Canada Votes, 2019

Welcome to Wondercafe2!

A community where we discuss, share, and have some fun together. Join today and become a part of it!

Graeme Decarie

Well-Known Member
Messages
4,589
Reaction score
1,489
It's not at all disrespectful. I don't know where Northwind gets his information. I know of no research that suggests this will gradually all go away, leaving us with a world population of ----what? I million? 500 million? Scientists tell us we could have as little as 20 years to get busy.
Your question was a silly one. (Gosh, how will we heat our homes?) Hey - by then we're all dead anyway.

I have never seen any research suggesting anybody would survive. It's already happening to animals and fish and birds and even insects as once populous groups of them now disappear. And the thought that a few million humans might survive (in caveman condition) does not cheer me as much as you might think.

We have a choice. We can either find energy sources that are safe - or we die. The oil industry has no intention of finding such energy sources. It is interested only in it's profits NOW.

Is it a big deal to find adequate and safe energy sources? Yes. We already know that wind power alone could do the job. And that's only one that's been known for many, many years.

We do have a choice. But the oil industry pays off Liberals and Conservatives and Republicans and Democrats to do nothing.

Is the oil industry greedy? Bloody right it is. And if you care to take a look, you will notice that The wealthy are exploding with wealth while most people live in serious economic decline. Those nice people have killed millions to get control over their oil (Iraq, for example, and Iran and Syria and Venezuela on the chopping block.) Take a look at the real world. And, in most countries they take control of, the local people get very little out of it except as dirt cheap labour. (Saudi Arabia is the exception to that rule - though most of that money goes to the royal family.)

Capitalism breeds wars and mass murder. It's been doing it since 1945 - and earlier. Why do you think Britain went to war against Germany in 1939? In fact, it was Britain that opened the door for Hitler when it broke its promise not to cripple Germany after World War 1. In fact, it destroyed the German economy. Enter Hitler to take advantage of that.

(The British and Canadians and Americans didn't give a damn for saving Jews. In fact, they refused to do so, even sending escaped Jews back to the death camps. We are not good people fighting evil. And the very rich have a long history of plundering, murdering and impoverishing whole nations. It's called Empire buiding. The British empire murdered roughly 400,000,000. - all with the blessing, we are told, of God. In india, on at least two occasions they deliberately starved millions to death even though food was available. That was under Churchill who had a contempt of all foreigners. In 1920, he order the RAF in what is now part of Syria, to concentrate on bombing helpless civilians who lived in undefended towns.
From 1690, Americans murdered native peoples making sure to include men, women and children. by 1900 only 20,000 were left. The last 'Indian war' was in 1923, bringing the aboriginal population down to 20,000. That was all to please land speculators - like George Washington. Over the years, they had killed 130,000,000 native peoples. It became a model for Hitler in planning his holocaust. Don't kid yourself. The rich and powerful have a long history of brutality and murder.--by the way, did you know the American CIA led by George Bush - the father of the later George - led in the murders of some 200,000 innocent Guatemalans? They were especially interested in killing priests, missionaries, and nuns. --no. the story has never appeared in our news media. But the National Film Board has a film about it. It is very foolish to assume the super wealthy want to help us and give us jobs. Moving into that circle requires ruthlessness and greed. And that's the oil industry. American capitalists are now bleeding Latin America,, making it unlivable. And the U.S. is now threatening war against Cuba to bring it back to the good
old days when it was bled dry by American gangsters and American capitalists. )

The very rich are very seldom close to God. And it's the very, very rich who own the oil industry.
 

Graeme Decarie

Well-Known Member
Messages
4,589
Reaction score
1,489
1. Mendalla - Most climate scientists agree. The process already begun will end for us within a generation. And if you heard somebody say it could take centuries, that somebody must have been an oil executive.
(The Netherlands did this years ago.)

Solar power, yes. in fact, it is quite possible with current technology to set up an unlimited number of wind mills in the oceans around us - and also many on land. The technology is well advanced. But have you heard any oil executives discussing this? And why aren't the Liberals and Conservatives talking about it?

2. Northwind - think hard. You sent a post suggesting we need oil for our stoves. That is such a great issue that it is enough to suggest we must continue to poison the earth by doing that?
 

