Climate: LNG in B.C. vs Alberta tarsands

[agentaqua]

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2015/02/150211132019.htm
Carbon release from ocean helped end the Ice Age
Date: February 11, 2015
Source: Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona
Summary: A release of carbon dioxide from the deep ocean helped bring an end to the last Ice Age, according to new research. The study shows that carbon stored in an isolated reservoir deep in the Southern Ocean re-connected with the atmosphere, driving a rise in atmospheric CO2 and an increase in global temperatures. The finding gives scientists an insight into how the ocean affects the carbon cycle and climate change.

Joides Resolution, Bay of Bengal (Indian Ocean), IODP Expeditions 353.
Credit: Photo by William Crawford, IODP/TAMU

A release of carbon dioxide (CO2) from the deep ocean helped bring an end to the last Ice Age, according to new collaborative research by the University of Southampton, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona (UAB), the Australian National University (ANU), and international colleagues.

Published today in Nature, the study shows that carbon stored in an isolated reservoir deep in the Southern Ocean re-connected with the atmosphere, driving a rise in atmospheric CO2 and an increase in global temperatures. The finding gives scientists an insight into how the ocean affects the carbon cycle and climate change.

Atmospheric CO2 levels fluctuate from about 185 parts-per-million (ppm), during ice ages, to around 280 ppm, during warmer periods like today (termed interglacials). The oceans currently contain approximately sixty times more carbon than the atmosphere and that carbon can exchange rapidly (from a geological perspective) between these two systems (atmosphere-ocean).

Joint lead author Dr. Miguel Martínez-Botí from the University of Southampton adds: “The magnitude and rapidity of the swings in atmospheric CO2 across the ice age cycles suggests that changes in ocean carbon storage are important drivers of natural atmospheric CO2 variations.

Joint lead author Dr. Gianluca Marino, from ANU and previously at the ICTA, UAB, says: “We found that very high concentrations of dissolved CO2 in surface waters of the Southern Atlantic Ocean and the eastern equatorial Pacific coincided with the rises in atmospheric CO2 at the end of the last ice age, suggesting that these regions acted as sources of CO2 to the atmosphere”.

“Our findings support the theory that a series of processes operating in the southernmost sector of the Atlantic, Pacific and Indian Oceans, a region known as the ‘Southern Ocean’, changed the amount of carbon stored in the deep-sea. While a reduction in communication between the deep-sea and the atmosphere in this region potentially locks carbon away from the atmosphere into the abyss during ice ages, the opposite occurs during warm interglacial periods.”

The international team studied the composition of the calcium carbonate shells of ancient marine organisms that inhabited the surface of the ocean thousands of years ago in order to trace its carbon content.

Co-author Dr. Gavin Foster from the University of Southampton commented: “Just like the way the oceans have stored around 30 per cent of humanity’s fossil fuel emissions over the last 100 years or so, our new data confirms that natural variations in atmospheric CO2 between ice ages and warm interglacials are driven largely by changes in the amount of carbon stored in our oceans.

“These results will help to better understanding the dynamics of human-induced CO2 accumulation in the atmosphere since the ocean is an important carbon sink and the largest reservoir of carbon on our planet’ commented co-author Patrizia Ziveri, ICREA professor at the ICTA, UAB.

While these new results support a primary role for the Southern Ocean processes in these natural cycles, we don’t yet know the full story and other processes operating in other parts of the ocean, such as the North Pacific, may have an additional role to play.

Story Source: The above story is based on materials provided by Universitat Autònoma de Ba celona. Note: Materials may be edited for content and length.

Journal Reference: M. A. Martínez-Botí, G. Marino, G. L. Foster, P. Ziveri, M. J. Henehan, J. W. B. Rae, P. G. Mortyn, D. Vance. Boron isotope evidence for oceanic carbon dioxide leakage during the last deglaciation. Nature, 2015; 518 (7538): 219 DOI: 10.1038/nature14155

 

[agentaqua]

http://www.canadians.org/LacStPierre

Doubling Down on Disaster is a report by the Council of Canadians and Équiterre that outlines how an oil spill in Lac Saint-Pierre on the St. Lawrence River would cost billions to clean up – far more than the liability limit in Canada. The report models the costs and damages from a spill of less than 10 per cent of the cargo of an Afromax class supertanker, a size of ship that recently received federal approval to ply the waters of the St. Lawrence River. According to the model, a spill of 10 million litres would cost $2.14 billion. The federal limit to liability for oil spills is $1.4 billion, leaving taxpayers on the hook for the difference.

http://www.canadians.org/sites/default/files/publications/LacSaintPierre-report-0215.pdf

 

[OldBlackDog]

UNFCCC Chief: Our aim is not to save the world from ecological calamity but to destroy capitalism.

Truth Revolt
The United Nation’s top climate change official Christiana Figueres announced this week that the group is actively working to "intentionally transform" the world's economic development model, a task she called the "most difficult" one the group has ever undertaken.
"This is probably the most difficult task we have ever given ourselves, which is to intentionally transform the economic development model, for the first time in human history," UNFCCC Executive Secretary Figueres stated at a press conference in Brussels Tuesday. (see also Fox News - LINK)
Also reported by IBD:
U.N. Official Reveals Real Reason Behind Warming Scare
Christiana Figueres, executive secretary of U.N.'s Framework Convention on Climate Change, admitted that the goal of environmental activists is not to save the world from ecological calamity but to destroy capitalism.
"This is the first time in the history of mankind that we are setting ourselves the task of intentionally, within a defined period of time, to change the economic development model that has been reigning for at least 150 years, since the Industrial Revolution," she said.
The cat's out of the bag. There is no approaching ecological calamity. The aim is to destroy capitalism.

