticking to the use of coal. Can kyoto accomplish anything there? Absolutely not. Infact it will allow some countries to pollute more.

Seems to me they are spending lots on energy developement, cando reactors for one example. Nice counter balance while some pollute more the others are reducing. Somewhere down the pipe they will have to bow to international pressure and follow the logical course of action. Stop polluting the planet or there will be no planet.

[Giancarlo]

Originally posted by blackice
Create future industries, a less polluted world just for starters. What future developement are you refering to?

Kyoto doesn't create anything but creates on hell of a mess.

Seems to me they are spending lots on energy developement, cando reactors for one example. Nice counter balance while some pollute more the others are reducing. Somewhere down the pipe they will have to bow to international pressure and follow the logical course of action. Stop polluting the planet or there will be no planet.

Therefore countries like China can pollute more. International pressure... phseeh... look at reality. Stop polluting the planet or there will be no planet? There was probably more CO2 in the atmosphere before humans were around.

[Tingkai]

Originally posted by Fez
The problem with China is they don't want to spend squat on energy development and are sticking to the use of coal.

Fez has obviously never heard about a very tiny energy project called the Three Gorge Dam.

[Urban Ranger]

Originally posted by November Adam
Tingkai, you do realize there is a large cloud of pollution over Asia due to its growth. China doesn't have the most effecient pollution control, and it has a very large population of polluters.

Edit. nevermind I see this has been addressed.

Adam,

The brown cloud has been created in India.

[Urban Ranger]

Originally posted by Fez
The problem with China is they don't want to spend squat on energy development and are sticking to the use of coal. Can kyoto accomplish anything there? Absolutely not. Infact it will allow some countries to pollute more.

You clearly do not have any inkling of ideas on how much China spends on energy development. You probably haven't seen the windmill farms, the solar stoves, the hydroelectric stations, the nuclear power plants. You know, the whole works.

[blackice]

South China's Guangdong Spends Heavily on Air Pollution Control 5.7 billion yuan (about 687 million US dollars)

http://english.peopledaily.com.cn/200108/01/eng20010801_76238.html

Look they are doing it without *****ing, I guess they have a real concern about thier people.

[blackice]

State Institutions Ordered to Conserve Energy
China Online, 7 November 2001
Government agencies, which account for 5 percent of total energy consumption in China, have been ordered to make sweeping changes to save energy. The State Economic and Trade Commission (SETC), the Ministry of Finance (MOF) and the State Council’s Departmental Affairs Administration jointly issued a proposal on November 5th telling governments at various levels and state-supported entities and institutions including the army, armed police, education entities, medical treatment institutions, and research institutions, what they must do to conserve energy.
The report said the government spends 80 billion yuan (US$9.66 billion) each year on energy, constituting a large proportion of China’s budget. Each state institution will be required to set specific energy-saving goals and lay down practical energy-saving measures. Government purchasing agents were ordered to place priority on acquiring energy-saving facilities or equipment. In addition, government institutions were ordered to dispose of facilities and products that are not energy efficient. The proposal requires an examination of all lighting, heating and cooling equipment, office equipment and vehicles.

Zero Energy Growth by 2040
China Daily, 11 November 2001
The Chinese Government vowed on Monday to speed up efforts to save energy to ensure national energy security and to maintain sustainable development during the country's 10th Five-Year Plan (2001-05). According to Li Rongrong, minister of the State Economic and Trade Commission (SETC), increasing efforts are indispensable because there is tremendous potential in saving energy. The government aims to decrease its energy consumption from 2.77 tons of standard coal per 10,000 yuan of gross domestic product in 2000 to 2.2 tons by 2005.
According to Li, zero growth in energy use should be achieved by 2040. He also noted that regulations and standards should be developed soon to fully implement the national Energy Saving Law which was launched in 1997.

Beijing Warms to Clean Energy
China Daily, 19 November 2001
Some 60 percent of the boilers in Beijing now use clean energy such as natural gas and electricity to produce heat. An official with the municipal management committee said that there are still at least 5,000 small-sized boilers using coal for heating in the city. All boilers are scheduled to switch to clean fuel by 2008. Burning coal for heating in the winter has long been a problem since it causes serious air pollution. Before 1997, Beijing consumed 28 million tons of coal each year, which produced 90 percent of the sulfur dioxide and 50 percent of the floating particles in the air, according to official statistics.

I guess the bottom line is Chinda is doing a lot, I do not see it hurting thier economy you? It could it be the powers at be see this as a warning?
Could it be they see this new industry slipping away?
Imagine if China lead the world to the clean energy industry.