HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada


Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #3161  
Old Posted May 8, 2023, 1:56 PM
casper casper is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Victoria
Posts: 9,358
Quote:
Originally Posted by Innsertnamehere View Post
The rebate is stupid right now as every EV an automaker can produce basically sells out immediately - the problem with EV production right now is supply, not demand. Further stimulating demand does nothing for getting more EVs on the road.

The subsidies would be better placed on improving EV-support infrastructure and development - greater subsidies to get EVs designed and manufacturing facilities online, and ensuring that those processes are as clean as possible.
A first step would be to remove the EV rebate on vehicles that are not manufactured in Canada.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3162  
Old Posted May 8, 2023, 2:06 PM
YOWetal YOWetal is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 4,401
Quote:
Originally Posted by casper View Post
A first step would be to remove the EV rebate on vehicles that are not manufactured in Canada.
Yes! ( well North America). It's crazy we begged, threatened and cajoled the Americans into including us and we are still going to hand out subsidies to Chinese EVs.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3163  
Old Posted May 8, 2023, 10:56 PM
O-tacular's Avatar
O-tacular O-tacular is offline
Fake News
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Calgary
Posts: 23,889
Albertan conservative conspiracy theorist nutcases on social media are now claiming that NDP supporters and "The Left" have deliberately caused all of the wildfires that led to the provincial state of emergency to disenfranchise them from voting in the upcoming election and to push the Great Reset on them.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3164  
Old Posted May 8, 2023, 11:51 PM
Hackslack Hackslack is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2015
Posts: 2,352
You gotta post a link to some of these claims
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3165  
Old Posted May 9, 2023, 1:09 PM
MolsonExport's Avatar
MolsonExport MolsonExport is offline
The Vomit Bag.
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Otisburgh
Posts: 45,544
__________________
The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, and wiser people so full of doubts. (Bertrand Russell)
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3166  
Old Posted May 9, 2023, 2:23 PM
Hawrylyshyn's Avatar
Hawrylyshyn Hawrylyshyn is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Location: Ontario
Posts: 1,949
Quote:
Originally Posted by MolsonExport View Post
"Pipelines Lower Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Emissions"

Holy this might be the dumbest opener to an article I've seen
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3167  
Old Posted May 9, 2023, 5:34 PM
Hackslack Hackslack is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2015
Posts: 2,352
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hawrylyshyn View Post
"Pipelines Lower Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Emissions"

Holy this might be the dumbest opener to an article I've seen
Apparently the Faculty of Engineering at the University of Alberta found that pipelines reduced GHG emissions by anywhere between 61 to 77 per cent versus rail for transporting oil and gas long distances.

https://www.ualberta.ca/engineering/...tthanrail.aspx
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3168  
Old Posted May 9, 2023, 6:00 PM
O-tacular's Avatar
O-tacular O-tacular is offline
Fake News
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Calgary
Posts: 23,889
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hackslack View Post
You gotta post a link to some of these claims
Multiple posts on social media. A Reddit thread about it:

https://www.reddit.com/r/Edmonton/co..._of_messed_up/

Here’s The Western Standard asking if they were deliberately set next to ‘oil towns’ at a press conference:

https://twitter.com/TheBreakdownAB/s...98076535492608
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3169  
Old Posted May 9, 2023, 6:08 PM
Hackslack Hackslack is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2015
Posts: 2,352
F that’s funny. So stupid. Western Standard question is so ridiculous …. In all likelyhood it’s whoever made it out camping first in the back country that unintentionally caused the ignition of these fires, whether by campfire or off-road vehicle. I believe it was a quad that ignited the fort mac fire
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3170  
Old Posted May 9, 2023, 7:20 PM
TorontoDrew's Avatar
TorontoDrew TorontoDrew is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 9,846
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hackslack View Post
Apparently the Faculty of Engineering at the University of Alberta found that pipelines reduced GHG emissions by anywhere between 61 to 77 per cent versus rail for transporting oil and gas long distances.

https://www.ualberta.ca/engineering/...tthanrail.aspx

The irony is the product in the pipe is the biggest cause of GHG emissions. I see no need to invest heavily into a industry the world is trying to scale back from.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3171  
Old Posted May 9, 2023, 7:38 PM
YOWetal YOWetal is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 4,401
Quote:
Originally Posted by TorontoDrew View Post
The irony is the product in the pipe is the biggest cause of GHG emissions. I see no need to invest heavily into a industry the world is trying to scale back from.
It's not ironic it's an often forgotten fact. A car EV or ICE has a ton of emissions for the production of the body.

