Save the Planet

Remove all ads!

I know some of u are against greenpeace but just a little something to think about. This kind of thing effects us all not just Canada.


"Greenpeace Canada is launching an urgent campaign to keep Canada in the Kyoto Protocol on Climate Change. Kyoto is in grave danger, particulary from U.S. President George Bush and his new energy plan.

In March, U.S. President George W. Bush announced that he would not ratify the Kyoto Protocol on Climate change. Then in May, he unveiled an energy plan calling for more oil, more coal, and more greenhouse gas emissions. At the same time, the plan relaxes environmental standards and weakens regulations for building nuclear power plants. All this spells disaster for the global climate.

Environment minister David Anderson has refused to confirm Canada's commitment to Kyoto, indicating to the European contries that Canada may join Bush in abandoning the agreement. At the same time, Natural Resources Minister Ralph Goodale is pushing for a Continental Energy Plan that threatens to make Bush's plan Canadian policy.

Canada's oil and gas exports to the US are already skyrocketting. Jean Chretien is now setting up Canada up to supply even more fossil fuels to the US., which already produces 25% of the worlds greenhouse gas emmissions with only 4% the population."

I am sorry to say but this is a sad sad thing to think is happining in the year 2001. Not only do we have the technology to make energy without harmful emmissons but we are still to greedy to even try.

 

See? I told you Bush was dumb! see! See! SEE!
Mwahahahahahahahahaha!!!!!!
And greedy.

But seriously. Canada is a beautiful country. So is the United States And Kyoto.
If this happens, Than Our poor, poor Earth will suffer the consequences.
Just Think: Water will overflow, Earthquakes will ravage the earth, And the four horsemen will...
Well that won't happen. But it will make the air here harder to breathe and generally make living Conditions worse.
Maybe that's why Canada recently went to No. 3 on the best places to live poll Instead of No. 1!
(And U.S went to no. 6. Maybe there is a thing called Karma.)


And U

 

At this moment, there is no proof that the level of carbondioxide in the atmosphere acually has anything to do with global temperature. Global climate changes has happened all the time through the ages, and we can't do anything to prevent it.

 

Yeah right, do you believe that yourself Mollusken, I'm not saying that the climate won't naturly change in the long run (of course it will it has happened before and it will happen again), but the human race is playing a big part in the changing the climate for the worse. I heard things that New York has it's own wind flow or something like that. And we can do something to prevent, thing like recycling and stuff like that.

 

Pretty stupid ain't it, Economy is more important then the earth... On the other side, when Bush lowered the CO2 it wouldn't be good for the economy (and America is so afraid for Europe ) and when the Economy goes not very well people wouldn't pe satisfied with Bush as president so it's not only Bush who does something wrong, it's the whole mentality.

 

As an ex academic I too am slightly concerned about the rigour employed in most of the surevys we hear about, both those trying to prove that emmissions have no affect as well as though proving there is an affect.

However, as a sensible human being I think it seems obvious that pumping loads of crap into the atmosphere is not a very clever plan when there are viable alternatives. Anyway, those with an interest in this might like to see a recent news report claiming that the rate of damage is even worse than originally feared:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/sci/tech/newsid_1435000/1435009.stm

 

Man HAS some influence indeed in the periodical climate changes. The great emission of carbon dioxide fastens the global warm up, so the new energy plan could lead indirectly to a disaster. If I understand this correctly, the government has permitted the plan...Too bad, I didn't like the old George Bush, nor do I his son!

 

Would it really ruin the economy to make a serious effort to reduce fossil fuel usage? If we made the effort to invest in fuel efficiency, recycling, renewable energy sources etc., we would be able to reduce emissions to much lower than they are now, while boosting the "green" sector of the economy. Aside from the initial investment, it generally saves money to go green, which is then available to be put back into the economy. Really it's just a case of overcoming inertia and having the political will to take a lead, rather than be led by vested interests (and yes, we have them in the UK too).
I've also heard speculation that with growing scientific acceptance and proof of the causes and effects of global warming, developing countries would have a good case for sueing countries which pollute for the damage caused by climate change, which could result in huge lawsuits.

