[C.M. Burns]

EyeBrock EyeBrock:

The Tories have some longer term limits on pollution and emmission. A rudimentary search would educate you better sandorski. If you are not up to speed on this subject, don't post.

Fuck me! You're one to talk!

$1:

Dion's plan is pure tax, no reductions, no anti-pollution measures, just us poor plebs paying out more for the stuff we need.

The Liberals plan is not pure tax. It is tax and rebate.
It is not just-us-poor-plebes paying more. Typical whiner lie.
The price of CO2 pollution is added to the wholesale price of everything except gasoline. You are free to be as green as you want, to make your own choices and the market still rules.

$1:

The average Canadian household using home heating oil purchases approximately 1800 litres per year. The Green Shift, in year one, will increase the cost of home heating oil for that household by $50 per year or $4.20 per month. In year four, the Green Shift will increase costs by $203 per year or $16.95 per month.
The average Canadian household using natural gas purchases approximately 3,000-3,500 m3 of natural gas each year. The Green Shift, in year one, will increase the cost of natural gas for that household from $57 to $66.50 per year or $4.75-$5.54 per month. In year four, the Green Shift will increase costs from $228 to $266 per year or from $19 to $22.16 per month.

The Green Shift will not be applied to diesel until the second year, but will implement a pollution tax on diesel rising to seven cents per litre by year four. By the end of year four, the Green Shift will have increased the average freight trucker’s total annual operating expenses by less than one per cent or approximately $1,700 per year.

Just about anyone can avoid these costs with some minor efficiencies.

http://thegreenshift.ca/pdfs/green_shift_book_en.pdf

A rudimentary search would educate you better, but you're too busy spewing your bullshit and pointing the finger at others to do any actual work.

[cheryl08]

$1:

and just what did the Liberals do for the environment? they had their chance..."but didn't get it done"


Again with the finger pointing



answer the question.

When Dion was Environmental minister, he won international agreement to extend the Kyoto protocol beyond 2012 at the follow-up to the Kyoto Conference on Climate Change in Montreal in December 2005.

In 2005, Mr. Dion also announced $9.2 million in funding to help protect species at risk and their habitat.

He also made some adjustments too his "project green" to coincide with terms in the Kyoto protocol.

[mtbr]

more paper shuffling with ZERO results.

[saturn_656]

cheryl08 cheryl08:

When Dion was Environmental minister, he won international agreement to extend the Kyoto protocol beyond 2012 at the follow-up to the Kyoto Conference on Climate Change in Montreal in December 2005.

In 2005, Mr. Dion also announced $9.2 million in funding to help protect species at risk and their habitat.

He also made some adjustments too his "project green" to coincide with terms in the Kyoto protocol.

Kyoto is a big screw over for developed countries, especially ones with resource based economies like Canada.

In my eyes, Kyoto is not in Canada's interest.

[cheryl08]

$1:

Kyoto is a big screw over for developed countries, especially ones with resource based economies like Canada.

In my eyes, Kyoto is not in Canada's interest.

The Kyoto protocol does not "coincide with Canada's interests" because people are too lazy to change policies. Honestly there's nothing wrong with attempting to reduces greenhouse gas emissions and fuel consumption, you might not think it's a big deal but the Kyoto protocol is an international agreement, and it's important that Canada, a developed nation sets an example and pressures other countries like China and the United States to amend their policies and then maybe they wouldn't have to bitch to the ICJ to make water a basic necessity because they polluted their water reserves.

[saturn_656]

cheryl08 cheryl08:

The Kyoto protocol does not "coincide with Canada's interests" because people are too lazy to change policies. Honestly there's nothing wrong with attempting to reduces greenhouse gas emissions and fuel consumption, you might not think it's a big deal but the Kyoto protocol is an international agreement, and it's important that Canada, a developed nation sets an example and pressures other countries like China and the United States to amend their policies and then maybe they wouldn't have to bitch to the ICJ to make water a basic necessity because they polluted their water reserves.

No, it has nothing to do with being "lazy" cheryl it is more complicated than that.

Kyoto isn't in our interest because of the way it is written.

Our massive forests suck up a lot of C02 from the air. Kyoto does not recognize this.

Developing countries are rapidly surpassing the developed world in terms of total emissions. Kyoto does not apply to them.

With the whole carbon credit scheme, countries are essentially paying for an imaginary "product" which does not exist. As I Canadian I don't want my government to waste our tax dollars on "hot air".

And if you think Canada can apply enough pressure on the United States or even China to sign onto Kyoto or its successor then I want some of what you're high on, sounds like great shit.

