A prominent environmental writer in the U.K. has targeted Canada ahead of this month’s climate change summit in Copenhagen, Denmark, slamming the Conservative government for its hostility towards an international agreement on climate change and support for Alberta’s tar sands operations.
“Until now I believed that the nation that has done most to sabotage a new climate change agreement was the United States,” writes George Monbiot in his latest column for the Guardian. “I was wrong. The real villain is Canada.”
Monbiot argues that the federal government’s efforts to protect oil companies’ operations at the tar sands have become an “assault” on international efforts to reign in climate change.
He describes what is going on at the tar sands in ugly detail:
Refining tar sands requires two to three times as much energy as refining crude oil. The companies exploiting them burn enough natural gas to heat six million homes. Alberta's tar sands operation is the world's biggest single industrial source of carbon emissions. By 2020, if the current growth continues, it will produce more greenhouse gases than Ireland or Denmark. Already, thanks in part to the tar mining, Canadians have almost the highest per capita emissions on earth, and the stripping of Alberta has scarcely begun.
Monbiot also delivers a specific critique of the Harper government’s efforts to sabotage any agreement negotiated at Copenhagen, writing:
After giving the finger to Kyoto, Canada then set out to prevent the other nations striking a successor agreement. At the end of 2007, it singlehandedly blocked a Commonwealth resolution to support binding targets for industrialised nations. After the climate talks in Poland in December 2008, it won the Fossil of the Year award, presented by environmental groups to the country that had done most to disrupt the talks. The climate change performance index, which assesses the efforts of the world's 60 richest nations, was published in the same month. Saudi Arabia came 60th. Canada came 59th.
He continues, “In Copenhagen next week, this country will do everything in its power to wreck the talks. The rest of the world must do everything in its power to stop it.”
Monbiot recently travelled to Toronto with the goal of raising awareness about the tar sands in Canada.
With an average daily circulation of 358,844, the Guardian is one of the largest daily newspapers in the UK. Its Web site, guardian.co.uk, is one of the highest-traffic English-language news Web sites in the world.
George Monbiot is the author of Heat: How to Stop the Planet Burning, which outlines a pragmatic plan for industrial nations to cut their carbon emissions by 90 percent while maintaining a high standard of living.
You can follow Travis Lupick on Twitter at twitter.com/tlupick.
Most Popular
- 1. Your horoscope for February 9 to 15, 2012
- 2. Legendary arts journalist Lloyd Dykk dies at 67
Comments (7) - 3. Women who want sex constantly Comments (67)
- 4. Your horoscope for February 2 to 8, 2012
- 5. I kissed a boy and I didn't like it
- 6. McDonald’s stops use of ammonium hydroxide “pink slime” in hamburgers Comments (35)
- 7. Vancouver Canucks' stretch run to the playoffs fuels feisty Maxim Lapierre
- 8. The Georgia Straight's 2012 sex survey: The lust and thrust report
- 9. Derrick O’Keefe: Stephen Harper’s rhetoric on Iran should frighten us all Comments (40)
- 10. News flash, NDP MP Rathika Sitsabaiesan: Canada's population is much higher than 9 million Comments (8)
Comments
Secondly Canadas less than 1% of Global emissions seems to have been exaggerated by special interest groups too willing to ignore real science. Alberta has been subjected like in this case to pseudo-experts who know little or nothing but the power of microphones and the naivete of the media who lack objectivity and science credentials. The oilsands make up less than 5% of the entire 1% of Canada s contribution to GWG. Its a fact but I doubt that people are really interested in a non-story
And if people feel it is worth noting that figure, it is probably also worth noting that Canada only holds an estimated 0.5 percent of the world's population.
One may talk about the “consensus” of 7,000 scientists supporting the global warming theory as science, but consensus is not science, scepticism is. In fact, 30,000 scientist sceptics have signed a petition discounting the global warming fraud, yet that is ignored by the IPCC and the FEM’s. The whole climate change movement from Maurice Strong, to Al Gore, to David Suzuki, and George Monbiot is a purposeful socialist fraud constructed to manipulate a duped population in surrendering their tax dollars and their sovereignty to the U.N. and the third world. There are two classes; the entitled and those who are responsible to pay the entitled. Those who pay are slaves to the other.
What these socialist ideologues want to do is to destroy capitalism; the system that has built the most successful nations in the world; the United States, Canada, Australia, and even Monbiot’s UK.
This is a dangerous slippery slope that could lead to a form of world government; a government where Canadians have no representation because nobody is elected.
People like Monbiot are elitist snobs who think their own air doesn’t stink.
