03-09-2002 12:14									#31
	Support Apolyton or Terrorists Win

I find it completely amazing the supporters of Kyoto continually fall back on the trite "you don't care, you just don't care" while ignoring the realities that while the individual country's pollution will decrease, it's only because the production has been moved out of that country to developing nations or other industrialized nations not under Kyoto's scope.

I thought it was such a simple concept, but it appears most people here never looked at it from a business's point of view.

	03-09-2002 12:18									#32
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations: Deluxe Edition

It would require a second industrial revolution to raise the Third World to the level of the 1st world emissions.

	03-09-2002 12:19									#33
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

Not the production though.
Think about it, che...

	03-09-2002 12:20									#34
	Support Apolyton

chegitz, the fear is that the burden of Kyoto will fall most heavily on the energy producing provinces and Ontario.

I am unclear as to how exactly they plan on reaching the goals. I'm not against it until I know how they plan on skinning that cat.

However, if implementation means throttling the two parts of the Canadian economy that are going well, Ontario and Alberta, I can't agree with it.

If Alberta is severely effected, I can guess how most people around here will react. We don't consume the products of our petrochemical industry, we produce it. Any plan based on throttling production will place an inordinate burden on a few industries in a few regions.

	03-09-2002 12:21									#35
	Support Apolyton, buy Alpha Centauri

quote: Originally posted by chegitz guevara It would require a second industrial revolution to raise the Third World to the level of the 1st world emissions.

You mean like the one that's been going on in S and SE Asia for 30 years now?

	03-09-2002 12:23									#36
	Support Apolyton

I think that's the problem, nye. The federal government hasn't told everyone how they plan to implement it, but they're going to ratify it and think about it later...

I can't think of any way for them to implement it without screwing over Alberta and to a lesser extent Ontario. But Tingkai apparently thinks there's a very cheap magic device that will drastically cut emissions down to 1990 levels while not affecting production...

	03-09-2002 12:28									#37
	Support Apolyton, buy Alpha Centauri

Actually Asher, I doubt Chretien will get this past the Ontario caucus without outlining exactly how the goals will be achieved. If he does, I'm more than a bit worried for this democracy.

	03-09-2002 12:29									#38
	Support Apolyton

If he does get it past the Ontario caucus, guess whose expense it will be at?

Hint: Probably the region that doesn't vote Liberal.

Someone's got to front the economic damage of the treaty, there's no way around it.

	03-09-2002 12:39									#39
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization: The Boardgame

Then start the clock.

	03-09-2002 12:47									#40
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations

quote: Originally posted by Asher Do tell, Tingkai. How will all of these modern plants built after 1990 drastically reduce pollution? Alberta's production levels have more than doubled since 1990.

So the Albertan oil industry is not using any machinery older than 1990? Sure.

And the technology for pollution control suddenly stopped developing in 1990? Sure.

quote: Originally posted by Asher There is a definite and obvious lack of consumption needed, and what's more for Alberta -- a lack of production.

This is classic oil industry propaganda. The problem now is there is no enough oil being produced because there is not enough demand for oil.

quote: Originally posted by Asher Chretien fired Paul Martin (who had enormous approval ratings) because he was talking about running against him, and Chretien's "friends" own the largest newspaper chain in Canada who fired columnists who criticized him.

And Chretien has no plans to step down.

quote: Originally posted by Asher Having a bunch of low level ministers meeting...

Why am I not surprised that an oil industry boy thinks that environment ministers are low level.

	03-09-2002 12:50									#41
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: Originally posted by Tingkai So the Albertan oil industry is not using any machinery older than 1990? Sure. And the technology for pollution control suddenly stopped developing in 1990? Sure.

It has, but you seem to think it works so REMARKABLY well that it'll reduce emissions substantially.

Let me be the first to tell you you really do have no clue what you're talking about, and I'd also like for you to stop even trying to use this argument until you link to some reputable sites saying we can implement Kyoto without affecting production.

Perhaps some blueprints on this magical device you keep talking about to reduce emissions would be good too. You could make trillions of dollars off of this magical thing.

quote: And Chretien has no plans to step down.

The only reason he announced his plan to step down was so he could stay in another year...

quote: Why am I not surprised that an oil industry boy thinks that environment ministers are low level.

Why am I not surprised that you can't read anything right?
ALL ministers are low level. I don't even know WHY you said that comment, because the meeting also involved ENERGY ministers.

Do go on and tell us all about this magical technology which will reduce emissions drastically without touching Alberta's economy. Do go on an tell us why a business would not just develop production in other countries not under Kyoto since there's an abundance of oil there as well?
Do go on and tell us where you get your information that even the old plants in Alberta haven't been upgraded.

These are all interesting assertions you've made and you've yet to substantiate a single one of them.

