Edmonton- University of Alberta

[Black Star]

Originally Posted by Jaws

I think Suzuki is a hypocritical shill, but he is within his right to be so. It is also within the right of the UofA to award him an honourary degree, but having said that I don't why the university decided that they had bestow the honour among him at all. They had to understand that there would be serious fallout from this decision, so it strikes me as naïve that they even went there in the first place.

The U of A has the right to do what they choose.

As well Suzuki can say what he likes.

But....the law of Cause and Effect come to light.

Psst....U of A.....you are in OIL country. You know, our bread and butter.

Yet oddly enough you want to give a bogus degree to a guy who wants it all shut down lol.

[Airboy]

So away from the politics for a moment.

This project is now moving ahead. Lister Hall upgrades approximately $81 million.

http://majorprojects.alberta.ca/deta...velopment/3576

[Coldrsx]

About time... they were pretty awful back when I used to crash there for 'ship nights'.

[Landlocked]

Originally Posted by Black Star

The U of A has the right to do what they choose.

As well Suzuki can say what he likes.

But....the law of Cause and Effect come to light.

Psst....U of A.....you are in OIL country. You know, our bread and butter.

Yet oddly enough you want to give a bogus degree to a guy who wants it all shut down lol.

It would be a PR coup if they gave Ezra Levant one at the same time for his Ethical Oil work. Ezra is often wrong about a lot, but his E.O. argument hit the mark.

[adam-machiavelli]

I demand to see the voting records of anyone criticizing that amazing and highly influential human David Suzuki. He is sensationalist because anyone who uses television to get their message across has to act that way to get people's attention. If any of you are conservative voters, then you are hypocritical shills for the oil and gas industry, thus rendering your opinion moot and irrelevant.

I chose to write this message on a big bad energy-sucking computer, as opposed to using an eco-friendly stick in the dirt. So maybe I'm the hypocrite?

[Jaws]

Originally Posted by adam-machiavelli

If any of you are conservative voters, then you are hypocritical shills for the oil and gas industry, thus rendering your opinion moot and irrelevant.

I can’t say that I follow your logic, but I consider your opinion to be irrelevant. So as far as I’m concerned, your message in the dirt would have been equally as effective as your post.

[Reecemartin]

[Deleted]

[kcantor]

I find the discussions surrounding the granting of an honorary degree to David Suzuki to be interesting and challenging.

To start with, I disagree with much of what Suzuki espouses, how he chooses to evangelize his beliefs, and how he somehow manages to reconcile his own lifestyle choices with those things. On the other hand, I have had the pleasure of listening to him speak on several occasions and had some of my own beliefs challenged and some of my opinions changed as a result.

This is exactly the sort of interplay and exchange that one would expect a leading university to encourage and foster and we as well as the institution and its faculty and its students should be richer as a result. If that was conducted with an open exchange of thoughts and ideas rather than repeating rhetorical dogma on both sides, this conversation would potentially have the same results.

Would I give Greenpeace or the Suzuki Foundation a dime? Not on your life – I disagree with them too strongly on things both factual and stylistically that are important to me to do so. While I am not a University of Alberta Alumni, I do proudly and happily support them by contributing not insubstantial amounts of both time and dollars to specific programs that do closely match my personal priorities.

The research being done by the Faculty of Medicine and Dentistry, the work being done in the Faculties of Law and Planning and Fine Arts and Design and Music and Engineering is all as worthy of support today - and will be tomorrow - as it was yesterday. An honorary degree given to David Suzuki doesn’t change that in the least.

Including this year, the University of Alberta will have granted approximately 400 honorary degrees. Do I need to agree with the credentials and “worthiness” of each and every one of them and make my support conditional upon that? Of course not – that would be silly. Interestingly enough, if others had taken that position in the past, we would have no oil and gas sector to speak of to be defending because supporting its development potential threatened agriculture and forestry and coal mining at the time.

Can a case be made that agriculture and forestry are still under threat? Possibly, but at the same time oil and gas has greatly reduced our reliance on coal and continues to do so. The role of a university is to challenge and it is up to all of us to rise to those challenges with them, not surrender in the face of them in some sort of imaginary aggrieved protest.

[s4.audios]

Originally Posted by jaws

i can’t say that i follow your logic, but i consider your opinion to be irrelevant. So as far as i’m concerned, your message in the dirt would have been equally as effective as your post.

lol

[s4.audios]

Originally Posted by Reecemartin

These are all things that frankly have clear alternatives that don't require fossil fuels. This argument might have worked 10 years ago but today I really don't think it does.

