Monday, December 14, 2009

Intensity, inshmensity

After all this talk about Canadian sovereignty, standing up for Canada -- we're just going to be following the US policy of cutting "intensity" of pollution by a wimpy 10% instead of real pollution cuts overall? The forests of Alberta (a carbon sink cutting pollution) are being destroyed arrogantly while emissions from the tar sands will increase 165% by 2020 as the area mined grows to an area larger than Nova Scotia. Unacceptable. It's even worse than the intensity cut suggested a couple of years ago. We need a real environment policy, one that defines Canada as its own country. No wonder why we're a joke at Copenhagen this week.

Vote for this post at Progressive Bloggers.


Anonymous said...

It is not acceptable for the world to reap our resources while we get stuck with the GHG emissions.

Should we let them freeze and/or starve?

Johnny Test said...

Shutting down the oil sands means risking a national unity crisis and wiping out 40 billion in royalties of which Quebec gets 8 billion in transfers. Not so easy is it?

BlastFurnace said...

There are ways to extract the oil without using so much water or natural gas or emitting so much pollution or destroying lakes, and it really isn't that much more expensive than how it's done right now -- they're out there, but big oil won't use them. This could be a growth industry but there's no will to do so.