There are benefits for oil producers too for increasing efficiency. The more efficient your plants are, the less energy you use to make the new energy, the less it costs to produce this energy, and you've also got newer machinery which is less likely to fail altogether. Most plants (at least for a few companies that I know about) do continually upgrade their machinery and plants...

	03-09-2002 12:55									#42
	Increase Your PM Length

quote: Originally posted by Asher You seriously insist we can reduce pollution to 1990 levels without affecting consumption (and thereby production).

Sometimes I do get tired of explain basic economics to Asher.

Try to understand this simple concept. If governments strengthen pollution control laws then this will lead to the increased consumption of pollution control devices, whether for businesses or for personal use. As a result, more jobs are created because a new market has developed. Simple really.

quote: Originally posted by Asher If you don't reduce consumption, how would you reduce pollution? By making engines more EFFICIENT? If you make them more efficient, don't they require less fuel? Wouldn't this not lower consumption?

The obvious answer would be devices that decrease the amount of pollution emitted. Or how about switching to natural gas. Hong Kong, for example, now requires all of its taxis to be powered by LPG. This has helped reduced pollution caused by diesel-powered vehicles.

quote: Originally posted by Asher It's just a large wealth transfer. But instead of being a West->East wealth transfer, this time it's North->South.

Again, you fail to look at the big picture. An initial wealth transfer from the developed world to the under-developed world is actually beneficial to the entire global economy. As economies grow in the under-developed world, new markets are created for goods from the developed world. This creates a virtuous circle where economic growth in the economically developing world leads to economic growth in economically developed world, which in turn leads to more investment going from "north>south" as you put it.

	03-09-2002 12:57									#43
	Avatar Enlargement: We've got the solution

quote: Originally posted by Asher I find it completely amazing the supporters of Kyoto continually fall back on the trite "you don't care, you just don't care" while ignoring the realities that while the individual country's pollution will decrease, it's only because the production has been moved out of that country to developing nations or other industrialized nations not under Kyoto's scope. I thought it was such a simple concept, but it appears most people here never looked at it from a business's point of view.

Again, you don't know what you are talking about.

Economic growth in places like China has not resulted in the impoverishment of developed countries nor has it led to an increase in pollution from countries like China.

	03-09-2002 13:02									#44
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: Originally posted by Tingkai Sometimes I do get tired of explain basic economics to Asher. Try to understand this simple concept. If governments strengthen pollution control laws then this will lead to the increased consumption of pollution control devices, whether for businesses or for personal use. As a result, more jobs are created because a new market has developed. Simple really.

That's great! Then we can expect no taxes on production then.

	03-09-2002 13:04									#45
	Increase the size of your Attachments

quote: Originally posted by Asher It has, but you seem to think it works so REMARKABLY well that it'll reduce emissions substantially.

The Kyoto agreement is designed as an initial, small first step that will begin a voyage of a thousand miles. Whether it requires substantiall reductions is subjective.

Since you claim that Kyoto will destroy the Albertan economy, how about posting some proof from an unbaised source.

quote: Originally posted by Asher ALL ministers are low level. I don't even know WHY you said that comment, because the meeting also involved ENERGY ministers.

You really don't know anything about parliamentary government. Backbenchers have low levels of influence. The opposition has a low level of influence. Cabinet ministers have a lot of influence.

quote: Originally posted by Asher Do go on and tell us all about this magical technology which will reduce emissions drastically without touching Alberta's economy. Do go on an tell us why a business would not just develop production in other countries not under Kyoto since there's an abundance of oil there as well?

Jesus, now I have to explain the oil industry to Asher.

There is a simple thing called transportation costs. Enough said.

quote: Originally posted by Asher Do go on and tell us where you get your information that even the old plants in Alberta haven't been upgraded.

You're the one making the claim that Albertan oil industry only uses the most up-to-date equipment and that none of the plants are older than 1990. It is up to you to provide proof of the claim. I am merely doubting your propaganda.

	03-09-2002 13:04									#46
	Remove this text

quote: Originally posted by Tingkai Economic growth in places like China has not resulted in the impoverishment of developed countries nor has it led to an increase in pollution from countries like China.

Are you sure about this?

I've heard of cities in China where the air is very thick.

	03-09-2002 13:06									#47
	Tired of ads?

quote: Originally posted by notyoueither That's great! Then we can expect no taxes on production then.

No, please god, no. Don't even suggest anything to do with that three-lettered abbreviation.

	03-09-2002 13:08									#48
	Browse Apolyton AD-FREE

quote: Originally posted by notyoueither Are you sure about this? I've heard of cities in China where the air is very thick.

A 1997 report by the UN, IIRC (it might have been the World Bank) found that overall pollution levels had not changed between 1980-1995.