The world isn't really trying to scale back from O&G in any meaningful way. Our exporting by rail certainly isn't destroying demand in any significant way.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3172  
Old Posted May 17, 2023, 12:47 PM
MolsonExport's Avatar
MolsonExport MolsonExport is offline
The Vomit Bag.
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Otisburgh
Posts: 45,544
Global warming set to break key 1.5C limit for first time

Quote:
Our overheating world is likely to break a key temperature limit for the first time over the next few years, scientists predict.

Researchers say there's now a 66% chance we will pass the 1.5C global warming threshold between now and 2027
Quote:
Since 2020 the World Meteorological Organisation has been giving an estimate of the chances of the world breaking the 1.5C threshold in any one year.

Back then they predicted there was less than a 20% chance of breaking 1.5C in the five years ahead.

By last year this had increased to 50%, and now it's jumped to 66%, which the scientists say means it's "more likely than not."
__________________
The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, and wiser people so full of doubts. (Bertrand Russell)
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3173  
Old Posted May 17, 2023, 6:34 PM
1overcosc's Avatar
1overcosc 1overcosc is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: Kingston, Ontario
Posts: 11,592
The 1.5C threshold was more or less impossible from the time they first proposed it.

The current focus of climate policy on "net zero by 2050" essentially guaranteed it. Everyone is thinking about the long term and letting progress be really slow in the short term, letting the perfect be the enemy of the good. Solutions that could reduce emissions very quickly, like using natural gas as a bridge fuel to quickly displace coal & oil pending more nuclear investment and further development of energy storage tech, are being rejected as they're not "net zero".

IMO, the better approach would be to have a very aggressive emissions reduction target in the short term followed by a slower transition to net zero. Say 75% reduction by 2035 on the way to net zero by 2080. That way we could maximize investment on solutions that are ready to go now but just need more scale-up (like EVs for commuters, nuclear power, the wind/solar/battery trio, heat pumps for buildings, etc.) while leaving harder problems (like complete elimination of natural gas power & decarbonizing steel production) for later.

In electricity, Ontario eliminated coal, replaced only a small part of it with natural gas, and expanded wind, and is now expanding nuclear. As a result Ontario went from a grid that around 30-40% fossil fuel, mostly coal, to a grid that is now 94% carbon-free with the remaining 6% being natural gas only. It was a huge reduction in the carbon intensity of the power grid (IIRC, something like 85% less emissions per watt from 2005 to 2020). The small amount of natural gas used is critical to ensuring the reliability & stability of the grid. The net zero fetishists are extremely upset that Ontario has no immediate plans to eliminate that last 15% of emissions per watt by 2030; ignoring that there's way the province can do that without severe impacts on reliability and affordability of power (and it's not just an "anti-windmill government" saying that, it's the civil servants in charge of the grid). In reality, Ontario did it right - focus on quick & early phaseout of what's feasible and leave the hardest, highest-hanging fruit for later.

By contrast, places like Germany whose entire plan is based on having an all-renewable grid in 30 years have actually increased fossil fuel emissions in the short term. If the entire global economy had approached the problem the way Ontario did with its electricity grid, we'd have a higher chance of meeting aggressive temperature targets because there'd be a much larger reduction in emissions in the short term.
__________________
"It is only because the control of the means of production is divided among many people acting independently that nobody has complete power over us, that we as individuals can decide what to do with ourselves." - Friedrich Hayek
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3174  
Old Posted May 17, 2023, 9:56 PM
O-tacular's Avatar
O-tacular O-tacular is offline
Fake News
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Calgary
Posts: 23,889
Getting really tired of this wildfire smoke every year. From yesterday:





The air today is just as bad, but less orange. Apologies for the large picture size.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3175  
Old Posted May 17, 2023, 10:18 PM
Truenorth00 Truenorth00 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2017
Posts: 25,158
Climate policy is massively frustrating. On one hand, half the political spectrum is either in denial or basically doesn't think any policy intervention is justified. On the other side, the governing party puts a price on carbon and declares victory. Not much effort at building infrastructure to help reduce emissions (like HSR and regional transit systems). Heck, it's going to take Canada Post 15 years to electrify its fleet. Not much effort to help cities develop with minimal impact. In fact, no substantial support for cities, while massively jacking up demand. Indeed, I'm struck by how the federal government now requires Gender Based Analysis for every major spend more than a few thousand. If we really believed climate change was a crisis, I would expect something approaching GBA+ for climate impacts. Right now, it feels like feminism is a substantially higher priority than climate change.

