UN says Trudeau’s emissions impossible

[Anonymous]

First of all, there is no such thing as a carbon tax, there are just taxes or confiscation. Any tax has the same effect, it lowers economic output. So, technically a tax, much like a recession lowers carbon emissions a bit. What it doesn't do, especially in a carbon negative nation like Canada is budge the climate needle. The Paris Agreement makes no difference. This is something both climate realists and alarmists agree on.



From Sun News Media



When will Prime Minister Justin Trudeau and environment Minister Catherine Mckenna end the fiction that Canada is meeting its commitments to reduce industrial greenhouse gas emissions they made to the united Nations?



The UN's ninth annual emissions gap report released Tuesday says Canada, responsible for 1.6% of global emissions, isn't on track to meet its 2020 or 2030 targets.



Meanwhile, global emissions are rising — to a record 53.5 billion tonnes last year.



The report says even if every nation that signed the UN's Paris climate accord in 2015 met its commitments, it will not stop global temperatures from rising above the UN's targets.



To hold the global temperature increase to the upper limit of 2C, countries will have to triple their current efforts to cut emissions, while keeping them to 1.5C requires five times the effort. Both require higher carbon taxes.



The emissions gap report is the second time the UN has said neither Canada nor the global community are meeting their Paris commitments.



It joins earlier, similar findings with regard to Canada's performance by the environmental commissioner and provincial auditors general from nine of 10 provinces, and from the federal government's own assessments.



Given that global emissions are rising and Canada isn't meeting its UN commitments (our emissions fell 1.4% in 2016, the last year for which figures are available), a critical question arises for Canada's federal and provincial governments.



[size=150]How much more money will Canadians have to pay through carbon pricing — whether in carbon taxes or cap-and-trade — in a futile effort to lower emissions to the levels the Trudeau government claims it will?[/size]



President Donald Trump has rejected the findings of a recent study produced by 13 U.S. federal agencies warning that the impacts of climate change are already being felt and will increase, saying he doesn't find it credible.



Yet America reduced emissions by 2.7% for its largest industrial emitters last year, albeit not recognized by the UN because of Trump's withdrawal from the Paris accord.



This was achieved largely by replacing coal-fired power plants with less expensive natural gas, which burns at half the carbon intensity of coal, huge reserves of which have been freed up by fracking.



And without a national carbon tax, but through technological innovation and market forces.

[Anonymous]

How much more money will Canadians have to pay through carbon pricing

This is what average families like mine want to know, but neither our premier nor the prime minister want to answer.

[Anonymous]

How much more money will Canadians have to pay through carbon pricing

This is what average families like mine want to know, but neither our premier nor the prime minister want to answer.

Get used to it kid, it goes up every year to fifty bucks a tonne by 2022. And that is just the opening act. The IPCC will issue an even more dire sky is falling prediction and Justine who will still be in office then will double down on the rip off and triple(minimum) the vig payment

[Anonymous]

How dare you deniers question emperor True Dope.

[Anonymous]

How dare you deniers question emperor True Dope.

Forgive us.

 

[Odinson]

Any kind of raise in taxes lowers the average homes consumer power..



They buy less stuff.

[Anonymous]

Any kind of raise in taxes lowers the average homes consumer power..



They buy less stuff.

Tell that to Justin Trudeau, because he doesn't listen to people in this country.

[Odinson]

Any kind of raise in taxes lowers the average homes consumer power..



They buy less stuff.

Tell that to Justin Trudeau, because he doesn't listen to people in this country.

Maybe his intent is that people downsize their domestic vehicles..





A V6 is a gas guzzler compared to your average domestic car in europe.







And that people would try to avoid any excess motoring.

[Anonymous]

Any kind of raise in taxes lowers the average homes consumer power..



They buy less stuff.

Tell that to Justin Trudeau, because he doesn't listen to people in this country.

Maybe his intent is that people downsize their domestic vehicles..





A V6 is a gas guzzler compared to your average domestic car in europe.







And that people would try to avoid any excess motoring.

His intent is to be popular with the UN..



And if it causes mass job losses and poverty among average families, so be it.

[Anonymous]

By Lorrie Goldstein



Grits' carbon plan constantly moving target



TORONTO — Prime Minister Justin Trudeau's accusation Ontario Premier Doug Ford is "moving the goalposts ... (a) step backwards" on the province's industrial greenhouse gas emission targets is laughable, given the Liberals' sorry history on this issue.