The reason is that as the Chinese economy developed, industry switched to newer, less polluting equipment. Natural gas is replacing coal-fired stoves in kitchens which is also reducing pollution.

However, you are right. Pollution is still a significant problem.

	03-09-2002 21:54									#49
	Support Apolyton, buy GURPS/ Alpha Centauri

quote: The same poll said 65% didn't know what Kyoto entails.

Actually it said 64% have read or heard of Kyoto. In that Ipso/Ried poll I can find no referance to what you said here, how about a link? Maybe we are viewing two different polls.

quote: Leave it to the wonderful Chretien-funded CBC to leave that little detail out.

Read above.

In that same poll it appears most Albertans agree with some of what you have said here but most believe it is worth it.

quote: I don't see how Ottawa can force Alberta to abide by it, and Alberta has vowed never to implement it.

Article 2
Section 1 clause (v) (v) Progressive reduction or phasing out of market imperfections, fiscal incentives, tax and duty exemptions and subsidies in all greenhouse gas emitting sectors that run counter to the objective of the Convention and application of market instruments;
When the British North America Act, Canada's original constitution, was enacted in 1867, the concept of environment did not exist as we know it today. The constitution did not stipulate who, between the provincial and the federal governments, was responsible for maintaining a healthy environment for Canadians. Rather, both levels of government were given powers that permitted them to pass legislation to deal with environmental issues.

quote: Kyoto is strictly about resource control

Actually yes but it has several different components, interesting enough some of the components are similar in nature to parts of the NEP. Had those parts of the NEP been kept Canada would not be ranked so high today in pollution. Kyoto then would be a no show, you have to love some of them Albertans, always thinking of the rest of the world.

quote: Kyoto is about restricting the use of these resources to the point of reducing pollution.

Part of the problem would you not agree, but that too is only part of the agreement.

quote: it's only because the production has been moved out of that country to developing nations or other industrialized nations not under Kyoto's scope.

Well under Kyoto all nations must share the pollution cutting technologies "especially" with developing nations. So wrong again, they are also implimenting an agreement similar to the Montreal Accords that sees the IMF or the world bank fund these changes to developing countries. I think Asher is in that 20% that do not know what Kyoto is and what it does, must be that Klein government information he reads.

quote: I can't think of any way for them to implement it without screwing over Alberta and to a lesser extent Ontario.

Interesting to point out here Ontario has the second lowest GHG, s and is predicted to continue that trend.

Other information Canada ranks 8th in the world for GHG's that include two developing countries btw China and India without them Canada would be 6th.

Canada ranks an increable 4th in per capita GHG emissions.

Industries in canada will have increased GHG's by 2010 by 10% 1990.

Transportation 34%

Fossil fuel industries an increadable 64% it appears Klein is doing lots.

Commercial 34%

Electricity generation 25%

GHG's by province Atlantic 23%, Quebec 11%, Ontario 17%, Manatoba 24%, Saskatchewan 40%, Alberta 40%, B.C. 36% these are projected forcast's from1990 to 2010.

It appears the province with the most cash could do more to enhance the energy based economy and reduce pollution. Maybe rather than putting money into the haritage fund for future use. Thye could put money into use today, a small percentage is all it would take.

	03-09-2002 22:01									#50
	Lose 30 kilos (of popups)

Asher vs. Tingkai, Episode XXXVIII...

*makes popcorn*

	03-09-2002 22:22									#51
	Support Apolyton, pre-order Civilization IV

quote: Originally posted by notyoueither You mean like the one that's been going on in S and SE Asia for 30 years now?

Per capita? Highly doubtful.

	03-09-2002 23:05									#52
	Support Apolyton, buy GURPS/ Alpha Centauri

quote: Originally posted by Tingkai Economic growth in places like China has not resulted in the impoverishment of developed countries nor has it led to an increase in pollution from countries like China.

Tingkai, you do realize there is a large cloud of pollution over Asia due to its growth. China doesn't have the most effecient pollution control, and it has a very large population of polluters.

Edit. nevermind I see this has been addressed.

	04-09-2002 01:17									#53
	Increase Your PM Length

I thought I was alone in being against the illogical and fatally flawed Kyoto agreement here? Guess not. Really what does the agreement accomplish besides cutting back on future development?

The problem with China is they don't want to spend squat on energy development and are sticking to the use of coal. Can kyoto accomplish anything there? Absolutely not. Infact it will allow some countries to pollute more.

	04-09-2002 01:48									#54
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: Really what does the agreement accomplish besides cutting back on future development?

Create future industries, a less polluted world just for starters. What future developement are you refering to?

quote: The problem with China is they don't want to spend squat on energy development and are sticking to the use of coal. Can kyoto accomplish anything there? Absolutely not. Infact it will allow some countries to pollute more.

