Martin (Canada's future PM) Goes Cool on Kyoto

[Frederic Bastiat]

http://www.globeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20031203.wxkyoto1203/BNStory/Front/

Martin goes cool on Kyoto

OTTAWA, MOSCOW, CALGARY — Prime-minister-designate Paul Martin distanced himself Tuesday from Canada's plan to fulfill the Kyoto accord , as a senior Russian official cast a cloud over the future of the sweeping global pact to cut greenhouse-gas emissions.

Mr. Martin, asked repeatedly whether his government will follow through on Canada's Kyoto commitments should the deal die, said Canada does not yet have an adequate plan to determine whether it can live up to its targets.

<...>

Mr. Martin said Canada hasn't even assembled a plan that would determine whether it can reach its Kyoto targets. The pact would force Canada to chop emissions -- largely caused by burning fossil fuels -- by as much as 30 per cent from business-as-usual levels.

"What I have said very clearly is you need a plan to determine whether in fact you can meet those targets," Mr. Martin said.

"That plan is going to determine our capacity to do so , our ability to do so and really what are the very important steps. And we have not yet developed that plan, certainly not to my satisfaction."

His comments were a clear repudiation of Mr. Chrétien's Climate Change Plan for Canada, unveiled in November of 2002 by Environment Minister David Anderson. At the time, some provinces criticized the plan as full of holes. But $2.7-billion has already been spent by Ottawa to implement it.

<...>

[Spentastic]

1. Business has won

They'll kill us all to save their margins.

FUCKING IDIOTS

[Frederic Bastiat]

2. Here's a backgrounder on Kyoto

http://www.cbc.ca/national/news/kyoto/index.html

I can understand why Martin would have some misgivings about the whole deal.

[Spentastic]

3. Oh yes

It's the business first argument, we're not sure what will happen so we'll do nothing if it harms the economy.

It's shot termism and it'll get people killed.

[Frederic Bastiat]

6. Its the science first argument

It's the business first argument, we're not sure what will happen so we'll do nothing if it harms the economy.

Russia, like the U.S.A is not signing onto Kyoto because after both countries scientists looked at it, they reported back to their separate governments that Kyoto will do nothing to reduce GHG's or pollution (Kyoto isn't even supposed to reduce pollution), and will cost too much.

Add to that the fact that China and India have opted out permanently, add the fact that Japan and Australasia have indeed signed on, but now on the advice of their scientists, declined to take part.

[Spentastic]

7. That's interesting

Got links?

and this

"and will cost too much. "

We'll not be able to eat money.

[Frederic Bastiat]

12. Sure

http://www.bbc.co.uk/science/hottopics/climatechange/kyototreaty.shtml



The Kyoto treaty only places emission restrictions on certain countries. Countries are assigned 'carbon credits' based on existing economic and environmental factors, which they can then exchange with other countries. This means that some countries might end up increasing their overall emissions, and the system is open to abuse.

In Canada's case this means reducing GHG emissions to 6% below 1990 levels by 2010. As of today there are few if any technologies that can accomplish this feat (feel free to correct me) and renewable energy technologies will have only a marginal impact by then.

The other alternatives available is to deliberately reduce economic activity (especially energy developments), and/or buy emission credits (as specified by Kyoto) from other countries (which does nothing to reduce GHG's).

[goforit]

18. Yes!!!...I have suggested that Move-on march against CEOs, not

just on the mound where the weak SOB politicians in Washington
reside!!!!

And there have been very little protests againgst these
evil greedy scumbags.

There should be 100,000s of people knocking down their doors
just like Tom DeLay did in Florida.

But, just go back and have a beer and watch your NFL game
on the weekend. (sarcasm not directed to any specific person)

[Minstrel Boy]

4. hopefully this will wake-up those starry-eyed with Martin

Bono or no Bono, the man does not deserve the trust of the left.

From The Toronto Star:

NDP Leader Jack Layton said he was alarmed by Martin's failure to clearly reaffirm Canada's commitment to the protocol.