Weirdly enough I have had better discussions on climate change and Arctic security while on exchange in Trump's America than I've had at DND.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3176  
Old Posted May 17, 2023, 10:36 PM
1overcosc's Avatar
1overcosc 1overcosc is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: Kingston, Ontario
Posts: 11,592
You can upload to postimg or some other site on like that to resize it
__________________
"It is only because the control of the means of production is divided among many people acting independently that nobody has complete power over us, that we as individuals can decide what to do with ourselves." - Friedrich Hayek
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3177  
Old Posted May 17, 2023, 10:57 PM
1overcosc's Avatar
1overcosc 1overcosc is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: Kingston, Ontario
Posts: 11,592
Quote:
Originally Posted by Truenorth00 View Post
Climate policy is massively frustrating. On one hand, half the political spectrum is either in denial or basically doesn't think any policy intervention is justified. On the other side, the governing party puts a price on carbon and declares victory. Not much effort at building infrastructure to help reduce emissions (like HSR and regional transit systems). Heck, it's going to take Canada Post 15 years to electrify its fleet. Not much effort to help cities develop with minimal impact. In fact, no substantial support for cities, while massively jacking up demand. Indeed, I'm struck by how the federal government now requires Gender Based Analysis for every major spend more than a few thousand. If we really believed climate change was a crisis, I would expect something approaching GBA+ for climate impacts. Right now, it feels like feminism is a substantially higher priority than climate change.

Weirdly enough I have had better discussions on climate change and Arctic security while on exchange in Trump's America than I've had at DND.
LPC "climate policy" is based more on trying to "own the cons" than it is on actually reducing emissions.

And of course, the CPC is too beholden to the O&G industry to really do much.
__________________
"It is only because the control of the means of production is divided among many people acting independently that nobody has complete power over us, that we as individuals can decide what to do with ourselves." - Friedrich Hayek
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3178  
Old Posted May 18, 2023, 4:52 AM
O-tacular's Avatar
O-tacular O-tacular is offline
Fake News
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Calgary
Posts: 23,889
Quote:
Originally Posted by Truenorth00 View Post
Climate policy is massively frustrating. On one hand, half the political spectrum is either in denial or basically doesn't think any policy intervention is justified. On the other side, the governing party puts a price on carbon and declares victory. Not much effort at building infrastructure to help reduce emissions (like HSR and regional transit systems). Heck, it's going to take Canada Post 15 years to electrify its fleet. Not much effort to help cities develop with minimal impact. In fact, no substantial support for cities, while massively jacking up demand. Indeed, I'm struck by how the federal government now requires Gender Based Analysis for every major spend more than a few thousand. If we really believed climate change was a crisis, I would expect something approaching GBA+ for climate impacts. Right now, it feels like feminism is a substantially higher priority than climate change.

Weirdly enough I have had better discussions on climate change and Arctic security while on exchange in Trump's America than I've had at DND.
This should scare the shit out of all Canadians.

https://www.tiktok.com/@urbacalgary/...15888745532678

https://www.tiktok.com/@urbacalgary/...37424261025030
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3179  
Old Posted May 18, 2023, 8:29 AM
Architype's Avatar
Architype Architype is offline
♒︎ Empirically Canadian
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: 🍁 Canada
Posts: 12,211
Quote:
Originally Posted by 1overcosc View Post
LPC "climate policy" is based more on trying to "own the cons" than it is on actually reducing emissions.

And of course, the CPC is too beholden to the O&G industry to really do much.
I agree with much of what Truenorth00 said, although the leftist parties are more attitudinally in the realm of reality. IMO, meaningful progress will only be made when all major political parties are on the same page.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3180  
Old Posted May 18, 2023, 11:08 AM
Truenorth00 Truenorth00 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2017
Posts: 25,158
Quote:
Originally Posted by O-tacular View Post
I don't think this even scares Albertans....
Reply With Quote
     
     
This discussion thread continues

Use the page links to the lower-right to go to the next page for additional posts
 
 
Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada
Forum Jump



Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 7:10 AM.

     
SkyscraperPage.com - Archive - Privacy Statement - Top

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.