Besides what do "polluted water reserves" have to do with Kyoto?

[ziggy]

cheryl08 cheryl08:

$1:

Kyoto is a big screw over for developed countries, especially ones with resource based economies like Canada.

In my eyes, Kyoto is not in Canada's interest.

The Kyoto protocol does not "coincide with Canada's interests" because people are too lazy to change policies. Honestly there's nothing wrong with attempting to reduces greenhouse gas emissions and fuel consumption, you might not think it's a big deal but the Kyoto protocol is an international agreement, and it's important that Canada, a developed nation sets an example and pressures other countries like China and the United States to amend their policies and then maybe they wouldn't have to bitch to the ICJ to make water a basic necessity because they polluted their water reserves.

You might want to read up a bit on a major contributour to the kyoto protocol(Maurice Strong) and his affiliations with the liberal party and China.

Pay close attention to his ties with China and their coal industry.

[cheryl08]

saturn_656 saturn_656:

cheryl08 cheryl08:

The Kyoto protocol does not "coincide with Canada's interests" because people are too lazy to change policies. Honestly there's nothing wrong with attempting to reduces greenhouse gas emissions and fuel consumption, you might not think it's a big deal but the Kyoto protocol is an international agreement, and it's important that Canada, a developed nation sets an example and pressures other countries like China and the United States to amend their policies and then maybe they wouldn't have to bitch to the ICJ to make water a basic necessity because they polluted their water reserves.

No, it has nothing to do with being "lazy" cheryl it is more complicated than that.

Kyoto isn't in our interest because of the way it is written.

Our massive forests suck up a lot of C02 from the air. Kyoto does not recognize this.

Developing countries are rapidly surpassing the developed world in terms of total emissions. Kyoto does not apply to them.

With the whole carbon credit scheme, countries are essentially paying for an imaginary "product" which does not exist. As I Canadian I don't want my government to waste our tax dollars on "hot air".

And if you think Canada can apply enough pressure on the United States or even China to sign onto Kyoto or its successor then I want some of what you're high on, sounds like great shit.

Besides what do "polluted water reserves" have to do with Kyoto?

Large amounts of CO2 emissions largely effects bodies of water because of their absoroption of CO2. There is about 50 times as much carbon dissolved in the oceans in the form of CO2 and CO2 hydration products as exists in the atmosphere.

Generally, gas solubility decreases as water temperature increases (caused by the greenhouse effect). Accordingly carbon dioxide is released from ocean water into the atmosphere as ocean temperatures rise.

Most of the CO2 taken up by the ocean forms carbonic acid. Some is consumed in photosynthesis by organisms in the water, and a small proportion of that sinks and leaves the carbon cycle. There is considerable concern that as a result of increased CO2 in the atmosphere the acidity of seawater will increase and may adversely affect organisms living in the water. In particular, with increasing acidity, the availability of carbonates for forming shells decreases.

[dino_bobba_renno]

C.M. Burns C.M. Burns:

Just about anyone can avoid these costs with some minor efficiencies.

Minor efficiencies like not buying groceries anymore, not going to work and selling your house and living off the land in a tent.

[saturn_656]

cheryl08 cheryl08:

saturn_656 saturn_656:

cheryl08 cheryl08:

The Kyoto protocol does not "coincide with Canada's interests" because people are too lazy to change policies. Honestly there's nothing wrong with attempting to reduces greenhouse gas emissions and fuel consumption, you might not think it's a big deal but the Kyoto protocol is an international agreement, and it's important that Canada, a developed nation sets an example and pressures other countries like China and the United States to amend their policies and then maybe they wouldn't have to bitch to the ICJ to make water a basic necessity because they polluted their water reserves.

No, it has nothing to do with being "lazy" cheryl it is more complicated than that.

Kyoto isn't in our interest because of the way it is written.

Our massive forests suck up a lot of C02 from the air. Kyoto does not recognize this.

Developing countries are rapidly surpassing the developed world in terms of total emissions. Kyoto does not apply to them.

With the whole carbon credit scheme, countries are essentially paying for an imaginary "product" which does not exist. As I Canadian I don't want my government to waste our tax dollars on "hot air".

And if you think Canada can apply enough pressure on the United States or even China to sign onto Kyoto or its successor then I want some of what you're high on, sounds like great shit.

Besides what do "polluted water reserves" have to do with Kyoto?

Large amounts of CO2 emissions largely effects bodies of water because of their absoroption of CO2. There is about 50 times as much carbon dissolved in the oceans in the form of CO2 and CO2 hydration products as exists in the atmosphere.