Graeme Decarie

Well-Known Member
Messages
4,589
Reaction score
1,489
An error above. The sentence about The Netherlands and it's offshore windmill should be a paragraph lower than it is.
 

ChemGal

One with keen eye
Messages
12,543
Reaction score
3,189
Yes. Chem gal is right. If the oil industry says if it necessary, we much accept that and die gracefully.
So how do you propose to keep up with medicine, medical research?
I do think we can find alternative but we're not in a place where we can just drop things within 20 years.
 
Messages
27,257
Reaction score
3,690
I think what everybody’s saying is that there is technology in development, if not developed already, and the oil and gas companies need to step back and let that happen, now (also so that new energy methods have time to improve (like almost every technology has evolved over time) and become the dominant technologies before it’s too late; instead of bending the truth and playing dirty defence so it won’t get in the way of their business projections. They need to be used while phased out but they need to take a backseat to emerging methods and expect to be (and accept) being phased out sooner not later. It’s not sudden. They’ve been stalling everything up for decades.
 
Last edited:
Messages
27,257
Reaction score
3,690
@Graeme Decarie please tell me how you suggest homes get heated without oil/gas when it's -40 outside. That's a serious question.

Also, I may look pretty male these days. I'm not.
What about hybrid solar and electric hot water boilers and radiators and heat radiant flooring, insulating with thick glass windows, heavy carpets and drapes, sealing up cracks, and adding a pellet stove fireplace that burns recycled materials (heat from which can also be diverted to the water heater)? All of those separate technologies exist...why not hybrids, whereby the electricity used for heating only kicks in when the other sources are low enough (something similar to how hybrid cars work, except it’s the electricity that kicks in last and oil and gas are not part of the available energy sources, or are a last resort at most )?

I’m sure it’s possible - or something along those lines. It’s just a matter of getting to it, and removing obstacles placed in the way by the Oil and Gas industry.


And...incentives to home owners and builders for choosing such options. Higher heating prices for those who don’t.
 
Last edited:

Graeme Decarie

Well-Known Member
Messages
4,589
Reaction score
1,489
"We're not in a place where we can just drop things in twenty years."
So? We make a deal wih nature and get an extra fifty years? I'm afraid it doesn't work that way. We either drop things in some period of time - or we lose. We can't say to nature, "I'm not ready yet."

Anyway, a lot of the technology is there - and has been for years. The enemy is the oil industry which is thinking only of its own profits.
 

Luce NDs

Well-Known Member
Messages
46,017
Reaction score
3,609
Slow process ... the poor step up first as they are slower in the eyes of what's capital!
 

Mrs.Anteater

Just keep going....
Messages
4,279
Reaction score
2,047
I am surprised to hear that Alberta has neither wind nor sun to produce power. One advantage that Canada has, is the vast land- no problem with space to put all those alternative power sources. I am not sure if people think that solar panels only have to be directly on your roof. If Canada builts pipelines to transport oil, why could power not be transported equally? Not that long distance is something to strive for.
Bettes question is also valid- there might be places people shouldn’t or can’t live anymore. Like the floods that are supposed to come ( and are happening)- rebuilding really doesn’t make sense.
I am always surprised how after a severe storm, people who live way out, are complaining on the radio that their power is out for a week. With climate change and increasing storms and other emergency situations, I fully expect that people either have to learn to live independently like the first settlers or better move to a more populated area.
The problem is that we have come to get used to our conveniences and deny that there are limits.
If money was invested into alternative resources, Canada would be way further than where it is now. Part of it is, the voting system. If with proportional elections the Greens had gotten into Parliament in the 80 ties, a small but nagging voice for the environment, the country would look different today. That’s what happened after the oil crisis in Germany.
 

Luce NDs

Well-Known Member
Messages
46,017
Reaction score
3,609
Wind needs spatial Aerei to get woundup! Liebenstrum ...

In Celtic lands this may be a Harpie!
 

Mendalla

Eastern Lowland Gorilla
Messages
31,150
Reaction score
14,464
One advantage that Canada has, is the vast land- no problem with space to put all those alternative power sources.
Then why is Ontario chewing up prime farm land to build them? Almost every wind turbine in my part of the province is on a farm. I get why farmers do it and don't begrudge them that. They probably get more money from the land lease than they do from crops and it is certainly steadier income. But when people are pushing us to buy local food, is it really good public policy to give up yet more agricultural land, even if it is arguably a better use of it than sprawling suburbs.
 