"What I heard were weasel words," Layton said. "It is vital that Canada take an independent and clear position on this issue. Any waffling whatsoever by Paul Martin will be disastrous not only for the future of this agreement, but for the future of the planet."
http://www.thestar.com/NASApp/cs/ContentServer?pagename=thestar/Layout/Article_Type1&c=Article&cid=1070406609772&call_pageid=968332188854&col=968350060724


From an opinion piece by John Ibbitson in today's Globe, "Why he's prepared to abandon dying deal":

This brings Mr. Martin back to the position he adopted when Mr. Chrétien first announced Canada would ratify the accord. The Martin camp was furious that the PM would cavalierly commit Canada to ratification at an African conference, without any real consultation and without any idea of how to make the plan work. No wonder Alberta, Canada's principal producer of fossil fuels, went ballistic.

So Mr. Martin, who wants to make nice with the West, rumbled his concern while his advisers warned of dire consequences for the Canadian economy should Kyoto be implemented. But when the time came for Parliament to vote on ratification, Mr. Martin went along.

...

But he would never be so blunt. After all, most Canadians are worried about global warming and want Canada to do its part. If the Liberals were to reverse themselves on Kyoto before the next federal election, they would enrage the environmentalists and hand the NDP the wedge issue of their dreams.

So expect Mr. Martin to fudge, to obfuscate, to say, "Let's be perfectly clear," and then to be anything but. In other words, expect the sort of thing he said yesterday. But understand: Kyoto is on life support, not just in Russia, but here.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20031203.wxibbits03/BNStory/Front/

[Screaming Lord Byron]

5. Martin's making quite a few mistakes before he's even PM, isn't he?

The real problem with Kyoto is, if the Russians pull out, the treaty can't be ratified. Martin's being way too presumptive, and if he were smarter, he'd wait for the Russians to kill it, then say 'well, Canada tried' and look like a hero. I'm really looking forward to another 10-year period of procrastination and delay on the way to the next treaty. I hope we have an Ozone layer left by then.

[Frederic Bastiat]

8. Or he's listening to scientific reason

http://www.sepp.org/NewSEPP/LttrtoPaulMartin.html

<...>

We strongly believe that important environmental policy should be based on a strong foundation of environmental science. Censoring credible science out of the debate because it does not conform to a pre-determined political agenda is clearly not a responsible course of action for any government. Your openness to re-examining the recent approach to the Kyoto file encourages us to believe that you may also be open to reconsidering the way in which the scientific debate was suppressed as well. We certainly hope so. Although ratification has already taken place, we believe that the government of Canada needs a far more comprehensive understanding of what climate science really says if environmental policy is to be developed that will truly benefit the environment while maintaining the economic prosperity so essential to social progress.

In the meantime, we would be happy to provide you with more information on this important topic and, for those of us who are able, we would like to offer to meet with you personally to discuss the issue further in the near future.

Above letter signed by:

Dr. Tim Ball, Environmental Consultant, 28 years Professor of Climatology, University of Winnipeg.

Dr. Madhav Khandekar, Environmental Consultant, former Research Scientist with Environment Canada. 45-year career in the fields of climatology, meteorology and oceanography.

Dr. Tad Murty, private sector climate researcher. Previously Senior Research Scientist for Fisheries and Oceans; conducted official DFO climate change/sea level review; Former Director of the National Tidal Facility of Australia; Current editor - "Natural Hazards".

Dr. Chris de Freitas (Canadian), Climate Scientist and Professor - School of Geography and Environmental Science, The University of Auckland, NZ.

Dr. Vaclav Smil, FRSC, Distinguished Professor of Geography; specialization in climate and CO2, University of Manitoba.

Dr. I.D. Clarke, Professor, Isotope Hydrogeology and Paleoclimatology, Department of Earth Sciences (arctic specialist), University of Ottawa.

