It's Official: Canada can do nothing to stop climate change.
Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 ... 12 Next
Rev_Blair @ Fri Feb 02, 2007 10:48 pm
Quiet Zip...they're all looking out their windows to see if there's an excuse out there.
OnTheIce @ Fri Feb 02, 2007 11:04 pm
Canadaka Canadaka:
If it is our means, should Canada not be a leading example to the world, rather than use lame excuses to do little or nothing. We may not be able to have a huge impact directly due to our small population, but we can carry a lot of weight to influence other nations.
I think it something we could be proud of as a nation.
I think it something we could be proud of as a nation.
Why not spend that money we'll be sending to other countries via Kyoto and use it here in Canada to improve our emmissions?
With that money, we could move forward on getting homes and businesses running on solar power, get rid of coal plants, etc etc etc.
If the government subsidized the cost of solar power, I'd be all over it. It's just too expensive now to make it worthwhile for the homeowner.
There are a lot of things we could do here in Canada with that money.
ridenrain @ Fri Feb 02, 2007 11:11 pm
Zipperfish Zipperfish:
Whether or not it was a bad deal, at Kyoto we signed on the dotted line as a nation, and that should count for something.
...like Afghanistan?
Id bet most Canadians would flip when they hear that our only alternative under Kioto is to buy billions of dollars of hot air. Id also bet that the'll burn the fool who signed such a huge contract with no public debate.
Rev_Blair @ Fri Feb 02, 2007 11:18 pm
$1:
Why not spend that money we'll be sending to other countries via Kyoto and use it here in Canada to improve our emmissions?
Why not provide Kyoto-creditable aid? Not buying credits, but actually doing something? Hey, help a developing nation, reduce emissions, develop an industry.
Oh, sorry, that wouldn't be "made in Canada" enough, would it? Letting a US corporation drill our oil is made in Canada, but having a Canadian company install its technology in a foreign country isn't.
Kind of gives a whole new meaning to getting your oil drilled, don't it?
Rev_Blair @ Fri Feb 02, 2007 11:20 pm
$1:
Id bet most Canadians would flip when they hear that our only alternative under Kioto is to buy billions of dollars of hot air.
Yeah, but most Canadians are smart enough to know that isn't our only option.
Canadian_Mind @ Fri Feb 02, 2007 11:30 pm
Kyoto is fucked now, a lost cause. it was a good idea when it came about, but we did fuck all about it, so the alternative would be to buy the goddamned carbon credits.
Now we shoudl pull out, cut our losses, and do something liek we shoudl have done 10-15 years ago. Mr. Harper speaks of needing new tech. I agree. funnel 1 billion or more into research PER YEAR aswell as subsidise energy alternatives.
Another thought, why not build massive solar generators in the north? not pesky 500 meter devices, but things that stretch 5 kilometers across or more to provide our energy needs. I'm not talking far north, but around and above the 55 latitude line where there aren't to many people living.
sandorski @ Fri Feb 02, 2007 11:40 pm
Canadian_Mind Canadian_Mind:
Kyoto is fucked now, a lost cause. it was a good idea when it came about, but we did fuck all about it, so the alternative would be to buy the goddamned carbon credits.
Now we shoudl pull out, cut our losses, and do something liek we shoudl have done 10-15 years ago. Mr. Harper speaks of needing new tech. I agree. funnel 1 billion or more into research PER YEAR aswell as subsidise energy alternatives.
Another thought, why not build massive solar generators in the north? not pesky 500 meter devices, but things that stretch 5 kilometers across or more to provide our energy needs. I'm not talking far north, but around and above the 55 latitude line where there aren't to many people living.
Now we shoudl pull out, cut our losses, and do something liek we shoudl have done 10-15 years ago. Mr. Harper speaks of needing new tech. I agree. funnel 1 billion or more into research PER YEAR aswell as subsidise energy alternatives.
Another thought, why not build massive solar generators in the north? not pesky 500 meter devices, but things that stretch 5 kilometers across or more to provide our energy needs. I'm not talking far north, but around and above the 55 latitude line where there aren't to many people living.
Even the 6 months/year there is reasonable sunlight it would still be very weak. The further from the Equator the less effective Solar Power becomes. Wind Power might be feasible up North though.
Rev_Blair @ Fri Feb 02, 2007 11:57 pm
$1:
Even the 6 months/year there is reasonable sunlight it would still be very weak. The further from the Equator the less effective Solar Power becomes. Wind Power might be feasible up North though.
That's completely wrong. Go learn facts, then try again.
Patrick_Ross @ Sat Feb 03, 2007 12:04 am
Always4Iggy Always4Iggy:
Listen, brainless con prick, we all know from about a hundred years ago exactly what Canada's share of the total is. Only a syphilitic brain like yours would keep harping on the 2% number, just as ridenrain's equally infected brain harps on the payments to china, to the glee of the gonorrhea infected redneck.
Syphilis? Gonorhea? That would have to be one of the most intriguing Freudian slips I have ever heard in my life.
Does someone have issues?
Scape @ Sat Feb 03, 2007 12:21 am
ShepherdsDog ShepherdsDog:
While humanity has exacerbated the shift in climate, this is hardly the first time that the Earth has experienced a warming trend, nor is it the warmest that it has ever been. During the Eocene, Earth had an almost uniform tropical climate from pole to pole. This was 60 - 63 million years ago, a mere blink in geological terms.
That was about the same time earth was hit by a very large rock.
sandorski @ Sat Feb 03, 2007 12:26 am
Rev_Blair Rev_Blair:
$1:
Even the 6 months/year there is reasonable sunlight it would still be very weak. The further from the Equator the less effective Solar Power becomes. Wind Power might be feasible up North though.
That's completely wrong. Go learn facts, then try again.
