Walking the Walk
December 14th, 2005
| Tags:
I can’t resist a furrther reflection on Ambassador Wilkins’ speech. Imagine the effrontery of the man, in the face of Rick Mercer, pointing out:
Wilkins noted the United States has a better track record on cutting its greenhouse-gas emissions, as a percentage of its total, than Canada does.Since Kyoto was signed, Canada’s greenhouse-gas emissions have gone up 24 per cent over 1990 levels, while U.S. emissions have climbed 13.3 per cent from 1990 to 2003.
“I would respectfully submit to you that when it comes to a ‘global conscience,’ the United States is walking the walk,” Wilkins said.
cbc
The bastards!
Imagine reducing emissions without a bureaucracy or having to declare CO2 a toxic gas or even carbon credit trading….I blame Bush.
“Since Kyoto was signed, Canada’s greenhouse-gas emissions have gone up 24 per cent over 1990 levels, while U.S. emissions have climbed 13.3 per cent from 1990 to 2003.”
That’s probably because all of their manufacturing has moved to China. It’s all Wal-mart’s fault, those anti-union bastards.
They haven’t reduced anything, you fool. They’re still shitting on the planet at a faster rate every year and it’s worse because their turds are enourmous. You can blame Martin for his lack of action but you only look like a moron holding up the US as an example of how to deal with the problem.
Well Robert, it seems thay have and we have not…nor, of course have the Europeans. Fact is that the US has, more or less by letting markets work, reduced its emissions faster than all the blow hards signed up to the Kyoto fraud.
And, Robert, much as I enjoy your comments, a wee bit of temperance in language would help make whatever points you have.
They’ve done better than us on the greenhouse front because they’ve lost manufacturing at a lot faster clip than we have.
Also we cheat.
Jay-
A ton of CO2 emitted in Ohio is the same as a ton of CO2 emitted anywhere else. Since the objective is to lower the amount of greenhouse gas that is emitted into the atmosphere moving emissions from one country to another hardly seems like it is solving anything.
It also seems odd that you would champion moving emissions from one country to another while calling it a reduction and condemn the moving CO2 reductions from one country to another as a part of Kyoto.
It is also worth noting that, to the extent that CO2 regulations exist, the US federal government has downloaded them to the states which are using regulations, tax policy and fines to achieve any real reductions that have taken place. The “market” has achieved none.
“are using regulations, tax policy and fines”
Oops, strike fines from that list.
KevinG –
We can reduce carbon emissions to practically nothing by the simple expedient of destroying the economy and ceasing all productive activity. I for one am looking forward to living in my renewable resource grass hut. Another plus: the lack of electricity will mean my computer won’t work and consequently I will not exposed to simple-minded twaddle like your comment.
Cheers!
So, it doesn’t count … that bit about moving the manufacturing emissions to China. Agreed. But who pushed for/allowed China and India to be excluded and who was opposed to that. The US was opposed to them being excluded, so actually they would like China’s portion of world CO2 emmissions counted. I don’t see your point. Flea? Your grass hut may be renewable, but it will never be renewable enough. Or, they’ll find fault with some other way you run your life. Given the choice, i swear i would rather be ruled by islamists as opposed to environmentalists.