Monbiot was the first to call for the resignation of the University of East Anglia's Paul Jones. Hardly "ignoring" the issue, in my opinion.
A little birdy told me...
Canadas answer to Mr. Moonbot, and the Copenchange conference will cause the socialists heads to explode.
We will be demanding that our 1.3 billion acres of boreal forest carbon-sink be recognised as the single largest man-managed carbon-sink in the world, we have nurtured it, cultivated it and yes under our care it has grown and expanded.
Further more we will be demanding our share of the trillions of dollars that will be collected from the real polluters of the world.
We estimate our share to be around 12 billion give or take a million.
Also, Canada demands exemption from any carbon trading tax as we have already saved the planet, from a temperature rise of at least
2 deg.C. and we will continue to provide that protection for earth through good management of our forests.
Your humble negotiator
Joe Canadian.
Here are some calculations that I forwarded to Mr Monboit based on 2005 emissions that I found on wikipedia.
CN 7,291,019,901 tons total or 756.35 tons per km sq
CAN 752,837,391 tons total or 75.39 tons per km sq
UK 647,799,973 tons total or 2646.02 tons per km sq
Who is doing the most damage based on capacity of the country to process carbon? We can't be expected to have the same footprint as Europe where everything is compressed, more temperate and mass transit actually works. That being said I think that we waste too much and travel unnecessarily at times. I am one of the few that carpool where I work and it drives me nuts that more don't.
*Flat Earth Marxist
Lack of carpooling is driving you nuts?
I can see by your post that must have already happened.
Calculation: Took the per capita emmisions from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_greenhouse_gas_emissio.... and multiplied by the population of the country (from Wikipedia) to get the total, then divide by the land area (Wikipedia again).
I agree that Ghost is playing the fool, thinking he's looking real clever. But the labels in your table left me wondering. What are CN and CAN? If CAN is Canada, what is CN?
No one disputes that the tar sands are a major environmental problem, and would be even if they could capture their CO2 emissions. Someone on a CBC news item about a year ago, said to be from the Pembina Inst, claimed that most of the GHGs could be captured for a cost of about $13 per barrel. But that would still leave water, land and wildlife issues to deal with.
I do think though that people could do without the kind of spin that's apparent in this Monbiot column. The claim that Alberta's tarsands are "the world's biggest single industrial source of carbon emissions" is clearly a kind of salesman's Gee-Whiz factoid, one entirely dependent on completely arbitrary definitions. As one other poster said, what about coal fired thermal in America? If that's one industry, it would overwhelm the tarsands. But if's treated as many sources, then there's a different result.
Rod Smelser
"George Monbiot is a Flat Earth Marxist (FEM) who thinks he can spew lies about Canadians while ignoring the cover up in his own country...." in reference to the hackes IPCC emails.
In fact, Monbiot has not ignored it and wrote a column last week about this issue: http://www.monbiot.com/archives/2009/11/23/the-knights-carbonic/
Thanks, China, ... I should have guessed.
I don't think it's fair to say that China is doing nothing. From Foreign Affairs, I hear they're doing a great deal.
Rod Smelser
Wondering what all the vultures in Ottawa are cooking up for us based on the fall out of Harpers selfess actions? Should make for good entertainment to see how this unravells.
Fossil fuel use would pay for its own end with worldwide build of 10000 nuclear plants. With mass production, Atomic Energy Canada is telling Harpo, nuclear power costs drop from the current Asian $1.5 to under $1B a Gw cheaper than coal and 10% the least cost renewable.
www.huffingtonpost.com/steve-kirsch/add-a-gigawatt-a-day-to-k_b_261728.html
A $150 billion investment in mass produced nukes, would be paid for by and would end Canada's $100 billion annual fossil fuel bill- a two year payback using only a small fraction of our industrial capacity.
Similarly, the US needs 2500 new reactors but is crippled by inefficient private power companies, a biased Nuclear Rejection Commission and corrupt and litigious political and legal systems, quadrupling nuclear costs and time frames.
By rimming the border with AECL reactors, Canada's public power companies would make $trillions selling the US nuke power at premium rates.
In Canada it would create hundreds of thousands of hi tech jobs making Canada the world leader in booming nuclear tech with massive orders for AECL ACR-1000 nukes. Unlike the US, Canada could easily legislate a one time environmental all sites anywhere permit for any and all reactors - no local input needed - 36 months start to service.
Canadian neocon governments have historically chosen the hewers of wood drawers of water route refusing to support Canadian hitech from the Arvo Arrow to most recently Nortel but this a huge employment booster and may be Harpo's ticket to that elusive majority government.
