Quote:
Originally Posted by Airboy
WR being run by Rod Love with other former Klien Tories in the back room
|
That is actually a huge positive. Rod Love is a smart guy and was with Klein through the golden years of his reign and quit at the peak of that era. He quit the PC party because of the recent terrible decisions that party has made on leaders and the fact that they lost there way.
Going with "old" tories like Rod Love is a big change because people like him bailed on the PC party pre-Stalmach because they no longer believed in the PC party. We have not had a strong PC party for well over a decade now. It WOULD be a change to go back to an actual strong PC-like party now, and Redford's PC's certainly are not that anymore, not even close.
Mason's ideas about moving away from coal fired power plants is simply terrible, what is he going to replace that power with? Wind? The green energy that is Hydro that decimated fish stocks of the Pacific by damming up rivers like the Columbia and allowing 1/10,000th the number of fish to spawn as once could. Natural Gas? That WILL be a major source of electricty moving into the future but it releases two things when burned, CO2 and H2O.
That said, CO2 CAN be used in many ways to enhance oil recovery. I wonder how many people in the general public know that Canada is actually piping IN CO2 from a USA coal fired plany in order to pump that CO2 into Saskatchewan's Bakken tight oil play. Like Canada does not have their OWN CO2 we could use, we are actually piping it in from the USA... THIS is idiocy when you have Alberta and industry here ALREADY spending $15/tonne for CO2 emmisions.
CO2 causes warming of the planet, that is pretty much universally accepted. What is NOT universally accepted are the effects of the warming. Media likes to make the instant jump from "ok so the globe is warming so massive hurricanes, massive droughts, huge floods, ect... will obviously be the result". But that is where the disconnect is, the effects of higher levels of CO2 are nowhere near proven and TBH have hardly been studied at all compared to the studies targetting whether anthropogenic global warming is actually occuring at all (it is).
Also unknown is the amount of the warming that is associated to the CO2 and how much could be caused by other factors, some also human derived. The existence of heat islands is well known and more scientifically accpeted then even AGW. Cities produce heat. For Canada that heat is small when compared to the total area of the land, for places like China, Europe, parts of the USA, ect... it is more significant. That heat is constantly produced and it disipates across the globe. We have 24/7/365 heating of this planet occuring from cities that never stop emmiting heat energy.
One of the most potent greenhouse gases is H2O, water. Most of that so called "smoke" you see coming out of stacks at plants and industry is actually water vapour, steam. Those are all tiny little humidifiers that run 24/7/365 and put more H20 into the atmosphere then is natural. A FAR larger increase in water vapour in the atmopshere is from irrigation. Modern farming takes both ground water and lacustrian/fluvial water and uses it to water huge crops across massive stretches of this planet. Evaporation of ground water when it is IN the ground is very limited, evaporation rates from a lake or river are determined in part by the surface area of the water body.
When you take any of that water and you blast it out of a sprinkler all over a crop you are causing a MASSIVE increase in surface area of that water and creating far more evaporation of that H2O into the atmosphere and that H2O now in the atmoshpere acts as a greenhouse gas. H2O is cyclic, if you run a humidifier in your house for a while the humidity will go up but you can turn that humidifier off and eventually the humidty reverts back to a normal natural state. The world is the same, but humans NEVER shut the humidifiers off, we have them running 24/7/365 and we have been doing so for many decades now. That produces a higher then normal amount of H2O in the atmosphere and sorry to say that is part of what causes global warming.
Now, the sad thing is Danielle Smith does not know this stuff. Her knowledge of the ACTUAL science behind this is limited and she goes on sound bites and bits of info she has been told. If she actually knew about this stuff in alot more detail she could debate the issues with people like Raj and Redford and they would not actually have a prayer of keeping up in the debate because their own knowledge is about as lacking, only they take the other biased side of the debate and take their sound bites from other people on the other side of the fence. The sad thing is that ALL of them have no actual clue and instead have to have people tell them what science says, instead of looking at the journals and going to presentations and talks from the actual scientists and seeing what THEY are actually saying.
Prev
Linear Mode
