I'm a big C, that stands for Conservative, and that means I support big business.

I'm from the west and that means money is more important than ducks.  I'm a Conservative.

When the water is lapping at my door, this CONSERVATIVE, will just blame the Liberals.

Pathetic all around!

IT

Russ

Hi Russ:  Big Business asked for a carbon fee years ago, because that would provide a level playing field and a predictable set of economic rules.

Some of the companies in the oil sands business have been ready for a while to take major initiatives on improving their operations, but need a level playing field to be able to do this.  The number one source of resistance to new rules:  Syncrude, aka Imperial Oil, aka Exxon, aka the polluter that still has not paid up for the damage done by the Valdez many years ago.

I am not sure if you are being ironic, sarcastic or on the ambiguous level.

This makes me cry, MikePaterson.  It's things like this that shame my Canadian identity.

and Beshpin ....you are annoying.....

Rita

Oh, forgive Beshpin. He'a bright but, I suspect, a very lonely and disappointed person.

If you're provoked to say something against it Beshpin, why don't you turn it into a two-sided conversation?

Beshpin, I appreciate the increasing quality of your input into various discussion threads.  Thank you for making the points you did.

About 30 years ago, I was introduced to a book about how Canada was rapidly developing a third world economy (relying more and more on natural resources).  Unfortunately, the assertions of that book have proven disturbingly correct.  When fossil fuel exports, primarily from Alberta, Saskatchewan, and Newfoundland, reach the economic importance they have, there are a number of negative effects on the economy.  When those exports are doing well, companies in that industry can afford to pay much higher wages than most other industries, increasing the cost of labour for industries that need to compete with similar industries in other countries, or reducing the availability of labour.  Petrodollars usually raise the value of the national currency which further reduces the competitiveness of other industries.  The end result is a downward spiral in the viability of other industries.  The fossil fuel industry needs much less labour per unit value of production than other industries which can then increase unemployment.

So, you are right:  these exports that are criticized by many on this website and other places are an increasingly important generator of wealth for our country.  Unfortunately, under our current tax and royalty laws, this wealth is poorly distributed.  The nature of the development of these finite resources is also geared to leading us to a point where, just as the resources become their most valuable, we will have little of most of them left.  We will be rich now, but eventually poorer with a less-productive environment, and a poorer base for other economic activity.

While most of the posters on this site are focused on environmental issues, some of us are also concerned about broader social and economic issues.  As a long-term environmentalist, I am concerned about the focus on Green-house Gases, with less attention being paid to other pollutants, and other environmental issues.

Again, thank you for the quality of your contributions.  I hope you will help spur an improvement in the depth and quality of our discussions.

I'm with Jim Kenney in thanking you Beshpin.  I hope you don't think I was trying to be sarcastic or snarky - I really did want to hear your opinion!

And I think it's shameful how much Canada squanders the resources it has.  You seem frustrated by the hypocrisy of a person's complaining about a system that supports them.  I think it's our responsibility to note our own compliancy in systems and work from there.  Yes, I like the fact that when I turn on water to brush my teeth, it's clean and I can drink it, and it won't stop until I turn off the tap.  I control the things I can (like turning it off while brushing) and when presented with the opportunity, add my voice to larger issues I can't do on my own.

I've said it though, haven't I?  "When presented with the opportunity".  Canadians are too polite sometimes to say things when they should - they instead wait for someone to ask them.  I've never met anyone who isn't a hypocrite in some way, but I respect the ones that are honest about their failings more.

But you DO want people to feel embarrassed about efforts to ensure your well-fed children have a sustainable planet when they grow up and have to feed their children? So it doesn't matter how you make your living or buy your groceries? I think the people who don't care about you or whether you feed your kids are NOT the same people who are concerned for the welfare of the planet.

The science about climate change is solid. the debates are about how bad it's shaping up to be... the prognoses are on a worsening slope. The rest of the world cares and is trying to get some damage limitation in place. Our government isn't taking heed. It seems oblivious of to any priority beyond the next election.

I believe there is a large gap between feeding our children and providing them with personal TVs, cell phones, computers, automobiles, and whatever else they may want, even if they don't need it.  I would like a discussion on how we can increase personal accountability for how far we move across that gap and other gaps between basic needs and random wish fulfillment. 

In my books, the fairest approach includes environmental levies, possibly escalating ones.  These could include carbon fees; environmental fees on recyclable and non-recyclable items such as Alberta's fees on drink containers, tires, and electronics; and disposal fees on pollutants similar to what we already pay when we take things to the landfill.  I would like all of these fees paid into an environmental fund that would fund research and development, start-up capital on an equity basis for companies introducing new products that reduce environmental impacts of particular activities; payments into the health system related to treatment of illnesses caused by the pollutants; and subsidies to consumers and corporate purchasers of the above products related to the carefully validated anticipated benefits of those products, adjustable as real experience provides more data on actual impacts.  I also would like at least 50% of these fees paid out in the province where they are collected to balance out any negative impacts on the activities and industries generating the fees.  This would facilitate diversification and stabilization of the economy.

 I think that's great thinking, Jim. The thing is that there's bound to be more business in on-petroleum, non-carbon energies and alternatives are strongly showing their potential. By lagging behind, as we are in Canada at present, we are compromising our opportunities to generate jobs in saner energy solutions and we'll find ourselves having to buy in expertise and technology instead of growing our own. This is an issue that involves global issues that are not going to go away.

My first preference would be to have the Pembina Institute which has a good reputation with business and environmental organization design a process of setting up an environmental foundation to administer the funds; a clear mandate for the use of those funds; and an accountable and transparent process for continual public review of the actual use of those funds along with a process for reviewing the ongoing effectiveness.  I would hope the supervising board would include a diverse group of representatives from various occupations and partisan interests.  I believe a lot of our taxes in Alberta are directed to profiting friends of the Conservative party which makes me distrust government control of the funds.