Dr./Cdr. M. R. Morgan, FRMS, Dartmouth, Nova Scotia. Climate Consultant, Past Meteorology Advisor to the World Meteorological Organization and other scientific bodies in Marine Meteorology. Recent Research Scientist in Climatology at University of Exeter, UK.

Dr. Chris Essex, Professor of Applied Mathematics, University of Western Ontario - focuses on underlying physics/math to complex climate systems.

Dr. Keith D. Hage, climate consultant and Professor Emeritus of Meteorology, University of Alberta, specialized in micrometeorology, specifically western prairie weather patterns.

Dr. Kenneth Green, Chief Scientist, Fraser Institute, Vancouver, BC - expert reviewer for the IPCC 2001 Working Group I science report.

Dr. Petr Chylek, Professor of Physics and Atmospheric Science, Dalhousie University, Nova Scotia.

Dr. Tim Patterson, Professor, Department of Earth Sciences (Paleoclimatology), Carleton University, Ottawa, Ontario.

David Nowell, M.Sc. (Meteorology), Fellow of the Royal Meteorological Society, Canadian member and Past Chairman of the NATO Meteorological Group, Ottawa.

Dr. Fred Michel, Professor, Department of Earth Sciences (Paleoclimatology), Carleton University, arctic regions specialist, Ottawa.

Dr. Roger Pocklington, Ocean/Climate Consultant, F.C.I.C., Researcher - Bedford Institute of Oceanography, Nova Scotia.

Rob Scagel, M.Sc., Forest microclimate specialist, Principal Consultant, Pacific Phytometric Consultants, Surrey, B.C.

Dr. David Wojick, P.E., Climate specialist and President, Climatechangedebate.org, Sioux Lookout, Ontario/Star Tannery, VA.

Dr. S. Fred Singer, Distinguished Research Professor at George Mason University and Professor Emeritus of Environmental Science at the University of Virginia.

Dr. Richard S. Lindzen, Alfred P. Sloan Professor of Meteorology, Department of Earth, Atmospheric and Planetary Sciences at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology.

George Taylor, State Climatologist, Oregon Climate Service, Oregon State University, Past President - American Association of State Climatologists.

Doctorandus Hans Erren, Geophysicist/climate specialist, Sittard, The Netherlands.

Dr. Hans Jelbring - Wind/Climate specialist, Paleogeophysics & Geodynamics Unit, Stockholm University, Sweden. Currently, Manager Inventex Aqua Research Institute, Stockholm.

Dr. Theodor Landscheidt, solar/climate specialist, Schroeter Institute for Research in Cycles of Solar Activity, Waldmuenchen, Germany.

Dr. Zbigniew Jaworowski, Climate expert, Chairman of the scientific council of CLOR, Central Laboratory for Radiological Protection, Warsaw, Poland.

Dr. Art Robinson, Founder - Oregon Institute of Science and Medicine - focus on climate change and CO2, Cave Junction, Oregon.

Dr. Craig D. Idso, Chairman, Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change, Tempe, Arizona.

Dr. Sherwood B. Idso, President, Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change, Tempe, Arizona.

Dr. Pat Michaels, Professor of Environmental Sciences, University of Virginia; past president of the American Association of State Climatologists and a contributing author and reviewer of the IPCC science reports.

Dr. Sonja Boehmer-Christiansen, Reader, Department of Geography, University of Hull, UK, Editor, Energy & Environment.

Dr. Robert C. Balling, Jr., Director - Office of Climatology, Arizona State University.

Dr. Fred Seitz, Past President, U.S. National Academy of Sciences, President Emeritus, Rockefeller University, New York, NY.

Dr. Vincent Gray, Climate specialist, expert reviewer for the IPCC and author of "The Greenhouse Delusion; a Critique of 'Climate Change 2001'", Wellington, NZ.

Dipl.-Ing. Peter Dietze, energy and climate consultant, official scientific IPCC TAR Reviewer, Langensendelbach, Germany.

