Scary Movie
Well, I just finished watching "An Incovenient Truth". Without a doubt, the most important film my generation (or any other for that matter) will see. Shocking facts and figures, which quite simply, I was unaware of prior to seeing the film. I knew, of course, that global warming was a serious issue (I have never been one of those doubters) but I had no idea that the problem was as advanced as it is...I suppose that the smoke screen raised in popular media by the "powers that be" was doing what it was intended to do - hide the bare facts. Thanks to Al Gore (I will never laugh again at those old Bloom County cartoons that mock him or Tipper) the truth has been put out there, in a very popular and widely embraced movie.
Of course, the back issue, which is hinted at, but never fully developed, is that there are forces at work (in the USA, and elsewhere - I do feel shame in my own pathetic Stephen Harper led government, and their "environmental" platforms) that are actively trying to stall the global warming movement in an effort to create personal gain. Political practises are currently in the hands of big business, big oil, and other such powerful lobby groups. In Canada, the discovery and subsequent oil boom in Alberta have shaped our nations environmental policies for the last few decades; after all, it would be a shame to miss out on the fortune in the sand before it was completely used up, environment be damned - there is money to be made in those tar sands, and if we suddenly lowered our oil demand (with cheap hybrid cars, or hydrogen cars, and so on), that cash cow would become lean indeed, and a great many rich and powerful people would lose out of their "due"...say, isn't Harper from Alberta? No, I am sure that it has no sway on his political agenda...fucking American puppet...
Before I lose myself completely and go on at great length in an angry tirade about the state of our global environmental situation (it makes me so angry, and yet makes me feel so impotent), I will say this - at least with the weather we have had this year, the Canadian people have "woken up" (except maybe in Alberta) and have made the environment our top national issue...which has made the Conservatives shit themselves, as they had no set platform set up, outside of raping every resource they could lay their hands on...so, they are attempting to come up with something to pacify the people, while still trying to kybosh our commitment to Kyoto...and ITS NOT WORKING. It looks like in the upcoming budget, they will recieve a vote of non-confidence in the House, and that will force an election in the spring. There is a god!
All we have to do now is hope that their successor gov't will not squander the responsibility that they will be entrusted with. Oh, for the days when we had politicians who did what was right and good for no better reasons than that, rather than do what they think will be popular with whomever they serve (which is not always the people)...yes, I for one miss the days of Pearson and Pierre. Men who had the courage to face the tasks we have ahead of us now...lets hope a new Trudeau shines for Canada before it is too late! He had what it would take...is there another like him in Canadian (or even international) politics today? We shall see...
posted by G. Richard Ludkin @ 1:00 PM
3 Comments:
OMG. The sky is falling. We must do something now. Money is no object. Please, double my already heavy tax burden. Ban my car. Shut down all the power in Canada. But.....we still still don't meet Kyoto, and whatever we Canadians may save by Draconian measures equals 3 months in China alone. Sending billions to the far east who closed their inefficient old factories for economic reasons ten years ago solves nothing either.
Dude, maybe you have never experienced good propaganda before. This is what it looks like and does. Al Gore's not a scientist and he has a political agenda. Even if the Earth warms up another 3 degrees, it was like that in 1300, before the industrail revolution.
Weather's weird, a hundred years means nothing to a four billion old planet and there's no proof it's us.
Oh, and other societal forces also kick in - urban boomers feel guilty about the good life in the West and want to feeling in control by Doing Something. Now. North America needs enemies, and when it doesn't, it has hysterias regularly every decade -like the anti-nuke hysteria, the child abduction hysteria. Be Scared is the theme that unites these outbreaks. This is just the latest.
Let's have clean air and water - but no public executions SVP. Reason over passion.
Try this, if your mind is still open.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FFXM0claHq4
As a culture, we crave big simple solutions because the world's a big scary place. But simple answers are usually wrong. Shades of gray.
Tom Wicker wrote about entering Attica as a negotiator - the unarmed man is the one who looks crazy.
When phrases like "everyone says," and "it's all decided" fill the air, that's scary.
Remember, these big Revolutions with simple ideas usually kill a lotta people, all in the name of a good cause - Russia, France, Iran.....
& try this, too........
Kyoto targets, tooth fairies and emissions ambitions
By GWYN MORGAN
Globe & Mail,
Monday, February 19, 2007 – Page B2
When an issue gains as much momentum as Greenhouse Gas Emissions (GHG), reality is often lost to a combination of rhetoric and sloganeering. Effective action must be based on an understanding of how hydrocarbon energy is used and what realistic alternatives are currently available.
Let's look at the three big categories: electric power generation, transportation and heating/air conditioning.
Most of the world's electricity is generated from coal. While electricity is also generated by burning fuel oil and natural gas, the fact that coal is the most emissions-intensive hydrocarbon means that reducing emissions from coal-fired plants is the biggest challenge.
So what are the alternatives? Hydropower is emissions free, but there are few remaining undeveloped hydropower sites. The northern rivers of Quebec and Labrador are some of the few with undeveloped potential, which explains Quebec's ability to come close to meeting Kyoto targets. But on a world scale, additional hydro development is not going to reduce coal-fired power emissions.
