After noting, correctly, that “There are a good number of sober, sensible actions that will change the world from a smoggy and smoky place into a clean and prosperous home for us all … [but] … Lashing out in vicious fashion [a suggestive and offensive bumper sticker] against 17-year-old climate activist Greta Thunberg is not one of them.” He also says that “It’s also hard to disagree with Thunberg’s assertion that her side is winning. She constantly gets applause at gatherings of world leaders. Her push to end investment in fossil fuels is treated seriously by prominent financiers … [but] … Thunberg’s winning streak should alarm reasonable people. In recent months she has put forward a series of dangerous ideas … [and, while] … dangerous is a strong word … it’s also fair comment when we consider the harm to humanity that will result if her increasingly radical visions are enacted.“
“Speaking to world leaders in Davos, Switzerland last month,” Mr Staples writes, young Ms Thunberg “called for a “real zero” solution to climate change, the immediate end of fossil fuels right now. “Let’s be clear,” she said. “We don’t need a low carbon economy. We don’t need to lower emissions. Our emissions have to stop if we are to have a chance to stay below the 1.5-degree target … We must forget about net zero. We need real zero.”“
But, of course, she, and Justin Trudeau, too, I daresay, has no idea about the implication of “real zero.” It would push billions of people into the most abject sort of miserable poverty … they will not stand for it. Billions of Chinese and Indians are not going to commit real suicide ~ death by overwork and starvation ~ just because some pampered Canadian and European sink-stocking socialists and fake-feminists want to dismantle “Colonial, racist, and patriarchal systems of oppression … [which, they assert] … have created and fuelled” climate change and pretty much everything else that’s wrong with the world.
I have been saying, for some time now, that people like Greta Thunberg and Justin Trudeau are closely allied with Donald J Trump: they want billions of Asians and Africans to sink back into poverty and mass famines so that they can breathe cleaner air and have good jobs for all here in North America and Western Europe. They are, all of them, both: stupid and racist.
The leaders of China and India, and most African and Asian nations are NOT going to even try to meet climate change goals IF it means risking political turmoil ~ and them being hung from lamposts ~ when billions of people lose their jobs and begin to go hungry. The peoples of Africa and Asia are NOT going to go back to this:
Only the most breathtakingly stupid people on earth ~ millions of them, many with high IQs and PhDs ~ believe in massive deindustrialization and a return to some sort of mythical, clean, green 18th-century utopian, agrarian paradise. Sadly, it is pretty clear that Ms Thunberg and Prime Minister Trudeau are amongst them.
There are leaders out there who believe that climate change is real and who understand that we have to find sensible ways to mitigate its effects without destroying modern society. Singapore, for example, is investing in both small scale and gigantic solar energy programmes and in LNG bunkering to try to be energy independent while still enjoying all the benefits of the modern, 21st-century world. Now, I agree that Singapore is small, only 5.8 million people, slightly larger than Denmark, somewhat smaller than Switzerland; but, being a small, equatorial, island nation it has few natural resources. Singapore has to rely on its human talents to survive … it has to think. Sometimes it has to gamble. The proposed Sun Cable project is both imaginative and a gamble but it is infinitely more progressive than trying to tax people into using less energy.
North America has vast energy reserves ~ oil and gas alone enough to power the continent for centuries and large, existing hydro-electric stocks. North America also has, like Australia, huge deserts that have reliable sunshine all year ’round, and vast open spaces that have reliable winds, too and Canada gas the world’s longest coastline … some of which could be home to gigantic wind farms:
If Denmark, the Netherlands and Singapore can think big and act on their ideas then why can’t Canada? It’s only a question of leadership …
… and some have it and some don’t.
Canadians, and especially would-be Canadian political leaders …
… need to remember that:
- First, Gerald Butts is right … it, climate change, is a global problem;
- Second, because it’s a global issue we need to ‘think globally and act locally‘ to address it;
- Third, that means that we need to work out what the most serious global problems are and then decide what we can do, locally, to help alleviate them; and
- Fourth, we need to develop a sensible plan that works FOR Canada and the world, but a plan that does not condemn our people to poverty.
Thus, if we accept, as most people do, that Ms Thunberg and Prime Minister Trudeau are correct and global climate change is a pressing issue and greenhouse gasses, produced, in large part, by burning fossil fuel is a HUGE part of it then we must ask ourselves: how can we, Canadians, contribute to reducing greenhouse gas emissions?
It seems intuitively obvious to me that the first thing to think about is: where are all those greenhouse gas emissions coming from?
The answer appears to be …
… that energy production in China, the USA, the European Union and India account for most of it, and will out to 2030 and well beyond that, and we know that China and India use massive amounts of coal to produce that energy. OK, then: how does Canada help?
Is shutting down the Alberta oil sands going to help? How about stopping the Coastal GasLink pipeline so that we cannot export liquid natural gas to e.g. Singapore? Is that a good idea? How much will a price on carbon have to be before it makes Canadians buy heavier sweaters rather than turning up the thermostats in winter?
A sensible, Canadian, Conservative climate change plan has to include:
Making Canadian oil and natural gas readily accessible for ALL Canadians in ALL regions for as long as it is needed, displacing, in particular, blood-stained Middle Eastern oil;
- Making Canadian oil and gas available to the world, to displace coal use;
- Making Canadian nuclear energy available to the whole world, again to displace ALL fossil fuels;
- Replacing fossil fuels is Canada with alternative energy sources ~ nuclear, hydro-electric, wind and (imported) solar as soon as technically and economically practicable;
- Establishing a true continental energy market within NAFTA.
As David Staples says, in the Edmonton Journal, “It’s worth pointing out that her [Greta Thunberg’s] fossil fuel divestment plan would immediately see a clampdown on oil production in countries like Canada where social justice is respected, shifting production to places where women, LGBTQ, religious minorities and political opposition are under grave threat, such as Russia and oil dictatorships in Iran and Saudi Arabia … [which is what I meant, just above, by “blood-stained Middle Eastern oil,” and] … The remedies put forward by Thunberg and her extremist bubble … [which includes Justin Trudeau and his cronies] … look to be far more deadly than the disease of climate change itself.” Canada needs and deserves better.