Congratulations to Iraq

There is so little good news from Iraq, this should be the top story on every newcast and blog around the world.

The Iraqi National Soccer team (The Lions) has won the Asian cup in a major upset. They beat Australia, South Korea and finally Saudi Arabia today in the final. (See the link for great pictures).

The team is made up of all Iraqis, Sunni, Shia and Kurd.

All of Iraq rejoiced today, even as bombs went off.

This is the type of thing that can truly revive a nation and allow it to remember the pride it always had.

May Iraqis revel in this victory.. and may it help them continue being strong in the face of terrible, terrible circumstances.

(It was so very special today, to see my RSS feed for Iraqi blogs, and every single one was positive and cheering… wonderful wonderful day)

August 2008 – US a Dictatorship warring with Iran

I don’t believe it… but a former Reagan official does…

Unless Congress immediately impeaches Bush and Cheney…. a year from now, the US could be a dictatorial police state at war with Iran

Listen to the Interview with Paul Craig Roberts, former Assistant Secretary to the Treasury during the Reagan administration. (And so called “father” of Reaganomics).

And he doesn’t think his words are very inflammatory…

Canada is taking the wrong road

In the past many weeks, Prime Minister Stephen Harper has announced over $20 billion in new military spending. It is my opinion that world leaders have woken up to what will be the true battle of the 21st century. It will not be terrorism or climate change, though those will be both sideeffects, and scapegoats… rather, it will be ever diminishing fossil fuel energy resources that will dictate where, when and how countries fight to survive and adapt.

Lee R Raymond

“We don’t have the option of saying that anything is off the table. We simply need to do everything we can,” NPC Chairman and former ExxonMobil Corp. Chief Executive Officer Lee R. Raymond told reporters following the council’s July 18 meeting, where the study [Facing Hard Truths] was approved and relayed to US Sec. of Energy Samuel W. Bodman, who had requested it.

So as I said, there seem to be two distinct camps to face this challenge.

Camp #1: Those that would fight aggressively, either through military might, or political muscle, for every last remaining scrap of oil, thus propping up their doomed economies with the promise of “cheap” energy, while wasting that same energy on fighting unwinnable wars and sowing dissent and fear both at home and abroad.

Camp #2: Those that choose to move away quickly from fossil fuels, and either reduce energy consumption drastrically or dramatically expanding renewable energy resources (or both), thus diminishing their need to rely on foreign supplies in fiery lands and making the issue of political capital through control of fossil fuel resources a moot point. (They also have the added benefit of “controlling” what will inevitably be the future of energy production)

It is worth noting that only the developed or largely-developed world need bother with these “camps”, as only they can and will continue to afford the cost of oil as it becomes more dear. We are already seeing the least wealthy countries scramble to provide energy for their citizens as costs rise… and being an oil exporter does not guarantee you a privileged spot. Iran, Nigeria, Pakistan, Ghana, Bolivia, Argentina, Bangladesh, and many others are all feeling the effects of higher energy costs, and growing demand.

With the ongoing military buildup, and continued stubborn refusal to reevaluate our mission in Afghanistan, Stephen Harper is clearly positioning Canada to be in Camp #1 along with the US, Britain, Australia, and other war-on-terror stalwarts.

The message being sent by Stephen Harper and Defense Minister O’Connor is clear, Canada is preparing it’s military to fight wars abroad.
C17 GlobeMaster

  1. New C17 Globemasters,and associated new support structure, to get us there.
  2. New Air Expeditionary Force to clear a path.
  3. New Leopard Tanks to fight the “enemy”.

Then of course there is the plan for the new fleet of small Arctic ice breakers and Arctic deep sea port, but I will get to that later.

Canada is an oil exporting nation.. were it not for that fact, and the high price of energy, would Canada be able to afford this strategy? Would we even be able to afford our continued presence in Afghanistan?.

While I am all for the solid defense of Canadian borders and values, I cannot support a government that would jeopardize our god-given gift of vast energy resources by squandering it abroad in a fight to secure energy resources for other countries.

Should we use those Arctic ice breakers to stake out and defend our sovereingty over energy resources which may be hidden under the ice in the Canadian Arctic? Absolutely. But if we just turn around and use that energy to fuel a raging war machine, then really what are we gaining?

It is time to refocus.

The countries that win this fight for energy in the 21st Century will be the ones who successfully transition their economies AWAY from fossil fuels. If they don’t do that, no matter how many foreign oil and gas fields they control, they will be constantly threatened by ever-increasing energy prices.

Canada is in a priviledged position. We are an oil exporter, we have the largest developed unconventional reserves (the tar sands) in the world, and we are a stable, democratic country. We have the opportunity to shift the money we make from the ongoing subsidization of energy security and energy consumption… to finding alternatives and ways to conserve.

The $300 Million being spent on Bagotvilles new Air Expeditionary Wing could have been spent to set up a nationwide research and development program into all forms of renewable energy.