To say nothing of hypocritical. First, a brief explanation of why this controversy about "goalposts" erupted at Friday's first ministers' meeting.



Ford accused Trudeau and Environment Minister Catherine Mckenna of "moving the goalposts" on Ontario because they rejected his plan to reduce the province's emissions to 30% below 2005 levels by 2030, which is Trudeau's national standard for all of Canada.



They responded Ford moved the goalposts because he scrapped former Ontario Liberal premier Kathleen Wynne's cap-and-trade scheme, intended to lower provincial emissions to 37% below 1990 levels by 2030, a deeper cut.



Trudeau was relying on Ontario's plan under his Liberal ally, Wynne, to meet his national standard of a 30% cut below 2005 emissions by 2030, because other provinces whose climate change plans he accepted will not achieve that target.



Ford argued Trudeau and Mckenna are undermining Ontario's economy by demanding it achieve deeper cuts than other provinces, despite his pledge to meet Trudeau's national standard without a carbon tax.



Trudeau and Mckenna countered Ford was playing games with the numbers.



That criticism is especially hypocritical given that federal Liberal governments have been moving their goalposts backward and playing games with their emission targets for a quarter century.



In the 1993 election which brought Jean Chretien and the Liberals to power, he promised to reduce Canada's emission to 20% below 1988 levels by 2005.



That meant our emissions under the Liberals in 2005, should have been 470 megatonnes annually (a megatonne, or Mt, represents one million tonnes).



In fact, they were 732 Mt, a staggering 56% above Chretien's 1993 target, a huge backward step.



But long before 2005, Chretien moved the goalposts even further away from his 1993 election promise.



In 1998, he signed the United Nations' Kyoto accord with a far less stringent target for Canada of reducing our emissions to an average of 6% below 1990 levels between 2008 and 2012.



That meant Canada's emissions should have been an average of 567 Mt annually between 2008 and 2012.



When Paul Martin, having succeeded Chretien as PM in 2004, was defeated by Stephen Harper and the Conservatives in 2006, Canada's emissions were 723 Mt, or 28% above Chretien's 2008 to 2012 Kyoto target.



That made it impossible for Harper to achieve within two years, without causing a massive recession.



But the Liberals weren't done moving the goalposts back once again when they returned to power under Trudeau in the 2015 election.



As Liberal leader, Trudeau denounced as inadequate the less stringent targets Harper announced in 2015 — 17% below 2005 emissions by 2020, 30% below by 2030, both backward steps from Chretien's abandoned commitment to the Kyoto accord, which Harper scrapped.



But after the election, Trudeau reversed field and adopted Harper's targets and committed to fulfilling them under the UN'S Paris climate accord.



Trudeau's target means Canada's emissions in 2020 should be 608 Mt annually.



Our emissions for 2016, the last year for which figures are available, are 704 Mt annually.



This means Trudeau has to cut our emissions by 96 Mt annually, or 14%, within two years, the equivalent of shutting down Canada's entire electricity sector (79 Mt annually) and still falling 17 Mt short.



That's impossible.



To meet Trudeau's 2030 target, Canada will have to cut emissions by 192 Mt annually within 12 years, the equivalent of shutting down Canada's entire oil and gas sector (189.5 Mt annually). That's impossible.



To meet the latest UN targets which are much more onerous than those in the Paris accord — 45% below 2010 emissions by 2030 — Canada will have to lower its annual emissions to 382 Mt within 12 years, or by 322 Mt.



To achieve that, Canada will have to shut down the equivalent of its entire oil and gas sector (189.5 Mt annually), plus 76.6% of its transportation sector (132.5 Mt annually) by 2030.



That's ridiculous.



The Liberals first under Chretien, then under Paul Martin and now under Trudeau, have been moving their goal posts backwards for 25 years, missing every emission target they set.



So did the Conservatives — Brian Mulroney made the same commitment in 1988 that Chretien copied in 1993, and that Harper backtracked on in 2015.



But the Conservatives aren't the ones accusing Ford of moving the goalposts backwards now.



Given that Trudeau, Mckenna and Liberal governments have been doing that for 25 years, it's amazing they can keep a straight face.



Especially since Trudeau's carbon tax/price we're going to be paying won't meet his emission targets, yet again.

[Anonymous]

By Lorrie Goldstein of Sun News Media



Trudeau's carbon plan is incredibly flawed – why don't enviros call him out?



