How will Canada keep warm now?!?

[Flubber]

hmmm

I haven't looked at the details but in a fair treaty Canada should be ok if credit is given for natural gas production.

OH and diss nice pic--- but on the other side, geologists have found stumps and trees underground in the far Canadian north above the current tree line -- this indicates a more temperate climate in that region in the past

[Asher]

By the way, here's Canada's token effort to abiding by Kyoto: http://www.climatechange.gc.ca/onetonne/english/






Ohhh, Canada...

[Kontiki]

Originally posted by My Wife Hates CIV


The issue with Kyoto is that it screws nations like Canada and the United States, which have a developed industrial base, and it lets completely off the hook an la nation like China, which has no restrictions and is allowed to build factories and pollute like crazy in order to catch up with the rest.

How is that in any way relevant? Kyoto may not be the best framework (it's probably not, in fact), but is your argument really "as long as China isn't a signatory, we should never do anything about our own emissions"?

[JimmyCracksCorn]

Originally posted by My Wife Hates CIV



why should we (US) sign up?? whats in it for us?? why let all the little guys catch up??

Well, a healthier environment for one thing.

And what this does is provide very real incentives towards creating a more efficient and cleaner industrial base. Once this happens, and it already is, it will be you guys (the US) playing catch up. Its temporary pain for long term gain.

[JimmyCracksCorn]

Originally posted by Asher
By the way, here's Canada's token effort to abiding by Kyoto: http://www.climatechange.gc.ca/onetonne/english/



Ohhh, Canada...

I hate Rick Mercer

[Asher]

Originally posted by JimmyCracksCorn
I hate Rick Mercer

I'm waiting for them to pull out all the stops and get Rita MacNeil to be their spokesperson.



Or Maybe Anne Murray?

[My Wife Hates CIV]

i just dont agree. what good will it do the earth if the US does this and a enormous nation like China does not?? It will not help the planet... only hurt those nations which have a developed industrial base.

[dannubis]

Originally posted by My Wife Hates CIV



why should we (US) sign up?? whats in it for us?? why let all the little guys catch up??

why should all the little guys give a **** about your (the US's) concerns? yet you bomb the hell out of them...

[Hot Mustard]

Originally posted by JimmyCracksCorn

I hate Rick Mercer

Really? Why? He rants just like I do, according to my wife.

[My Wife Hates CIV]

Originally posted by dannubis


why should all the little guys give a **** about your (the US's) concerns? yet you bomb the hell out of them...

who ever said they should? or do?? As far as the bombing... well... you know where i stand on that.

[dannubis]

in the greenhouse ?

but basically i agree that the developping countries should also be bound to treaties like kyoto. however, the fact that they won't commit themselves doesn't let the greatest emitor of greenhouse gasses of the hook though. your cars still burn twice as much fuel as the average european car. heck, i wouldn't even consider buying a car that uses more than 7l/100km. mine currently uses about 4.5l/100km.

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by Kontiki


How is that in any way relevant? Kyoto may not be the best framework (it's probably not, in fact), but is your argument really "as long as China isn't a signatory, we should never do anything about our own emissions"?

from whitehouse.gov

US GHG goals:

"Reduce the Greenhouse Gas Intensity of the U.S. Economy by 18 Percent in the Next Ten Years. Greenhouse gas intensity measures the ratio of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions to economic output. This new approach focuses on reducing the growth of GHG emissions, while sustaining the economic growth needed to finance investment in new, clean energy technologies. It sets America on a path to slow the growth of greenhouse gas emissions, and – as the science justifies – to stop and then reverse that growth:
In efficiency terms, the 183 metric tons of emissions per million dollars GDP that we emit today will be lowered to 151 metric tons per million dollars GDP in 2012.
Existing trends and efforts in technology improvement will play a significant role. Beyond that, the President's commitment will achieve 100 million metric tons of reduced emissions in 2012 alone, with more than 500 million metric tons in cumulative savings over the entire decade.
This goal is comparable to the average progress that nations participating in the Kyoto Protocol are required to achieve. "

[Wezil]

Originally posted by My Wife Hates CIV


I just picked canada because I think this will hurt them the most.

You are under the mistaken impression we will actually fulfill our commitments to Kyoto.

[My Wife Hates CIV]

Originally posted by Wezil


You are under the mistaken impression we will actually fulfill our commitments to Kyoto.

i dont think any of the members who signed up will. Or even can!

[Wezil]

We can't unless the feds want to hammer Alberta again. Despite the Liberals obvious contempt for all things western, I doubt they have the stomach or gonads to try that fight again.