Trudeau's carbon pricing | Page 2 | GTAMotorcycle.com

Trudeau's carbon pricing

Wynne will fold like an origami set.

Fold?? She'll be first in line to make life more expensive for Ontarians. The provincial Liberals have proven it countless times already. Now that the witch has a like-minded moron leading the country, we're well and truly forked.
 
We should be voting this idiot out our carbon foot print is so small compared to most other nations on this ball of mud


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
 
Fold?? She'll be first in line to make life more expensive for Ontarians. The provincial Liberals have proven it countless times already. Now that the witch has a like-minded moron leading the country, we're well and truly forked.


uhm, it's the people aka voters that are the problem...Wynn was elected by the ppl.
 
uhm, it's the people aka voters that are the problem...Wynn was elected by the ppl.

Yep, Toronto is sadly full of partisan idiots and young voters with no comprehension/memory of what happened in the previous 10 years of Liberal leadership.
 
Just some numbers:

Canada is the 9th largest emitter (country wise) of CO2 in the world.
This accounts for ~1.6% of the worlds CO2 emissions.
We account for 0.48% of the worlds population.
We are the eighth highest per capita in the world (15.8 t).
We produce three times the world average per capita.
We produce twice as much per capita as China, almost nine times per capita as India.
We are very close to the US per capita (16.5 t).

On a per person (per capita) level we are large emitters. As a total percentage we have a small population but we are still top 10. Countries like India and China although much lower emitters per capita they have such large populations they are still higher up than us in total.

Saying, well we are only 1.6% so we should do nothing is like an alcoholic saying "I am not an alcoholic because all you people together drink more than I do..."

BTW, CO2 is not just about global warming. It contributes to things like the acidification of oceans and lakes, causing serious eco system problems.

It also comes from burning fossil fuels which also comes down to air quality...

As for the tax, not sure it will do much.

Theroretically at best. The science behind that claim is ridiculously suspect. Since you brought up the oceans; 330ish gigatonnes per year emitted; anthropogenic contribution... under 30 gt. Furthermore, we're at a near historic low for atmospheric CO2. Were the oceans acid in the Jurassic period? Nope; but CO2 was double what it is now.

co2_temperature_historical.png


This graph and associated paper also shows no coupling of CO2 and temperature.. Do some research, see the other side of the discussion, and ask yourself what is more reliable; empirical data, or predictive computer modelling.


p.s. Air quality in N.A. is the best it's been in 150 years, despite the consistent rise in CO2 emissions. Do not confuse a naturally occurring trace gas with harmful compounds such as sulfur dioxide and nitric oxides. Ask Europe how the push for diesel, to reduce CO2, has worked out for their air quality.
 
as far as harper & pals goes, the daily idiotic trudeau 'nice hair' soundbite on the radio for at least a year alone, said everything i needed to know about 'em, bye bye & get lost,

talk about losers, outa touch, out to lunch & lost in space,

looks like wynn is next
 
Last edited:
Theroretically at best. The science behind that claim is ridiculously suspect. Since you brought up the oceans; 330ish gigatonnes per year emitted; anthropogenic contribution... under 30 gt. Furthermore, we're at a near historic low for atmospheric CO2. Were the oceans acid in the Jurassic period? Nope; but CO2 was double what it is now.

co2_temperature_historical.png


This graph and associated paper also shows no coupling of CO2 and temperature.. Do some research, see the other side of the discussion, and ask yourself what is more reliable; empirical data, or predictive computer modelling.


p.s. Air quality in N.A. is the best it's been in 150 years, despite the consistent rise in CO2 emissions. Do not confuse a naturally occurring trace gas with harmful compounds such as sulfur dioxide and nitric oxides. Ask Europe how the push for diesel, to reduce CO2, has worked out for their air quality.

Why not look at the incidence of asthma over the years. I think you'll find something very interesting.
 
Not sure how any right minded person can take a position that humans have not contributed to pollution.
Nature did not make cars, trains, planes, chemicals we created, and all the crap we burn (into the air) and the crap we dump into the oceans.

We are in a sealed bubble...of course we are hurting ourselves.
 
I'm no chemist by any means, but a gallon of gas weighs just shy of 7lbs. How does burning 7lbs of gas create 18lbs of CO2? I think your math may be off by a bit. The three largest sources of pollution in order are: meat farming, oil production, and clothing production. Given the sheer volume of farming done in Canada, and the oil production in the tar sands we're destined to have high levels of pollution output. Trying to save the world by lowering tail pipe emissions is a joke.
 
I'm no chemist by any means, but a gallon of gas weighs just shy of 7lbs. How does burning 7lbs of gas create 18lbs of CO2? I think your math may be off by a bit. The three largest sources of pollution in order are: meat farming, oil production, and clothing production. Given the sheer volume of farming done in Canada, and the oil production in the tar sands we're destined to have high levels of pollution output. Trying to save the world by lowering tail pipe emissions is a joke.

https://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/contentIncludes/co2_inc.htm
 
Why not look at the incidence of asthma over the years. I think you'll find something very interesting.