Northwind

Still knitting. Walking the path to health.
Messages
10,663
Reaction score
4,075
I'm curious how people jump to conclusions based on a comment I made about living in an area that has extreme cold winters. It is all well and good to want to reduce our dependence on oil and gas. In fact, it's crucial. My saying that we can't adequately heat homes in extreme climates right now is not saying there won't ever be solutions. I am saying that people are unrealistic to suggest we can stop oil and gas right now.

It has been interesting moving here after 20 years in oil and gas country. I'm now exposed to more people who are very opposed to the oil and gas industry. Some come across as very unrealistic. To be clear people in "The Patch" who yearn for the glory days of oil and gas are equally unrealistic. Yes, it is possible to live off the grid on a Gulf Island. People do it in the north too. It's harder and they likely have a vehicle. It isn't going to happen on a broader scale immediately.

Yes, there is sun and wind in the north. Heck there's even windmills and solar panels. The city of Fort St John, BC built an amazing house that is energy neutral. It has many European components and works well. We can absolutely commit to building more of these buildings. The fact is, adding solar panels and a windmill to a 40 year old home will not make it energy neutral. It will only help reduce energy consumption. That's a good start. From some of the responses I've seen here, that would not be enough. My husband and I looked into adding solar to our home in the BC Peace. We had a south facing roof that seemingly would have been perfect. We did not do it because the cost was prohibitive and we would not have gotten enough energy to warrant the cost.

I wish we could actually have a productive discussion about this important issue. This is not all or nothing. Still, it will be a process. There are, believe it or not, gas companies that are becoming more environmentally responsible.
 

Graeme Decarie

Well-Known Member
Messages
4,589
Reaction score
1,489
For thirty years, we have done nothing significant. The oil companies most certainly do block progress. They spend billions to make elected politicians back off. Haven't you heard of this? In the U.S., it's no secret. Senators and congressmen there can retire to prosperous years. That' why Americans who protest get beaten up by police.
In thirty years, we have now developed a plan to deal with this.
There's no point in saying the oil cos. will save us. They won't. They've made that clear. There's no point in claiming we need oil. We don't. We have alternatives. Yes, they might be expensive. Yes, they might interfere with current plans. The alternative is....?
You think the oil industry cares what we think? This is one of the most brutal, murderous industries in existence. How do you think the British got hold of those oil fields in the first place? And how do you think American oil companies stole them from the British? Oil companies bought governments to go to war, killing millions for that oil. And that goes way back for a century. Don't confuse oil bosses with fairy godmothers.
And We can't tell nature to be patient until we come up with something.
 

Northwind

Still knitting. Walking the path to health.
Messages
10,663
Reaction score
4,075
Oh FFS. :rolleyes: Preach at me. I'm an ignorant sinner. :censored:
 

Graeme Decarie

Well-Known Member
Messages
4,589
Reaction score
1,489
Nobody's preaching at you. I'm disagreeing with you. Is that a sin?

Your view is we can trust the oil industry - one of the most murderous and destructive industries in history. Indeed, private business has taken over control of much of the world. That is why we are having so many wars. Care to guess how many wars this world has fought since 1945. The most conservative guess would be 27. But it's really been more.
And it is no secret that big business owns both the Liberals and the Conservatives. But you prefer not to see that.
And there's no point in saying we need oil. What we need matters less than what is coming down on us.
Scientists all over the world have been telling us for years what is happening and what is going to happen.
And, no, I am not comforted by a thought that appeared on this page to say a few people would survive.
Whoopee. We cannot have oil without destroying the planet. I'm sorry to inconvenience you. But that's the reality.
 

Northwind

Still knitting. Walking the path to health.
Messages
10,663
Reaction score
4,075
I am certainly not saying we can trust the oil industry. You've inferred way too much into my comments.

Have a good day.
 

Graeme Decarie

Well-Known Member
Messages
4,589
Reaction score
1,489
But you HAVE said we can trust the oil industry. Read your own letters. You have ignored ALL the conclusions world scientists have reached. And you have repeatedly spoken favourably of the industry.

Have a good day? How witty!
 
Top