Green-Scam

Twenty years ago, an area of ice thought to weigh almost 500bn tonnes dramatically broke off the Antarctic continent and shattered into thousands of icebergs into the Weddell Sea.

The 1,255-sq-mile (3,250-sq-km) Larsen B ice shelf was known to be melting fast but no one had predicted that it would take just one month for the 200-metre-thick behemoth to completely disintegrate.

Glaciologists were shocked as much by the speed as by the scale of the collapse. “This is staggering. It’s just broken apart. It fell over like a wall and has broken as if into hundreds of thousands of bricks”, said one.

Maybe it has Covid?

“Did you know that you can now drive coast-to-coast from Victoria, B.C. to St. John’s, Nfld. in an electric vehicle?” That’s what radical-environmentalist-turned-radical-Environment-Minister Steven Guilbeault tweeted in July.

Yeah. Maybe.

Update: Is Trudeau suggesting Canadian tax payers will pay US residents the US rebate on EV’s made in Canada?

Prime Minister Justin Trudeau says Canada would ‘align’ its own electric-vehicle incentives with those south of the border if Canadian-built cars and trucks could be made eligible for proposed U.S. tax credits.

TORONTO — Doug Ford is pitching Ontario as the next electric vehicle manufacturing powerhouse, seemingly a far cry from the premier who three years ago cancelled incentives for people to buy them.

Where some see contradiction, others see calculated election strategy.

Shortly after coming to power in 2018, Ford’s government scrapped Ontario’s cap-and-trade system, and with it the electric vehicle rebates funded by that program.

What a bizarre article. It fails to mention that Biden’s BBB plan offers huge incentives to manufacture EV’s and batteries in the US which has the potential to wipe out Canada’s auto industry.

As for mining rare earths in the “Ring of Fire”, the Ring of Eco-Luddites will ensure that is at the least severely limited.

Rebates do favour the rich, electric vehicles do not make practical economic sense.

Fight over green agenda could strain Trump’s updated free-trade pact

“… The administration “is committed to tackling the threat of climate change by supporting the transition to electric vehicle manufacturing,” USTR spokesman Adam Hodge said in a statement to the Reuters news agency on Dec. 3. “We will continue to engage a range of stakeholders, including our close trading partners, as Congress considers legislation to strengthen U.S. leadership in the sector.”

That seems the US position in a nutshell and Biden is not driving this EV. I don’t see the US changing course. The existing trade agreements seem to be viewed as artifacts of a modern day equivalent to the horse and buggy era. And of course Trump Derangement Syndrome!

Mmmm – some good info here. Tesla is opening up it’s charging network to rivals because everything else is so bad it has the potential to undermine the entire EV industry.

The Democrats are doing everything they can to get Americans into electric cars.  However, those cars come with the risk of a serious loss of power — not just for the car, but for those who buy those cars.

We have to begin with asking, why is the governing pushing electric vehicles?  And it’s not just cars; it’s also trucks.  Why are they ignoring hybrid vehicles?  If something happens to the electric guts of a properly designed hybrid car, the vehicle can limp along with its smaller gas engine until it reaches safety.  What happens to a fully electric vehicle if its electrical system fails?  Nothing, of course!  You’re stuck.  All you have is a hunk of metal and plastic.  And if you run out of electricity while driving, you can’t just get a gallon gas can to fill the tank until you get to the nearest service station.  Again, you’re stuck.

When politicians like Prime Minister Justin Trudeau and B.C. Premier John Horgan link natural disasters such as massive flooding to addressing climate change, it’s important to understand they are not talking about preventing these disasters for the foreseeable future.

The climate we have now will be the climate we have for decades to come, even if we were miraculously able to stop emitting all industrial greenhouse gases today, which would be impossible to do.

“This discriminatory action” could be the “death knell” of the Canadian auto industry. So says Flavio Volpe, and he should know, since he’s the president of the Auto Parts Manufacturers’ Association of Canada, the organization tasked with, amongst other things, enticing automakers and their associated suppliers to build their production plants here in the Great White North.

Justin’s handlers are secretly happy about this.

In June, I published a carefully researched and edited paper entitled “Net Zero 2050: Rhetoric and Realities” in the “policy brief” series of the Johnson Shoyama Graduate School of Public Policy at the University of Saskatchewan, where at the time I was an adjunct professor.

The paper argues that net-zero rhetoric is wishful political thinking shaped by ideology instead of fact. The ultimate goal of net-zero politics is to impose a radical energy transition that demands a top-to-bottom physical and social-economic restructuring of society, with no credible road map in sight. Think of it as telling people to step out of a perfectly serviceable airplane without a parachute, with assurances that politicians will work out alternatives on the way down.

Canada’s mini-Al Gore is up to his old tricks. Radical environmentalist David Suzuki, who transitioned from early fruit-fly expert to later doomsday prophet, is once more in the news, foretelling the eruption of violence against the construction of oil pipelines. “We’re in deep, deep doo-doo,” he said at an Extinction Rebellion event on Vancouver Island. “This is what we’re come to. The next stage after this, there are going to be pipelines blown up if our leaders don’t pay attention to what’s going on.” 

In his fifth report for 2021, issued last week, the Commissioner of the Environment and Sustainable Development reported to Parliament on “Lessons Learned from Canada’s Record on Climate Change.” That’s not unusual. The commissioner has already moved on to his seventh report. But his fifth marked a sharp departure from his mandate and that of the Office of the Auditor General (AG) of Canada, of which his office is a part.