Alberta Wind Farm

Funds for development of transit systems, national electrified rail, wind, solar, and tidal farms as well as biomass generators should all be funded directly from the sale of our national endowment of fossil fuels. Instead, we’re fighting unwinnable wars in far away lands, and making excuses for our industries to continue consuming and emitting massive amounts of energy and waste.

Time is short, but it is not too late to switch camps. Perhaps our energy endowment has made us complacent. Perhaps we are simply being greedy. Or perhaps we are being pushed by outside influences.. but whatever it is, if Canada and Canadians wish to continue having the standard of living we’ve had over the past 60 years, then we’d better refocus on the truly Canadian values that we claim to hold so dear.

New Study disproves Sun link to Climate Change

The BBC reports on a study to be published in the Proceedings A at the Royal Society.

It shows that for the last 20 years, the Sun’s output has declined, yet temperatures on Earth have risen.

“All the graphs [sun-link proponents] showed stopped in about 1980, and I knew why, because things diverged after that,” he told the BBC News website.
“You can’t just ignore bits of data that you don’t like,” he said.

(I went to the Royal Society website but it appears the study is not yet online)

Hopefully the entire report will be published in a publicly available place… but just the Summary would go a long way towards countering the cosmic ray theory. Hopefully this will also encourage other scientist to conduct similar studies.

The co-author had this to say about the cosmic ray theory.

I do think there is a cosmic ray effect on cloud cover. It works in clean maritime air where there isn’t much else for water vapour to condense around.

“It might even have had a significant effect on pre-industrial climate. But you cannot apply it to what we’re seeing now, because we’re in a completely different ball game

So perhaps further studies can be done to nail down that pre-to-post industrial change on the cosmic ray effect on cloud cover (which is said to cool the earth).

Conservative Party “plan” for Greenhouse Gases in Canada

A major policy speech introducing the new “plan” by the Conservative Party of Canada to reduce Canadian GhG emissions has been leaked to the Opposition Liberals tonight… and in an attempt to avoid influencing the markets before they open tomorrow (Wednesday), the crux of the plan has been released.

The CBC reports:

The speech says that by 2020, the government hopes it will have reduced greenhouse gas emissions by 150 million tonnes.

It also says the government will explore emission credit trading with the U.S. and Mexico, something they have been reluctant to embrace in the past.

“The Tory government intends to stop the rise of greenhouse gases in three to five years”.

So… this begs numbers.

OK. Here’s the Quick Facts thanks to Environment Canada’s Greenhouse Gas Inventory and some quick math:

The Kyoto Target: ie. 1990 CO2 levels for Canada: 599 Megatonnes (MT)
2004 CO2 emissions: 754MT
Estimated 2007 emissions given 2% growth rate: 790MTB
Estimated 2012 emission given 1% average growth (the slowdown period): 820MT
Emissions with Conservatives reduction plan by 2020: 670MT (equal to 1998 levels)

See the bottom for the explanation of the numbers if you’d like…. I know it’s not most peoples thing. :)

So, eight years after other countries have met their Kyoto commitment, Canada would be bringing up the rear… still 12% off. I’m inclined to be very unimpressed by this goal. Especially since if it’s so “tough” to even do this, we gotta start soon, and yet, we still haven’t heard how the Conservatives propose to do it. If they can actually do this… I think I could live with it. Given what is happening in the Oil Sands, it is going to be very difficult to cool off the incredible growth in that region. So if we can get down to 670 by 2020, I’d say that’s OK. Nothing to be proud of, but OK.

The GHG Inventory above gives a great pie chart of CO2 emissions by industry.

Oil & Gas, Transportation, and Electricity Generation (Coal/Gas) are the major emitters at about 20% each. With domestic Natural Gas supplies likely in major decline by 2012 (coincidence? I think not)… I see Nuclear power in Alberta, and Canadas, future to replace all the Gas fired plants.

They say the Conservatives will use Carbon Trading to meet their goals as well. This makes me very very sceptical. I see this as the gift to the Oil and Gas industry… which means we could see no reduction at all in the worst emitters, and general polluters, in the country.

What’s missing in this? Transportation… I’m hoping the Conservatives will surprise me and introduce major incentives for consumers and industry to reduce transportation emisssions. That could only take the form of high-mileage cars, more rail, and more mass transit. These would be the only changes that would create the real societal changes that would actually reduce our *perceived need* to endlessly emit CO2.

If… instead, the Conservatives (like their Liberal predecessors) focus solely on “conservation”, it will simply not be enough… Canadians, I think, have already gotten that message. We need more concrete, widespread action. Enough beating around the bush. Lets get to it as a nation.

Here is the Math….

EnvCan sets the baseline at 599 Megatonnes (MT) of CO2 (ie. the 1990 “Kyoto” target). EnvCan says as of 2004 we gained 27%… to 754MT, about 2% growth a year for the past 14 years.

If we grew 2% a year since 2004 and over the next 5 years we grow by an average of 1% a year… (assuming we “slow” our growth gradually) that’s about 12% more on the 1990 level or 820MT by 2012. So the Tories want to reduce our emissions by 150MT by 2020 (8 years further on). 150MT will bring us to around 670MT, which is about where we were at in 1998.