Seems to me they are spending lots on energy developement, cando reactors for one example. Nice counter balance while some pollute more the others are reducing. Somewhere down the pipe they will have to bow to international pressure and follow the logical course of action. Stop polluting the planet or there will be no planet.

	04-09-2002 02:02									#55
	Support Apolyton, pre-order Civilization IV

quote: Originally posted by blackice Create future industries, a less polluted world just for starters. What future developement are you refering to?

Kyoto doesn't create anything but creates on hell of a mess.

quote: Seems to me they are spending lots on energy developement, cando reactors for one example. Nice counter balance while some pollute more the others are reducing. Somewhere down the pipe they will have to bow to international pressure and follow the logical course of action. Stop polluting the planet or there will be no planet.

Therefore countries like China can pollute more. International pressure... phseeh... look at reality. Stop polluting the planet or there will be no planet? There was probably more CO2 in the atmosphere before humans were around.

	04-09-2002 07:26									#56
	Increase Your PM Length

quote: Originally posted by Fez The problem with China is they don't want to spend squat on energy development and are sticking to the use of coal.

Fez has obviously never heard about a very tiny energy project called the Three Gorge Dam.

	04-09-2002 10:50									#57
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: Originally posted by November Adam Tingkai, you do realize there is a large cloud of pollution over Asia due to its growth. China doesn't have the most effecient pollution control, and it has a very large population of polluters. Edit. nevermind I see this has been addressed.

Adam,

The brown cloud has been created in India.

	04-09-2002 10:52									#58
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: Originally posted by Fez The problem with China is they don't want to spend squat on energy development and are sticking to the use of coal. Can kyoto accomplish anything there? Absolutely not. Infact it will allow some countries to pollute more.

You clearly do not have any inkling of ideas on how much China spends on energy development. You probably haven't seen the windmill farms, the solar stoves, the hydroelectric stations, the nuclear power plants. You know, the whole works.

	04-09-2002 14:41									#59
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization III: Complete

South China's Guangdong Spends Heavily on Air Pollution Control 5.7 billion yuan (about 687 million US dollars)
http://english.peopledaily.com.cn/2...0801_76238.html
Look they are doing it without *****ing, I guess they have a real concern about thier people.

	04-09-2002 14:56									#60
	Support Apolyton, buy GURPS/ Alpha Centauri

State Institutions Ordered to Conserve Energy
China Online, 7 November 2001
Government agencies, which account for 5 percent of total energy consumption in China, have been ordered to make sweeping changes to save energy. The State Economic and Trade Commission (SETC), the Ministry of Finance (MOF) and the State Council’s Departmental Affairs Administration jointly issued a proposal on November 5th telling governments at various levels and state-supported entities and institutions including the army, armed police, education entities, medical treatment institutions, and research institutions, what they must do to conserve energy.
The report said the government spends 80 billion yuan (US$9.66 billion) each year on energy, constituting a large proportion of China’s budget. Each state institution will be required to set specific energy-saving goals and lay down practical energy-saving measures. Government purchasing agents were ordered to place priority on acquiring energy-saving facilities or equipment. In addition, government institutions were ordered to dispose of facilities and products that are not energy efficient. The proposal requires an examination of all lighting, heating and cooling equipment, office equipment and vehicles.

Zero Energy Growth by 2040
China Daily, 11 November 2001
The Chinese Government vowed on Monday to speed up efforts to save energy to ensure national energy security and to maintain sustainable development during the country's 10th Five-Year Plan (2001-05). According to Li Rongrong, minister of the State Economic and Trade Commission (SETC), increasing efforts are indispensable because there is tremendous potential in saving energy. The government aims to decrease its energy consumption from 2.77 tons of standard coal per 10,000 yuan of gross domestic product in 2000 to 2.2 tons by 2005.
According to Li, zero growth in energy use should be achieved by 2040. He also noted that regulations and standards should be developed soon to fully implement the national Energy Saving Law which was launched in 1997.

Beijing Warms to Clean Energy
China Daily, 19 November 2001
Some 60 percent of the boilers in Beijing now use clean energy such as natural gas and electricity to produce heat. An official with the municipal management committee said that there are still at least 5,000 small-sized boilers using coal for heating in the city. All boilers are scheduled to switch to clean fuel by 2008. Burning coal for heating in the winter has long been a problem since it causes serious air pollution. Before 1997, Beijing consumed 28 million tons of coal each year, which produced 90 percent of the sulfur dioxide and 50 percent of the floating particles in the air, according to official statistics.

I guess the bottom line is Chinda is doing a lot, I do not see it hurting thier economy you? It could it be the powers at be see this as a warning?
Could it be they see this new industry slipping away?
Imagine if China lead the world to the clean energy industry.