FRIHOST FORUMS SEARCH FAQ TOS BLOGS COMPETITIONS
You are invited to Log in or Register a free Frihost Account!


Conservative party criticized for how it deals with climate





kody
UVic researcher's book draws praise, but not from Conservatives
Andrew Weaver criticizes how government deals with climate file

By Margaret Munro
Canwest News Service
The Vancouver Sun
Friday, September 12, 2008
Quote:
When Environment Canada scientists were ordered to refer all media calls to Ottawa earlier this year, B.C. climatologist Andrew Weaver denounced the Harper government for "muzzling" federal researchers.

After the Conservatives announced "aspirational" targets for reducing Canada's greenhouse gas emissions, the University of Victoria researcher said he could see no scientific rationale for the numbers.

"Maybe they have a Ouija board or something," he suggested.

Now the colourful and outspoken academic has a new book, Keeping Our Cool, Canada in a Warming World, coincidentally published by Viking Canada the same week Prime Minister Stephen Harper called the election.

It is getting high praise in some quarters, but it is not likely to win Weaver many friends on the Conservative campaign plane.

The book gives a sobering account of climate change and includes colourful commentary on the increasingly wacky weather -- Weaver was visiting family in Greece during last summer's wild fires. There is also an insider's perspective on the United Nation's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, or IPCC, which was co-winner of last year's Nobel Peace Prize. Weaver was one of the lead authors.

Weaver's overriding message is that the planet is fast approaching the threshold of "acceptable" global warming and society must slash greenhouse gasses by weaning itself off fossils fuels, one of the largest sources of carbon dioxide. But he notes how Alberta, by far Canada's largest greenhouse gas emitter, plans to reduce emissions by 14 per cent by 2050, far less than is required. If Alberta is to only cut emissions by 14 per cent, the rest of Canada would have to cut emissions by 81 per cent to meet Harper's "aspirational" target of 60-per-cent reduction by 2050, he says, calling attention to the "staggering" disconnect between the national and provincial targets.

Environmentalist David Suzuki says the book "should be the final alarm."

Thomas Homer-Dixon, who specializes in environmental security at the Balsillie School of International Affairs, has also endorsed the book saying: "For Canadians, this is the best single book on our climate crisis and what we should do about it."

The book is also laced with harsh criticism of the Harper government's handling of the climate file. He writes that the Conservatives have in the last two years dismantled and cut funding to important federal climate programs and research initiatives, rebuffed calls for action and requests for meetings by leading climate scientists, and "played a major role in obstructing international efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions."

The Conservatives' media office declined to respond to the criticisms raised in the book.

Source - http://www.canada.com/vancouversun/news/story.html?id=e28d9e57-46f8-4ac4-a579-0d987d6a3b75
[MOD - Quote tags and source added. Please ensure you do this yourself next time, otherwise I will issue an AWIT - Bikerman]
kevbailey
Industry over environment. You'd have a tough time finding a politician who truly believes otherwise. (especially in Canada).
eday2010
Climate change is a fraud. It's a cleverly veiled plan to distribute wealth from the rich western countries to the poorer countries. Why do you think there is the Kyoto Accord? You don't have to reduce carbon emissions as long as you pay money for "carbon credits" to countries like China, who pollute more than anyone. Kyoto isn't about reducing emissions so much as it's about moving money around.

Not to mention these climate change nuts talk about carbon dioxide like it's pollution when it's not. It's a building block of life.

People will believe anything.
kody
eday2010 wrote:
Climate change is a fraud. It's a cleverly veiled plan to distribute wealth from the rich western countries to the poorer countries. Why do you think there is the Kyoto Accord? You don't have to reduce carbon emissions as long as you pay money for "carbon credits" to countries like China, who pollute more than anyone. Kyoto isn't about reducing emissions so much as it's about moving money around.

Not to mention these climate change nuts talk about carbon dioxide like it's pollution when it's not. It's a building block of life.

People will believe anything.


You have any clue what you're talking about???

a) Cleverly veiled by who??? You think there's a huge conspiracy that all the have-not nations dreamed up so that they could take wealth from the developed and polluting nations? So cleverly veiled that all developed nations have been fooled by it? Wow.
b) Really? China? You think China is the only one to benefit? Big conspiracy to give money to China? REALLY?
c) Sure it's a building block of life. Doesn't mean we can easily have too much of it. Your same argument could be used for living in a 100% oxygen environment! Go ahead! It's just a building block of life!
d) Yes, you've demonstrated quite well that some people will believe anything, including ignoring plain facts and coming up with your own theories. Way to go!
kody
Frihost screwed up and I double-posted...

Corrected now.
liljp617
I prefer not to call them Conservatives anymore. Not for a bit at least.
kody
liljp617 wrote:
I prefer not to call them Conservatives anymore. Not for a bit at least.


What do you call them?
liljp617
kody wrote:
liljp617 wrote:
I prefer not to call them Conservatives anymore. Not for a bit at least.


What do you call them?


Can't say I have a label for them (them not being the entire political spectrum...but enough of them) at the moment. I know the the label Conservative and it's meaning as far as I know doesn't apply to them at the moment and hasn't for at least a few years.
kody
liljp617 wrote:
kody wrote:
liljp617 wrote:
I prefer not to call them Conservatives anymore. Not for a bit at least.


What do you call them?


Can't say I have a label for them (them not being the entire political spectrum...but enough of them) at the moment. I know the the label Conservative and it's meaning as far as I know doesn't apply to them at the moment and hasn't for at least a few years.


At the same time, the Liberals haven't exactly been typical Liberals during their years of power...
Related topics
Why Some Riot and Some Do Not
really hacker?
More Bad News for Brits? Wealth Redistribution
New Prime Minister in Canada
british Labour party.
Running for president in 2016
Canada and Kyoto
Nicolas Sarkozy, the new french president
20 A Week For Getting Married
!!Global Warming!! Video
Carbon Tax in British Columbia
Supreme Court blocks Republican voter intimidation tactic
Americans want universal health care. Why can't we get it?
Climate Change, Again
Reply to topic    Frihost Forum Index -> Lifestyle and News -> Politics

FRIHOST HOME | FAQ | TOS | ABOUT US | CONTACT US | SITE MAP
© 2005-2011 Frihost, forums powered by phpBB.