Generally, gas solubility decreases as water temperature increases (caused by the greenhouse effect). Accordingly carbon dioxide is released from ocean water into the atmosphere as ocean temperatures rise.

Most of the CO2 taken up by the ocean forms carbonic acid. Some is consumed in photosynthesis by organisms in the water, and a small proportion of that sinks and leaves the carbon cycle. There is considerable concern that as a result of increased CO2 in the atmosphere the acidity of seawater will increase and may adversely affect organisms living in the water. In particular, with increasing acidity, the availability of carbonates for forming shells decreases.

What you just wrote does not address anything I raised in my post, so why did you quote me?

And if you are going to quote wikipedia, credit them and post a link.

Good job changing the paragraphing and editing it to make it look like your own words though.

There is about 50 times as much carbon dissolved in the oceans in the form of CO2 and CO2 hydration products as exists in the atmosphere. The oceans act as an enormous carbon sink, having "absorbed about one-third of all human-generated CO2 emissions to date."[26] Generally, gas solubility decreases as water temperature increases. Accordingly carbon dioxide is released from ocean water into the atmosphere as ocean temperatures rise.

Most of the CO2 taken up by the ocean forms carbonic acid. Some is consumed in photosynthesis by organisms in the water, and a small proportion of that sinks and leaves the carbon cycle. There is considerable concern that as a result of increased CO2 in the atmosphere the acidity of seawater will increase and may adversely affect organisms living in the water. In particular, with increasing acidity, the availability of carbonates for forming shells decreases.[citation needed]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CO2#In_the_oceans

[Wally_Sconce]

after the high cost of fuel, housing, and taxes...I'd bet that more and more Canadians are not saving for their retirement.

[dino_bobba_renno]

cheryl08 cheryl08:

$1:

and just what did the Liberals do for the environment? they had their chance..."but didn't get it done"

Again with the finger pointing

Finger pointing? The Liberals did nothing for 8 years! When the oppositions main criticism of the Conservative plan is the fact it won’t meet it’s Koyto until 2025 I fail to see how the Liberals twittling their thumbs for 8 years isn’t relevant.

You seem to be a big fan of Kyoto so let me ask you something. Why would you support Dion’s green shift over what the Conservatives are proposing? The conservatives are at least trying to place some targets and goals on their plan such which fall in line with Canada’s Kyoto commitments such as:

-Reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 18 per cent from for existing industry by 2010 (based on 2006 levels);
-Reach a reduction target of 26 per cent by 2015;
-Cut emissions by 150 million tonnes, or 20 per cent from current levels, by 2020; and,
-An as-yet-undetermined mandatory fuel-efficiency standard for the auto industry, starting with the 2011 model year.

I don’t see Dion’s plan setting any targets like those. In fact Dion’s suggestion that he might impose tariffs on imports from other countries which don’t meet his as of yet unspecified targets is in direct conflict with the protocol.

The Conservative plan is a modest and couscous approach but a realistic one and it has set targets to meet the Kyoto requirements all be it late. No, it’s not the best we can do but it’s a start and at least it has some benchmarks which to measure it’s performance by. That's something that can't be said of Dion's hairbrained idea.

The conservatives have taken a lot of flack for their plan not being drastic enough to meet Canada’s Kyoto commitments in a timely manner but I personally don’t see Dion running around claiming he can do better. In fact there is absolutely no mention of how he intends to meet Canada’s Kyoto commitments anywhere in his green shift plan. The only mention of Kyoto is on Page 16 of his “Green Shift” booklet where it is only briefly mentioned once and then it drools on about taxes after that.

If you’re so concerned about Kyoto as shown in your other posts why would you support the green shift when all Dion is promising to do is move money around?

[Wally_Sconce]

I'm not big on trusting Liberal promises.

[dino_bobba_renno]

Aging_Redneck Aging_Redneck:

I'm not big on trusting Liberal promises.

Lol, the liberal’s record on keeping promises isn't overly encouraging at best. And here's Dion with a vague plan with so many holes in it isn't even capable of providing shade for a mouse and all he can say when challenged on it's vagueness is "vote for me and then you will see". Give me a break.

[C.M. Burns]

dino_bobba_renno dino_bobba_renno:

Minor efficiencies like not buying groceries anymore, not going to work and selling your house and living off the land in a tent.

• The Green Shift, in year one, will increase the cost of home heating oil for that household by $4.20 per month.
• The Green Shift, in year one, will increase the cost of natural gas for that household from $4.75-$5.54 per month

Dino, if an extra $4.20 each month is going to put you out of house and home then you need to charge more for giving a blow job.