 

in reply to
"At this moment, there is no proof that the level of carbondioxide in the atmosphere acually has anything to do with global temperature. Global climate changes has happened all the time through the ages, and we can't do anything to prevent it.
"

the problem is that greenhouse gas induced temperature rise is superpositioned on top of
naturally occuring variances in climate.
Still the concensus is that at least 0.6 degrees of the rise form the last century comes from mans activity.

Besides, You can have much better use of oil insted of burning it. eg. in the chemical industry and so on.

Many people views USA:s (read Bush) acting concernig international environmental treaties as arrogant and careless.

I personally thinks it is important that USA is a part of the environmental discussion and hope one day even the Rio treaty might be signed by the states.

Im not saying that we should all go back to living in caves but the fact is that if there will be a man made climatic change It would be much cheaper to start to think about solutions now instead of leaving it to our children and grandchildren.

We dont own the world, we´ve borrowed it from our children.

uh oh!
ranting for all Im worth!

bongo

 

I live in very (ecologically weived) clean country. Here, the nature and environment are almost untouched. I think the same is with Tal (Slovenia).
Only damn thing that bothers us are sulfur rains that are coming with clouds from your countries!
We don't have such poisonous industries here...

Am I lucky? No.
Am I guilty? No.
Am I crazy? No.
Am I lieing? No.
Am I gonna join Save the Planet cause? No.

People, clean the front of your own home - then ask others to clean theirs.


P.S. I support GreenPeace's efforts - but if politicians and CEOs don't change their heads, those efforts are for nothing.

 

If the US is willing to reduce CO2, when will they come up with some proposals to do it? We need to act yesterday, but failing that, today is better.
Forests will act as carbon sinks, but when a tree dies most of the CO2 is released back into the atmosphere. A mature tree is pretty much in equilibrium, and only absorbs a small amount of CO2. So you can only use forests if you are prepared to actually plant new forests every year to absorb the CO2 you emitted in that year; and even then, it only puts off the reckoning, because eventually the trees will die and emit their CO2 back into the atmosphere.
Everyone, developed and developing world alike, needs to reduce carbon emissions. However we emit far more per head than people in the developing world, so the need is far greater for us to act now.

Hmmmm...did I really want to contradict a mod as a level 1 goblin?

[This message has been edited by Maldir (edited July 12, 2001).]

 

Now we are getting into logging issues.. a big concern in British Columbia as most of our economy is based on logging.

There are alot of alternatives to using lumber for houses, paper etc. We need to leave old growth forests alone. Not only does it take 10 years for a tree to mature. But when you cut down 100 year old trees you destroy the wildlife and ecological system in that area! So you replant the trees, a little late after you have destroyed all the animals homes, and the land has been ravaged by clear cutting.

The answer is not planting more trees it is in finding alternatives, such as hemp! or recycling old cars and such to use for building houses. Another point... we have the technology to drive electric cars, or solar cars, yet we are so bent on speed and money we fail to implement them to the general public!!

 

BTA - Honda and a few other companies have "hybrid" cars that use gas & electric. They get 40+ miles/gallon.

My wife & I are considering re-building a condo with a new system that generates its own electrizity. Using solar and a few other techniques, it can supply a fairly adequet supply. Initial cost is fairly high, $20,000, but the return on investment (at least $300/month to the utility company) will come quickly!

 

hmmm there are ways of creating electricity that are not damageing to the environment, such as wind and water.

Here we have great water currents which can be harrnessed to make electricity.. not to mention wind power!

I must also add that there are ways around everything. This is the millenium we have the technology and the smarts.. it is just the gas and oil companies are fighting us all the way... Namely GREED!

[This message has been edited by Kitiara (edited July 12, 2001).]

[This message has been edited by Kitiara (edited July 12, 2001).]

 

the bottom line is... these are harmful to the air we breathe... A few jobs or some money does not add up to the amount of people that now have asthma.. or the permanent damage we are doing. Obviously something has to be done and done soon!

Money needs to be invested and technologies created to solve these problems.

And burning coal is definately not going to help!

 

I fully support Greenpeace