Dr. Roy W. Spencer, Principal Research Scientist, Earth System Science Center, The University of Alabama in Huntsville.

Dr. Hugh W. Ellsaesser, Atmospheric Consultant - four decades experience as a USAF weather officer and climate consultant at the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, CA.

Dr. Asmunn Moene, Former head of the National Forecasting Center, Meteorological Institute, Oslo, Norway.

Dr. Freeman J. Dyson, Emeritus Professor of Physics, Institute for Advanced Studies, Princeton, New Jersey.

Dr. James J. O'Brien, Professor of Meteorology and Oceanography, Center for Ocean-Atmospheric Prediction Studies, Florida Sate University. Co-chaired the Regional Climate Change Study for the Southeast USA.

Dr. Douglas V. Hoyt, climate consultant, previously Senior Scientist with Raytheon/ITSS; Broadly published author of "The Role of the Sun in Climate Change".

Dr. Gary D. Sharp, Scientific Director, Center for Climate/Ocean Resources Study, Salinas, California.

Prof. Dr. Kirill Ya. Kondratyev, Academician, Counsellor RAS, Research Centre for Ecological Safety, Russian Academy of Sciences and Nansen International Environmental and Remote Sensing Centre, St.-Petersburg, Russia.

Dr. Paal Brekke - Solar Physicist, specialist in sun/UV radiation/Sun-Earth Connection, affiliated with the University of Oslo, Norway.

Dr. Richard S. Courtney, climate consultant, expert IPCC peer reviewer, Founding Member of the European Science and Environment Forum, UK.

William Kininmonth, Managing Director, Australasian Climate Research. Formerly head of Australia's National Climate Centre and a member of Australia's delegations to the Second World Climate Conference and the UN Intergovernmental Negotiating Committee for a Framework Convention on Climate Change.

Dr. Jarl R. Ahlbeck, Docent in environmental technology/science, Process Design Laboratory, the Swedish University of Finland, Biskopsgatan, Finland.

Dr. Lee C. Gerhard, Principal Geologist, Kansas Geological Survey; Adjunct Professor, Colorado School of Mines; Noted author and geological expert on climate history.

[StopThief]

10. Ummmm. . . . . . .

Aren't you aware, exCav, that as is the case in all religions, Kyoto is based on faith. Try as you might with commentaries from (gasp) climate specialists, the message will not sink in. I do admire your efforts, though.

[Frederic Bastiat]

14. Yup

And this religion is costing us billions, imagine how many nurses and teachers we could hire with $2.7 billion ;-)

[Teaser]

21. What approach do you suggest to mitigating Climate Change?

Speaking as a scientist, and as someone who as developed models of Climate Change in the past, I was aware that Kyoto wouldn't make an appreciable dent in warming.

However, what Kyoto would have done is get the process started toward implementing changes that would make a dent. Once reforms are in place, it becomes easier to tweak those reforms to make them work.

Now that clearly won't happen. And you seem rather glad. So what would you do about it?

[Frederic Bastiat]

22. I'm glad

because I don't want my tax dollars shovelled off to some country just so that we can purchase some arbitrary "emission credits". What should the government of Canada do with that money by way of reducing GHG's?

1. Spend that money towards research in renewable energy (Wind, Sun, Water), low emissions coal burning, efficient sequestering of CO2 in petroleum reservoirs (Canada has huge reservoirs of both Coal and Oil) and much broader applications for fuel cell technology.

2. Government should set benchmarks for Industry emissions reductions based on realistic technological innovation, rather than using arbitrary reduction as called for in Kyoto.

Canada has the skilled labor, environmental conscience and $$$ to pull it off.

[Spazito]

23. Wow, well said!

*

[Minstrel Boy]

9. There's already blood in the water

Blue blood, that is. ;)

I've had a John Turner buzz about Martin for years. His myth is way out of whack with what he can deliver. Now he's the king and no longer the prince, his negatives are going to come into sharp focus, and they all reveal vulnerabilities the NDP can exploit.

