February 2nd, 2007

You are currently browsing the articles from Jay Currie written on February 2nd, 2007.

A Speech

Ladies and Gentlemen,

My government is committed to the creation of a sustainable energy future for Canada. We are committed to reducing the environmental impact of Canada’s economy. We are committed to curbing air pollution and greenhouse gas emissions.

Today I am tabling a bill in the House of Commons which will achieve those commitments if you, the people of Canada, give us the mandate to accomplish this massive task.

Our goal is nothing less than the elimination of emissions from power generation and the Alberta tar sands as well as a shift in our economy toward a bright green future.

How? Well, frankly, not by sending billions of dollars to the often corrupt governments of third world nations. We have enough to do in Canada.

Our plan is bold, direct and workable.

We propose to use proven, Canadian, technology and resources to generate power.

My government will ask for your approval to undertake an efficient, effective and environmentally sensitive shift away from fossil fuels in industrial applications.

We will be asking for your mandate to construct at least six and possibly as many as twelve CANDU 6 reactors across Canada. As these reactors come online we will decommission current coal and natural gas fired electrical power generating plants. Our goal is to replace the 27% of the energy we generate from burning fossil fuels with nuclear power. We already generate 12% of our electricity from nuclear and we have a long way to go to reach or exceed France’s current 75% nuclear electricity generation capacity. We also plan to largely eliminate burning fossil fuels in order to extract fossil fuels.

In addition, we will be asking for your mandate to build out our wind power generation to the level which can be sustained by our current electricity grid.

We will also create an Energy Research Institute to look at increasing the efficiency of our energy transmission and end use. We also propose to offer prizes for advances in battery storage technology, transmission efficiency, and end use efficiency.

This program will cost money. A great deal of money. A dozen 700Mwe reactors, even with the cost savings implicit in buying in bulk, will run a minimum of 60 billion dollars if we are conservative about the possibilities of cost overruns. Wind energy is estimated to cost another 3-5 billion. The research and prizes will add another 5 billion. At a minimum we believe this programs’ capital costs will be 75 billion dollars.

To put this into perspective, at the moment the current Canadian federal budget is 223 billion dollars and our federal debt is 483 billion dollars.

So, how will we pay for this?

Your government proposes to borrow the money in the form of 30 year Canada Energy Bonds which will be issued in series as the program proceeds. These bonds will bear market interest and have the full backing of the Government of Canada.

While they will be backed by your government they will be paid for with a number of measures.

In 2004 (get current stats) Canadians consumed 40 billion litres of gasoline. We propose a ten cent a litre energy surtax which would raise four billion dollars a year.

In 2005 Canada exported over 2 million barrels of oil per day. We exported 3.9 Tcf of natural gas and a net 10 Bkwh of electricity. We propose to impose a small export tax on all Canadian energy exports. The goal of such an impost will be an additional 4 billion dollars per year.

My government believes that reaching a nuclear fueled sustainable, emission free, energy strategy for Canada is worth a dime a litre. We believe that Canadian and world markets will welcome strong Canadian Energy Bonds.

To be honest I do not believe in Kyoto. I do not believe in Kyoto because Kyoto will not work.

And, to be blunt, my government is not at all convinced that the science of climate change is well enough understood to form a sensible basis for policy.

Which means that we have created this made in Canada bright green strategy because we are convinced it makes economic and environmental sense. It just happens that by following this plan we estimate that we will reduce Canada’s greenhouse gas emissions radically and quickly.

As you know, climate change was not an issue in the last election. We do not have your mandate to embark upon this fundamental and expensive change to the Canadian economy. We need that mandate.

To that end we will be bringing this proposal to the House of Commons for a full and, we hope, productive debate. At the end of that debate, and after incorporating suggestions from Her Majesty’s Loyal Opposition, we will bring this program to a vote in the Commons.

I sincerely hope this measure passes. However, I don’t believe that an election should be called on this matter. Rather, once the House has debated, amended and voted on the proposal I will call on you, the Canadian people, to vote yea or nay on a bright, green, future.

I propose to call a referendum to be held within 60 days of the final vote in the Commons. A simple 50% plus one can pass or defeat the proposal.

If we are confronted with a real crisis then it is imperative that we all work together to ensure Canada makes its contribution to the reducing world’s emissions. However, even if the climate change issue has been exaggerated, your government believes that the measures proposed tonight will be a tremendous economic boost for Canada.

This is your fight as much as it is your Government’s. Read, ask questions, learn: because in the not too distant future you are going to have to decide Canada’s energy and emissions future.