Won't that be a prize 10 years from now Canada no air pollution, no GHG's, the cheapest energy on the planet, and a booming nuclear based industrial economy.
With cheap Canadian nuclear technology for sale, we'd be saving the world, curing the US, India, and China of their nasty fossil fuel habits while Europe will be still spewing coal soot killing millions of their citizens and building their absurd windmills.
seth
We suck if we can't fix our co-prime ministers.
http://politicsrespun.org/2009/12/oh-canada-the-climate-criminal/
stephen elliott-buckley
http://PoliticsReSpun.org
Actually, it is even reported by the Canwest Global climate-change-denying empire (Calgary Herald), in statistics backed by well-respected Albertan organization (Pembina Institute) that "Alberta, with roughly 11 percent of the Can. population, generates 40 percent of Canada's greenhouse gas emissions. The province's tar sands deposit [...] is also the single biggest and fastest-growing source of those emissions anywhere in the country" in the words of Suzuki Chairman of the Board James Hoggan (who is, incidentally, from Alberta).
"Canwest Global climate-change-denying empire (Calgary Herald), ... well-respected Albertan organization (Pembina Institute) ...Suzuki Chairman of the Board James Hoggan (who is, incidentally, from Alberta)"
================================
A bit touchy on the supposed political angles, JJO. But if you're going to make mention of those political angles, why not mention ALL of them?
http://thetyee.ca/Blogs/TheHook/BC-Politics/2009/04/15/SuzukiChairLibera...
Rod Smelser
The oilsands are problematic because of the pollution of ground water, so carrying on about plant food CO2 is silly and a welcome diversion by the oil companies from the real destruction.
Harper doesn't want to rock his political boat in Quebec since the Montreal Exchange plans to trade carbon credits.
"The Multibillion Dollar Carbon Trading System
"The carbon trading system is a multibillion money-making bonanza for the financial establishment. The stakes are extremely high and the various lobby groups on behalf of Wall Street have already positioned themselves."
Global Warming: "Fixing the Climate Data around the Policy"
http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=16339
See Canadian scientists dispel myths of climate e-mails.
It isn't considered oil until it undergoes the upgrading process and then refined elsewhere.
I have worked in the area, in Suncor to be exact, and I can tell you that there are some mornings when low lying smog fills the air and makes it not only difficult to see but to breathe also.
The article is correct in stating that what currently exists in the Athabasca Tar Sands area is relatively small in comparison to the vast territory where the bitumen is located. However plans are to expand significantly, and some of that expansion has already taken place. The only holding the projects from going ahead is the current market price of oil. When the price hits triple digits, over $100/barrel, they all plans are full speed ahead...at least till the next recession.
I've got an idea for those who are in denial, the biggest noise makers, let's pipe in the water from Fort Chipewyan and have them drink it for a year. It's easier to cover your eyes living in Vancouver.
This is what the satellites say...it's cooling.
http://www.drroyspencer.com/latest-global-temperatures/
And if you would leave the Green Information Ghetto for a little bit and read THE SUN DEFINES THE CLIMATE
Habibullo Abdussamatov, Dr. Sc.
Head of Space research laboratory of the Pulkovo Observatory, Head of the Russian/Ukrainian joint project Astrometria
http://www.climatecooling.org/globalcoolingdocuments/abdussamatov_russia...
you might have a better handle on why the "CO2 is gonna burn up Gaia" nonsense IS nonsense.
Unfortunately, this is one of Canada's biggest resources, and it keeps us employed. Why hasn't anyone put some money into researching a greener way to get the oil out of the oilsands? There must be a greener way than having to use upgraders.
Get some context before you talk nonsense. There is no "vast worldwide socialist left wing conspiracy". If you believe so, talk about it at WND or some other far right conspiracist website.
"What these socialist ideologues want to do is to destroy capitalism"
While I'm all for the destruction of Capitalism, that is not even close to what is actually happening.
"One may talk about the “consensus” of 7,000 scientists supporting the global warming theory as science, but consensus is not science, scepticism is. In fact, 30,000 scientist sceptics have signed a petition discounting the global warming fraud"
Far more credible scientists are accepting of anthropogenic global warming than not.
Oh no they're in my schools, in my media, in my government AAAAH! PANIC! Long live McCarthyism!
"The new "Greens" are the same as the old "Reds"
I wish that was true but the "Green" parties all over the world are as Socialist as the Liberal party. The Canadian Green party for example is just a clone of the very neo-capitalist Liberals.
Also, Reddy is just a horrible pun.