Does CO2 cause asthma now? That's a new one. We'll add it to the list;

Tornados
Hurricanes
Drought
Extreme heat waves
Extreme winter weather
Asthma

... Is there anything CO2 can't do?
 
Last edited:
Not sure how any right minded person can take a position that humans have not contributed to pollution.
Nature did not make cars, trains, planes, chemicals we created, and all the crap we burn (into the air) and the crap we dump into the oceans.

We are in a sealed bubble...of course we are hurting ourselves.

As I said before, there is a great distinction to made between harmful chemical compounds which cars and industry used to emit unabated, and CO2. We are increadibly clean in this regard when compared to even 1990, and the air quality record backs that up. How many air quality alerts this year? Compare that with 1998

NOx, Sulfur dioxide, those are two biggies which form particles leading to smog and associated issues. Those, if you're informed, are at industrial age all time lows in North America. China, no; Europe, no... Dirty coal power generation and Diesel prevalence respectively. But here, we've made great strides in real problem areas over the last 30 years; CO2 is not one of them.

When the founder of green piece comes out and says environmentalism has been high jacked, somethings amiss.
 
Last edited:
Trudeau's new tax will add 11 cents more per litre of gas all-in. People are dreaming if they think that won't rise even higher. We'll be paying over $2/litre by the time the idiot is done.
 
Theroretically at best. The science behind that claim is ridiculously suspect. Since you brought up the oceans; 330ish gigatonnes per year emitted; anthropogenic contribution... under 30 gt. Furthermore, we're at a near historic low for atmospheric CO2. Were the oceans acid in the Jurassic period? Nope; but CO2 was double what it is now.

co2_temperature_historical.png


This graph and associated paper also shows no coupling of CO2 and temperature.. Do some research, see the other side of the discussion, and ask yourself what is more reliable; empirical data, or predictive computer modelling.


p.s. Air quality in N.A. is the best it's been in 150 years, despite the consistent rise in CO2 emissions. Do not confuse a naturally occurring trace gas with harmful compounds such as sulfur dioxide and nitric oxides. Ask Europe how the push for diesel, to reduce CO2, has worked out for their air quality.
Who needs Y-axes, right? They're all for show.
 
As I said before, there is a great distinction to made between harmful chemical compounds which cars and industry used to emit unabated, and CO2. We are increadibly clean in this regard when compared to even 1990, and the air quality record backs that up. How many air quality alerts this year? Compare that with 1998

NOx, Sulfur dioxide, those are two biggies which form particles leading to smog and associated issues. Those, if you're informed, are at industrial age all time lows in North America. China, no; Europe, no... Dirty coal power generation and Diesel prevalence respectively. But here, we've made great strides in real problem areas over the last 30 years; CO2 is not one of them.

People really need to distinct between air pollution and CO2 in atmosphere, land and oceans ... the one can be dealt with relatively quickly and is very localized as we have proven over the last 5 years or so. As you have pointed out, we don't know what is a smog day anymore in GTA.

The CO2 is a totally different beast though and is not local at all, quite the opposite .... most people don't realize how long it takes to get rid of it back to levels the planet can long term sustain.

I don't get, how can anyone debate though Canada's contribution to overall CO2 emissions, regardless which sides you are on. Or that hundreds of top level scientists are rigging some numbers .... I know Trump can say that, but anyone else?
 
Trudeau's new tax will add 11 cents more per litre of gas all-in. People are dreaming if they think that won't rise even higher. We'll be paying over $2/litre by the time the idiot is done.

What do you propose?

Not only you will be paying a lot more than 2$/l at some point, but you will also not be able to buy a new house without solar roof, you will not be able to buy new vehicle with any sort of ICE propulsion etc. ... yep that's all coming, probably faster than this forum can accept.
 
Who needs Y-axes, right? They're all for show.

Feel free to source the paleoclimate data for yourself. The graph is simple relationship comparison. You want accurate numbers? Good luck, as any scientist not lying through his teeth would attest, the resolution gets sketchy after a few 100 thousand years. Do try to included ALL available proxies in your research, unlike the IPCC, which refuses to use anything other than ice cores.

People really need to distinct between air pollution and CO2 in atmosphere, land and oceans ... the one can be dealt with relatively quickly and is very localized as we have proven over the last 5 years or so. As you have pointed out, we don't know what is a smog day anymore in GTA.

The CO2 is a totally different beast though and is not local at all, quite the opposite .... most people don't realize how long it takes to get rid of it back to levels the planet can long term sustain.

I don't get, how can anyone debate though Canada's contribution to overall CO2 emissions, regardless which sides you are on. Or that hundreds of top level scientists are rigging some numbers .... I know Trump can say that, but anyone else?

And what can the planet sustain? Is this settled now? Last I checked, all we have on that front is a computer spitting out a result, based on subjective input parameters, programmed by a human being. Can you point me to a model made in the last 20 years which has come even remotely close to meting it's own predictions? Aren't we all supposed to be underwater by now?
 
Fuel prices affect the price of *everything*. Bear that in mind.
 

Back
Top Bottom