Wind power has been expanding rapidly. Surprisingly enough, Alberta is a leader, but the province recently announced that it could not accept much more wind power into its electricity grid. Other jurisdictions will soon be doing the same. That's because there are frequent occasions when the wind is not blowing. If the proportion of wind power gets too high, consumers will face brownouts when they need power the most, such as on cold winter or hot summer days.
Then there is solar power, technically termed photo-voltaics. Unfortunately, current solar panel technology suffers from a combination of low capacity and high cost. Special applications to charge battery banks in remote locations or on your sailboat are great, but we can't count on much help from solar for a long time to come.
So, is there any big source of electricity with the potential to materially reduce coal-fired emissions? Well, yes -- nuclear power.
The replacement of coal-fired power generation with nuclear is the major reason the EU countries are closer to meeting their Kyoto targets than Canada. Modern nuclear plants have zero emissions, and despite public angst, they are safe to operate and the technology of spent fuel sequestration is sound. Greenpeace and other NGOs continue to oppose nuclear, while, at the same time, calling for the phase-out of coal-fired power. On the other hand, it's interesting to hear recent musings by a senior Alberta cabinet minister on the merits of nuclear to reduce emissions from the oil sands.
Now, on to transportation. Essentially all vehicles, railways, ships and airplanes are fuelled by oil in its various refined forms. Any who think electric cars will help should reread the previous section.
Two bio-fuels are emerging -- ethanol and plant-derived oils. Currently, ethanol is produced by the fermentation of corn and grains, as is whisky. This fuel has two limitations. One is the amount of agricultural land available beyond food requirements. The other, and bigger, concern is known as "energy-out minus energy-in," the latter being driven up for ethanol by fertilizers, farm fuel and the extraction process. I was interested to read recent comments by the CEO of Commercial Alcohols acknowledging that while there is substance to this concern, current research is focused on producing ethanol from cellulose, such as wood waste, straw, corn stalks and even grass. It may take years, but the prize is significant.
Next, to plant-derived oils, such as blending palm oil with diesel fuel to create bio-diesel. Some jurisdictions are shooting for at least 5-per-cent bio-oil content in five to 10 years. Palm oil prices are already skyrocketing and a recent Asian trip demonstrated the law of unintended consequences. A pervasive blue haze shuts out the sun as a result of the rampant burning of rain forests for palm oil plantations in Indonesia.
This not only destroys the GHG absorption capacity of the rain forest, but also adds more emissions. In the feel-good rhetoric of government-mandated bio-diesel, who has calculated the full consequences?
What about hydrogen? Like electricity, hydrogen is not a primary energy source, but rather a means of delivering energy. Hydrogen is produced from the conversion of natural gas, already under supply pressure in North America. The other method of producing hydrogen is the electrolysis of water, which requires huge amounts of electricity.
Finally, heating and air conditioning. While undeveloped countries use coal and wood, developed countries use mainly natural gas and fuel oil. Here it's not so much a case of finding alternatives, but rather increasing efficiency.
The bottom line: There are many compelling reasons to reduce hydrocarbon use but there are no immediate large-scale alternatives.
It takes at least 10 years to get a nuclear plant from the drawing board to production, and breakthroughs such as cellulose-based ethanol need research and development time.
Believing that Canada can achieve the one-third emissions reduction required by Kyoto over the next five years is tantamount to believing in the tooth fairy. Major emissions reductions are possible, but realistic time frames and continued R&D are the only realistic approach.
In the meantime, we're going to have to focus on using less.
Gwyn Morgan is the retired founding CEO of EnCana Corp.
Of course Al Gore has a political agenda...he is a politician. Making the environment his focus, however, is not wrong headed. It makes him relevant to the entire globe, not just America. He may not be a scientist, but he does not have to be one, he only needs to use the information they provide, and make that information available to the masses.
"No proof its us"!? How naieve. Try reading "State of the World 2000" and then get back to me on that one. I, for one, choose to get my information from reliable scientific documents, not from youtube (where anyone with a cam can post anything they want). Was the earth in a warming phase in the Middle Ages? Certainly. But the heating trend does not compare to the trend today, in any way shape or form. Your argument sounds like I am reading the Republican Party's environmental research papers...foolish, and dangerous. I have seen, first hand, the effects of this warming trend, from the Austrian Alps to the Hudson Bay Lowlands...No proof its us...spare me your tripe.
As for fear...oh yes, the media is very good at driving fear up...however, the popular media does not make global warming an issue to fear...it presents the same weak kneed arguments reasonable does...passes it off as "weather" and asks for the proof of human responsibility - and when that proof is documanted, it fails to show that...because media is in the hands of big business.
Sticking your head in the sand and denying global warming is not reason...it is stupidity...and becoming upset about the state of our planet is not an excess of passion...it is wisdom.
I am not afraid of higher taxation...in Canada, our tax levels are amazingly low, do not come close to those of the Scandanavian nations, for example, so please, do not cry the economic harp either. Safeguarding the planet is beyond a price tag.
Of course, "Nature always bats last", it is just going to be a question of whether or not humanity will be a part of the game centuries hence...Denial of global warming is a death sentence to our whole civilization...
Post a Comment
<< Home