-Electric cars are exploding
-Transit is electrifying very fast
-In general Electric heating is growing quite fast and has existed for a long time as does geothermal both of which are rapidly improving

I could continue but I am sure you get the point, clean tech and alternative energy is growing at an unprecedented rate hence massive investment in Fossil Fuels doesn't make a ton of sense in the long term, and anyways ff's are horrible for the planet and if anyone needs them in the future its not rich markets like Canada

And how exactly is that "electricity" you speak of generated??

At the end of the day.. there is a massive demand for fossil fuels still. I'd rather our economy be the supplier than other nations where rules and regulations are much worse around carbon emissions. I do also believe that Alberta and the rest of the oil rich areas in Canada need to diversify and pump up production of clean energy. We are definitely invested too much in just one source, but it doesn't mean we should reduce or cut off that investment.

[Hardhatdan]

Originally Posted by Reecemartin

These are all things that frankly have clear alternatives that don't require fossil fuels. This argument might have worked 10 years ago but today I really don't think it does.

-Electric cars are exploding
-Transit is electrifying very fast
-In general Electric heating is growing quite fast and has existed for a long time as does geothermal both of which are rapidly improving

I could continue but I am sure you get the point, clean tech and alternative energy is growing at an unprecedented rate hence massive investment in Fossil Fuels doesn't make a ton of sense in the long term, and anyways ff's are horrible for the planet and if anyone needs them in the future its not rich markets like Canada

Capital projects today are likely planned for 25 year lifespans.
It is incredibly unlikely that in 25 years the fossil fuel will be drastically reduced or gone.
Projects need to go ahead today to support the world while it transitions over the longer term. 25 years is a very short span of time even in today's rapidly evolving society.

[Rocket252]

U of A School of Business Comments


https://www.ualberta.ca/business/abo...norary-degrees

[Reecemartin]

[Deleted]

[Reecemartin]

[Deleted]

[Hardhatdan]

Originally Posted by Reecemartin

Maybe not in 10 years but easily in 15-20, theres already massive oversupply for fossil fuels. Not to mention the transition away from Oil is going to be exponential and is already huge when you look in places like China and India (markets thats are many multiples larger than Canada or the US, Shenzen alone has some 16000! electric buses - thats their whole fleet). The point I am trying to make is that in places like China where increased efficiency and less pollution are not a nice choice but a necessity have already done most of the R&D for advanced cleantech and so its already suprisingly developed
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/artic...e-oil-industry (Heres an article from Bloomberg on the effect of Electric Buses on the Oil Industry)

Not to mention tons of places have commited to banning ICE's completely within ~20 years, imagine the blow that will be to oil prices (not to mention that every year these targets seem to get moved even closer and become even more wide reaching, its really the way of the world)

I think you are dreaming.
Global fossil fuel demand is still growing. You have to have that taper off before you start talking about it trending down to the point where new capital spending isn't required.

[kcantor]

Originally Posted by Rocket252

U of A School of Business Comments


https://www.ualberta.ca/business/abo...norary-degrees

an interesting read, not that it changed my thoughts above.

it does, however, make me wonder - are those official "school of business comments" or are they dean doucet's official comments or are they joseph doucet's personal comments.

[Landlocked]

Originally Posted by kcantor

an interesting read, not that it changed by thoughts above.

it does, however, make me wonder - are those official "school of business comments" or are they dean doucet's official comments or are they joseph doucet's personal comments.

It was carefully worded to avoid criticizing the decision. A good fluffy non-apology to ensure little administrative backlash.

[Reecemartin]

[Deleted]

[ExcaliburKid]

When the cost of electricity is prohibitive in most cases, what advantage is there to paying more to heat your building using electric energy than you would for fossil fuels?

In my industry, almost all HVAC equipment we see is gas-fired. The odd time we'll see electric entrance heaters or electric baseboard, electric humidifiers, but compared to natural gas, in AB, it doesn't make sense to use Electric energy sources

[240glt]

Originally Posted by ExcaliburKid

When the cost of electricity is prohibitive in most cases, what advantage is there to paying more to heat your building using electric energy than you would for fossil fuels?

In my industry, almost all HVAC equipment we see is gas-fired. The odd time we'll see electric entrance heaters or electric baseboard, electric humidifiers, but compared to natural gas, in AB, it doesn't make sense to use Electric energy sources

Like we say, if you want to reduce your ekWh (to reduce consumption or improve your emissions standards) reduce your natural gas use. If you want to save money, reduce your power consumption.

Electric heat is only good where power is cheap. Otherwise it's insanely expensive to heat using electricity