I want you to explain why, when Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, Principal Secretary Gerald Butts, and Environment Minister Catherine Mckenna spew nonsense about carbon pricing that is completely misleading, you don't call them on it? Why do you let them get away with prattling on like carnival barkers, while you mock Scheer and Ford? Trudeau and Co. continue to insist they're on track to meet Trudeau's emission reduction targets (which used to be Stephen Harper's) that Trudeau agreed to in the 2015 Paris climate accord.



No credible body believes this — not the United Nations, which has said so twice, not the federal environment commissioner, not nine provincial auditors general, not the federal government's own studies.



Why don't you mock Trudeau and Co. about that?



Why, given that, to be effective, Canada's national carbon price would have to be in the $100 to $200 per tonne range today — which the Trudeau government knows — aren't you demanding answers from Trudeau on what will happen to his carbon price after it reaches $50 per tonne in 2022 (this year it's $20), if he wins the Oct. 19 federal election?



Here are some other questions you aren't asking Trudeau and Co.



If Trudeau's revenue neutral carbon tax is such an obviously great idea that anyone smarter than Ford understands it, why did Trudeau approve provincial carbon pricing plans in Ontario (under the Liberals) and Alberta (under the NDP), to name just two, that weren't revenue neutral?



If, as Trudeau says, man-made, excuse me, I mean "peoplemade", climate change poses an imminent, existential threat to humanity, why didn't Trudeau bring in a national, revenue-neutral carbon tax, instead of the ineffective hodgepodge of provincial and federal plans he's created?



Trudeau and Co. are getting away with talking utter nonsense on this file and the people who know it are letting him, apparently because they believe an ineffective Liberal plan is better than nothing.



Shilling for the Liberals is not serving the interests of Canadians.



Butts tweeted this week that Ford's views on a carbon tax causing a recession are so dumb, it's as if he believes the moon is made of blue cheese.



In his last job as head of the World Wildlife Fund, Canada, Butts called for shutting down Canada's carbon-based energy industry by 2050.



That's so dumb, it's as if he believes energy comes from unicorn farts.



More importantly, when someone with that view in his last job has major influence over Canada's energy and taxation policies, it's time to start mocking.

[Berry Sweet]

Everyone knows that JTs carbon tax is just a cash grab.  Notice how nobody is doing nothing to change our ways of living? We need change, and we need it NOW.  Not some tax.  Everyone needs to change their ways of living, eating, etc.  This needs to be highly promoted...but it wont  because it wont make money and people will complain about it.

[Anonymous]

Everyone knows that JTs carbon tax is just a cash grab.  Notice how nobody is doing nothing to change our ways of living? We need change, and we need it NOW.  Not some tax.  Everyone needs to change their ways of living, eating, etc.  This needs to be highly promoted...but it wont  because it wont make money and people will complain about it.

Berry, does this mean you won't be voting for Trudeau? ac_wot

[JOE]

Everyone knows that JTs carbon tax is just a cash grab.  Notice how nobody is doing nothing to change our ways of living? We need change, and we need it NOW.  Not some tax.  Everyone needs to change their ways of living, eating, etc.  This needs to be highly promoted...but it wont  because it wont make money and people will complain about it.

While I agree with the goals of implementing a carbon tax, I agree that its been poorly implemented in Canada.



Compared with other nations, Canada has very little to show for all the tax collected.



Some countries are going all out, finding alternative energy solutions that are actually saving their citizens money. Eg Germany allows people collecting solar energy to sell its excess back to the state.



When was the last time BC Hydro did this for British Columbians? And have they ever encouraged it?



Of course not. Because they want everyone to buy their energy source to make money for them and fatten the wallets of its corporate executives.



In other words in Canada the guv doesn't do a damn thing for people who want alternative energy sources to save money & the environment.  And if they can't deliver results like other nations, the tax should be scrapped.



In its present form, youre right. The carbon tax is just a tax grab.

[Anonymous]

Germans are paying more than ever for electricity.



German household power prices at record high

https://www.reuters.com/article/germany-electricity-retail/german-household-power-prices-at-record-high-verivox-idUSL8N1MZ30X">https://www.reuters.com/article/germany ... SL8N1MZ30X">https://www.reuters.com/article/germany-electricity-retail/german-household-power-prices-at-record-high-verivox-idUSL8N1MZ30X