Canada 's enviromental record worse then most.....
stemmer @ Mon Nov 26, 2007 6:39 am
The study reports only Iceland and Luxembourg are worse then Canada... Perhaps it is because we are colder nations then most WE must consume more energy to keep ourselves warm....
$1:
The results prove that Canada has one of the poorest environmental records of the industrialized countries. The primary finding is that for the twenty-five environmental indicators examined, Canada's overall ranking among OECD nations is a dismal 28th out of 29.
Other major findings of the study are:
• Canada is among the three best countries on zero indicators;
• Canada is among the three worst countries on nine indicators (per capita greenhouse gas emissions, sulphur dioxide emissions, carbon monoxide emissions, volatile organic compound emissions, water consumption, energy consumption, energy efficiency, volume of timber logged and generation of nuclear waste);
• Canada's economy is inefficient, in that we use much more energy and generate much more pollution to produce a given amount of goods and services relative to our industrial competitors, including 33% more energy than the United States per unit of GDP; and
• Canada's performance on most environmental indicators continues to worsen, including:increasing water consumption, increasing energy consumption, increases in nuclear and hazardous waste, higher greenhouse gas emissions, higher numbers of endangered species, declining fish populations, higher commercial fertilizer use, more livestock, more timber loggCanada's performance on most environmental indicators continues to worsen, includinged, more motor vehicles, more kilometres traveled by road, higher population and lower official development assistance.
Canada's record on energy issues is abysmal. In terms of energy use per capita, Canadians rank 27th out of 29 OECD nations, ahead of only Iceland and Luxembourg. In terms of total energy use, Canada stands 26th out of 29.
However Canada still ranks 13th out of 16 OECD nations in terms of per capita consumption of ozone-depleting substances, largely because of a 76% increase in the production and use of HCFCs, an interim substitute for CFCs.
http://www.environmentalindicators.c...cs/execsum.htm
Other major findings of the study are:
• Canada is among the three best countries on zero indicators;
• Canada is among the three worst countries on nine indicators (per capita greenhouse gas emissions, sulphur dioxide emissions, carbon monoxide emissions, volatile organic compound emissions, water consumption, energy consumption, energy efficiency, volume of timber logged and generation of nuclear waste);
• Canada's economy is inefficient, in that we use much more energy and generate much more pollution to produce a given amount of goods and services relative to our industrial competitors, including 33% more energy than the United States per unit of GDP; and
• Canada's performance on most environmental indicators continues to worsen, including:increasing water consumption, increasing energy consumption, increases in nuclear and hazardous waste, higher greenhouse gas emissions, higher numbers of endangered species, declining fish populations, higher commercial fertilizer use, more livestock, more timber loggCanada's performance on most environmental indicators continues to worsen, includinged, more motor vehicles, more kilometres traveled by road, higher population and lower official development assistance.
Canada's record on energy issues is abysmal. In terms of energy use per capita, Canadians rank 27th out of 29 OECD nations, ahead of only Iceland and Luxembourg. In terms of total energy use, Canada stands 26th out of 29.
However Canada still ranks 13th out of 16 OECD nations in terms of per capita consumption of ozone-depleting substances, largely because of a 76% increase in the production and use of HCFCs, an interim substitute for CFCs.
http://www.environmentalindicators.c...cs/execsum.htm
DerbyX @ Mon Nov 26, 2007 8:12 am
Do those figures take into account that a fair amount of our energy generation is sold to the US?
Wada @ Mon Nov 26, 2007 8:15 am
Yah so what! Steve Who has got our back. 
QBC @ Mon Nov 26, 2007 8:20 am
Huh, we're not number one on that list eh, I better trade in my small SUV and buy an Escalade or Excursion, need to burn more fuel dammit!!!
sasquatch2 @ Mon Nov 26, 2007 1:16 pm
Like all these "scientific studies" they start with an unfounded assumption and go from there.
CO2 is irrelevant unless you base everything on a science fiction movie.
The equations are:
No CO2 = No energy = No economy.
This fool overlooks the part that Canada has a sparse population and a huge land area....and a season called winter.
Due to an on average warmer climate, much of US housing lacks insulation or central heating.
The Brits consider central heating an electric space heater in the centre of the house to keep the pipes from freezing. Visit Britain in the winter and the first time you will feel warm is when you board the plane to return.
YetiWorld @ Mon Nov 26, 2007 2:40 pm
$1:
Visit Britain in the winter and the first time you will feel warm is when you board the plane to return.