Layton had a smart opinion piece a few months ago, directed towards liberal Liberals: You want to further the Chretien legacy? Vote NDP!

Yesterday's flap de jour:

Paul Martin defends free flights
OTTAWA (CP) - Incoming prime minister Paul Martin says he did nothing wrong by accepting five flights on the corporate jets of his rich friends while he was finance minister.
...
NDP Leader Jack Layton noted that Martin received large campaign donations from several of the people or families from whom he accepted the flights. Those included a $75,000 donation from Onex, a $50,000 donation from Harrison McCain, and a $100,000 donation from Wallace McCain.

"It's just a very nice little circle," he said.
http://www.canoe.ca/CNEWS/Politics/Liberal/2003/12/02/274894-cp.html

Go Jack!

[Frederic Bastiat]

16. Martin was busy yesterday

Picking up another seat from the Bloc, heck he aint even PM yet!

http://www.globeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20031203.wxmartin03/BNStory/Front/

OTTAWA — Paul Martin scooped up a defector from the Bloc Quebecois yesterday, even before taking office, as Quebec polls show the Liberals with a towering lead that could shake the separatist party to its core.

Robert Lanctôt, 40, first elected as a sovereigntist MP only three years ago, announced he is crossing the floor to the federal government, lauding Mr. Martin as a figure who can open "a new era" for Quebec within Canada. Mr. Lanctôt was quickly accepted into the fold by Quebec Liberal MPs.

Liberal organizers touted the move as a signal of changing times in Quebec, arguing Mr. Martin will be viewed as more Quebec-friendly and could make deep inroads into Bloc support, perhaps even crippling the party.

[pink_poodle]

13. I just knew he was a run-of-the-mill-prick yet every time..............

I said so, I got beaten up. This guy is a jerk!!!!!!!!!!!!! So both Canada and Russia are backing away from the Kyoto Accord. Hmmm......

It won't be long before Martin has his nose right up Bush's arse. I just know it with this guy.

[Screaming Lord Byron]

19. Too early to tell yet.

Kyoto without the Russians is dead anyway. I'm suspicious of Martin's position on this, but I'm not ready to get the gallows out quite yet. Not until he's actually Prime Minister at least.

I still think he's way too wily to suck up to Bush.

[pink_poodle]

20. I hope so Lord Byron. -nm

:

[Flightful]

11. Kyoto & national security

We're sitting on oil reserves that could be even larger than those of Saudi Arabia but the Kyoto deal would kill most oilsands projects. Every dollar spent on Canadian oil is one less dollar for the Saudi-financed terrorists.

[Minstrel Boy]

15. the oilsands should be killed

It's a disaster, and not just environmentally.

Two tons of sand must be mined for one barrel of oil. And it takes the equivalent of two barrels of oil to extract three barrels from the sands. That is, the oilsands yield much less than half the net energy of conventional oil.

And extraction requires tremendous amounts of fresh water, which ends up as oily sludge in huge ponds. For each barrel recovered, two and a half barrels of waste are pumped. Residents of northern Alberta know the environmental cost, including the destruction of forests, livestock death and rise in miscarriages and disease.

[Spazito]

17. Here is another take on this issue

from CTV. Canada has ratified the Kyoto Treaty. The question now is the plan for implementing it.

<snip>

Martin, who voted with the government to ratify Kyoto last December, said he still hopes to live up to Canada's commitment, but needs to be assured of the impact of the plan.

<snip>

He's long been an environmentalist," Duffy says. "But he also knows that you can't expect Canadians, at a time when our economy is only percolating at 1.0 per cent, to take a huge economic hit when the rest of the world isn't doing their share."

Martin noted that measures to fight climate change, such as using less energy, can actually make the economy more efficient. But he said Canada needs to develop a plan that can meet targets.

"My view is when you sign an international agreement, clearly your intention should be to implement it. But the only way you can implement it is if in fact you have a plan."

more

http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/1070455923468_42///?hub=TopStories