Good Night

Written by jay on February 2nd, 2007 with 6 comments.
Read more articles on "Global Warming" and CPC and Canadian Politics and Fiscal Policy and Liberals and NDP and tech.

Iran in Gaza…Surely not

In the raid on the Islamic University, a security official affiliated with Fatah said seven Iranian citizens were arrested and an eighth committed suicide. The security official spoke on condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the issue.

A Hamas official denied the claim and said there were no Iranian citizens at the university. Iran has supplied Hamas with funds, but there have been no previous claims of Iranians working with Hamas in Gaza. ap via alphabet city

It is awful that the Palis are so consistently the pawns of outside forces and that their leadership - using the word loosely - seems hellbent on civil war. In geo political terms the real news is that Iran is in Lebanon and in Gaza. This is not a surprise but it needs to be taken seriously.

A small civil war in Palestine, while tragic, might clear the way for moderate leaders to have at least a voice in the government of the Palestinians. However, Iran seems intent on destroying moderation where ever it appears in the Middle East. At some point the Sunnis will have had enough and then the real civil war begins.

Written by jay on February 2nd, 2007 with no comments.
Read more articles on Terror and religion.

Further signs of jumping sharks

Former Vice President Al Gore was nominated for the 2007 Nobel Peace Prize for his wide-reaching efforts to draw the world’s attention to the dangers of global warming, a Norwegian lawmaker said Thursday. ap

“Twenty foot sea level rises”. If you can manage to pile it high enough you can reach the stars or, at least, the Nobel Committee.

Climate hysteria has pretty much peaked when the whacky Nowegians get down with an ex-American Vice President. Gore joins a distinguished list of nominees which includes Adolpf Hitler, Joseph Stalin, Benito Mussolini and Yasser Arafat.

Written by jay on February 2nd, 2007 with 2 comments.
Read more articles on "Global Warming" and International.

What Dion wants us to buy into

By the numbers:

KYOTO

6% The Liberal government under Jean Chretien committed Canada to reducing its greenhouse gas emissions by 6%below 1990 levels by 2012.

35% The Conservative government said in December that Canada’s emissions have grown so rapidly since the Kyoto commitment was made that the country is now 35% above its target for 2012.

$10-billion The Liberals have suggested spending $10-billion on “credits” from other countries that have excess room under their Kyoto targets.

20% Assuming that $10- billion was spent, emissions management consultant Aldyen Donnelly suggests that in order to meet the 2012 deadline, every Canadian resident, building and industrial plant would have to consume at least 20%less energy than they do today, starting next January.

$80-billion Ms. Donnelly also suggests it would cost $80-billion in new capital spending to create a “clean” energy supply that would allow Canada to comply with Kyoto targets over the long term. national post

This is what Harper should be hammering away at.

Written by jay on February 2nd, 2007 with no comments.
Read more articles on "Global Warming" and CPC and Canadian Politics and Liberals.

Climate Capers

Liberal Leader Stéphane Dion tabled an opposition motion Thursday calling for the federal government to reaffirm Canada’s commitment to the Kyoto Protocol, labelling climate change “the single most pressing ecological threat facing our country.

“I call on the Prime Minister to implement the initiatives I have called for today,” Mr. Dion said. “This country cannot wait, this planet cannot wait.” globe and mail

Yeah, right. Baird makes the rather telling point that under the Liberals we “waited” thirteen years and had our emissions rise 27%.

That, however, is not going to matter. On this resolution the Liberals will almost certainly have NDP and BQ support. Harper may try to finesse it in the same way as he finessed the “nation” motion. Or he may simply bend over and have the CPC vote in favour of the motion.

What he seems utterly unwilling to do is actually address why Kyoto is such a bad and pointless agreement. This is an error.

The error lies in the fact that the Tories, at root, know that Kyoto is all that and worse. Which is why they have been bobbing and weaving on any moves to actually implement it. But because they see the polls going the other way, and because they lack any stomach to actually lead, they have been rushing to green up their image. Dion, legitimately, has called them on it.

A real political party with a real leader would take this as an opportunity to educate Canadians about the very real scientific uncertainties which underlie Kyoto, the ineffectiveness of the agreement as it now stands and the huge cost versus the entirely uncertain benefits Kyoto would impose.

Instead we are likely to have to watch Harper cringe and squirm. Worse, given the climate hysteria which is gripping the nation, we are probably going to watch the CPC fold its anti-Kyoto tent.

If it were not so serious it would almost be funny.

Written by jay on February 2nd, 2007 with 2 comments.
Read more articles on "Global Warming" and CPC and Canadian Politics and Liberals.