Completely?
Canadian_Mind @ Sat Feb 03, 2007 12:33 am
sandorski sandorski:
Canadian_Mind Canadian_Mind:
Kyoto is fucked now, a lost cause. it was a good idea when it came about, but we did fuck all about it, so the alternative would be to buy the goddamned carbon credits.
Now we shoudl pull out, cut our losses, and do something liek we shoudl have done 10-15 years ago. Mr. Harper speaks of needing new tech. I agree. funnel 1 billion or more into research PER YEAR aswell as subsidise energy alternatives.
Another thought, why not build massive solar generators in the north? not pesky 500 meter devices, but things that stretch 5 kilometers across or more to provide our energy needs. I'm not talking far north, but around and above the 55 latitude line where there aren't to many people living.
Now we shoudl pull out, cut our losses, and do something liek we shoudl have done 10-15 years ago. Mr. Harper speaks of needing new tech. I agree. funnel 1 billion or more into research PER YEAR aswell as subsidise energy alternatives.
Another thought, why not build massive solar generators in the north? not pesky 500 meter devices, but things that stretch 5 kilometers across or more to provide our energy needs. I'm not talking far north, but around and above the 55 latitude line where there aren't to many people living.
Even the 6 months/year there is reasonable sunlight it would still be very weak. The further from the Equator the less effective Solar Power becomes. Wind Power might be feasible up North though.
Even if you were correct in your statement, it would, to me, be even more reason to build something over 5 kilometers across. However, solar power does not require visible light to operate, atleast not outdoor solar panels. what it requires is solar radiation. Radiation penetrates the cloud layer, and during the winter months can even be magnified by the cloud layers (hence warmer temperatures on cloudy days).
Alas, it is not as effective as at the equator. for every degree north you lose 1.1 percent efficiency. so a solar collector at 55 degrees north would be only be 40% as effective as one at the equator on average. even so, it is better than nothing at all.
I would agree that wind power would be a better option. But I read in the past that massive wind farms can severly alter wind patterns, with currently unknown effects on the environment... I'd rather avoid that. We all knew what the unknowns of burning coal back in the 1700's lead too.
sandorski @ Sat Feb 03, 2007 12:38 am
Canadian_Mind Canadian_Mind:
sandorski sandorski:
Canadian_Mind Canadian_Mind:
Kyoto is fucked now, a lost cause. it was a good idea when it came about, but we did fuck all about it, so the alternative would be to buy the goddamned carbon credits.
Now we shoudl pull out, cut our losses, and do something liek we shoudl have done 10-15 years ago. Mr. Harper speaks of needing new tech. I agree. funnel 1 billion or more into research PER YEAR aswell as subsidise energy alternatives.
Another thought, why not build massive solar generators in the north? not pesky 500 meter devices, but things that stretch 5 kilometers across or more to provide our energy needs. I'm not talking far north, but around and above the 55 latitude line where there aren't to many people living.
Now we shoudl pull out, cut our losses, and do something liek we shoudl have done 10-15 years ago. Mr. Harper speaks of needing new tech. I agree. funnel 1 billion or more into research PER YEAR aswell as subsidise energy alternatives.
Another thought, why not build massive solar generators in the north? not pesky 500 meter devices, but things that stretch 5 kilometers across or more to provide our energy needs. I'm not talking far north, but around and above the 55 latitude line where there aren't to many people living.
Even the 6 months/year there is reasonable sunlight it would still be very weak. The further from the Equator the less effective Solar Power becomes. Wind Power might be feasible up North though.
Even if you were correct in your statement, it would, to me, be even more reason to build something over 5 kilometers across. However, solar power does not require visible light to operate, atleast not outdoor solar panels. what it requires is solar radiation. Radiation penetrates the cloud layer, and during the winter months can even be magnified by the cloud layers (hence warmer temperatures on cloudy days).
Alas, it is not as effective as at the equator. for every degree north you lose 1.1 percent efficiency. so a solar collector at 55 degrees north would be only be 40% as effective as one at the equator on average. even so, it is better than nothing at all.
I would agree that wind power would be a better option. But I read in the past that massive wind farms can severly alter wind patterns, with currently unknown effects on the environment... I'd rather avoid that. We all knew what the unknowns of burning coal back in the 1700's lead too.
Everything I've read about Solar Power says you need direct sunlight, the more the better. I'd have to see some info to the contrary to accept what you said.
edit: Link to some info on Solar Power, location, sunlight needs
Scape @ Sat Feb 03, 2007 2:09 am
Don't forget geothermal.
Zipperfish @ Sat Feb 03, 2007 8:03 am
OnTheIce OnTheIce:
Canadaka Canadaka:
If it is our means, should Canada not be a leading example to the world, rather than use lame excuses to do little or nothing. We may not be able to have a huge impact directly due to our small population, but we can carry a lot of weight to influence other nations.
I think it something we could be proud of as a nation.
I think it something we could be proud of as a nation.
Why not spend that money we'll be sending to other countries via Kyoto and use it here in Canada to improve our emmissions?
With that money, we could move forward on getting homes and businesses running on solar power, get rid of coal plants, etc etc etc.
If the government subsidized the cost of solar power, I'd be all over it. It's just too expensive now to make it worthwhile for the homeowner.
There are a lot of things we could do here in Canada with that money.
Great--it's fantastic to have the Conservatives on board and chipping in good ideas like this, rather than spending all their time denying it's occurring!
Personally, I don't think you'd even need to subsidize solar power (I know teh Harper gov't intend to subsidize wind and ethanol; not so sure about solar adn other alternatives). If you removed all the subsidies (obvious and invisible) that oil companies get now, you'd level the playing field to the point where alternative energies could compete.
Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 ... 12 Next