As Patrick Moore wrote:
The collapse of World Communism and the fall of the Berlin Wall led to the environmental movement being hijacked by the political and social activists who learned to use green language to cloak agendas that had more to do with anticapitalism and antiglobalization than with science or ecology.

 

[agentaqua]

UNFCCC Chief: Our aim is not to save the world from ecological calamity but to destroy capitalism.

nice cut and paste from Moore, OBD. If some guy/girl in a lab coat can "destroy capitalism" - it must be a very weak institution indeed - although I wish them the best of luck. that greenish liquid MUST BE that secret formula that OBD keeps talking about - the one that can defeat Capitalism. I hope this image of those evil geeks doesn't keep you up at night and give you nightmares!

 

[OldBlackDog]

National Academy of Science demands equal access to the climate trough for geoengineering

“…the time has come to look at options for a planetary-scale intervention…”

feeding-troughGuest essay by Eric Worrall

The National Academy of Science has demanded that scientists from disciplines other than climate modelling get a fair turn at the grant trough.

According to The Guardian;

“Climate change has advanced so rapidly that the time has come to look at options for a planetary-scale intervention, the National Academy of Science said on Tuesday.
The scientists were categorical that geoengineering should not be deployed now, and was too risky to ever be considered an alternative to cutting the greenhouse gas emissions that cause climate change. But it was better to start research on such unproven technologies now – to learn more about their risks – than to be stampeded into climate-shifting experiments in an emergency, the scientists said.
With that, a once-fringe topic in climate science moved towards the mainstream – despite the repeated warnings from the committee that cutting carbon pollution remained the best hope for dealing with climate change.
“That scientists are even considering technological interventions should be a wake-up call that we need to do more now to reduce emissions, which is the most effective, least risky way to combat climate change,” Marcia McNutt, the committee chair and former director of the US Geological Survey, said.
Asked whether she foresaw a time when scientists would eventually turn to some of the proposals studied by the committee, she said: “Gosh, I hope not.”
http://www.theguardian.com/environm...-as-a-climate-fix-yet-says-us-science-academy

I can understand Marcia’s point – it might be fun to build a doomsday machine, but you probably wouldn’t want to switch it on.

But the frustration of Physicists, Engineers and Chemistry majors is obvious and understandable – in my opinion they’re simply demanding that they get fair access to the climate trough, rather than seeing all the money, women, swanky holiday outings and the fancy new offices, go to the climate muddlers.

 

[GLG]

It's been a rather bad week for the climate denial team with this....

Climate scientist Andrew Weaver wins defamation case against National Post

Terence Corcoran, Peter Foster and Kevin Libin found guilty of "making stuff up" and fined $50,000

And this....

Andrew Coyne the National Post / Financial Post
In December 2014, he was appointed to the position of Editor, Editorials and Comment


and now this.....


Sun News Network to go off air Friday morning

Sun News Network is shutting down Friday morning, apparently after negotiations to sell troubled television network were unsuccessful.

http://www.thestar.com/news/gta/201...ork-to-go-off-air-friday-morning-reports.html

By: The Canadian Press Published on Thu Feb 12 2015
The Sun News Network is shutting down Friday morning after negotiations to sell the troubled television network were apparently unsuccessful.

Sources told The Canadian Press late Thursday that the network would cease broadcasting early Friday morning. It employs about 150 staff and 50 freelancers.

Last December, a report in the Globe and Mail quoted a source “familiar with the negotiations” who said that Moses Znaimer’s ZoomerMedia Ltd. was negotiating to acquire the network from Quebecor Inc. ZoomerMedia operates print, TV, radio, digital, consumer shows and conferences aimed at the over-45 demographic.

MORE AT THESTAR.COM:

Postmedia and the heavy price it pays to survive: Olive

Sun News was not included in the $316-million deal announced last October that will see Quebecor sell its 175 Sun Media English-language newspapers to Postmedia, pending federal approval.

Sun News Network hit the airwaves in April 2011 with heightened expectations and the watchful eyes of media observers who nicknamed the channel “Fox News North.”

The operations were plagued by tight production budgets that often left it with limited on-the-ground reporting and a large portion of its airtime dedicated to commentary and heavily editorialized news coverage.

The channel promised to balance the “lefty bias” of traditional Canadian media, but it also quickly drew controversy with its occasionally combative on-air approach.

One of the most famous examples happened when former Canada Live host Krista Erickson drilled Quebec-born dancer Margie Gillis about whether she could receive government money for her dance performances.

The segment went viral and drew a record number of complaints from viewers who felt Erickson was being unfair, but the Canadian Broadcast Standards Council eventually ruled the “aggressive” interview was acceptable.

Last September, Sun Media’s outspoken right-wing host Ezra Levant faced the ire of the Liberal party when he criticized Justin Trudeau for kissing a Toronto-area bride in a wedding photo. The bride later said Trudeau secured the groom’s OK beforehand.

Levant’s commentary also slurred Trudeau’s mother, Margaret, and his late father, former prime minister Pierre Trudeau. Sun News issued an apology after Trudeau said he would no longer speak to the outlet’s reporters until there was an appropriate response.



Hello far, far right, the crazy bus is going off the cliff..... are you sure you don't want off? Wake up and smell the coffee....

 

[OldBlackDog]

How Temperature Adjustments Have Transformed Arctic Climate History

By Paul Homewood

There seems to have been a campaign of misinformation, to downplay the significance of the Arctic temperature adjustments we have been looking at.

The claim is that they make little difference to temperature trends there, so let’s test this out with the example of Akureyri.

62004063000

62004063000

ftp://ftp.ncdc.noaa.gov/pub/data/ghcn/v3/products/stnplots/6/62004063000.gif

Note that the temperatures were cooled from 1922 to 1965, effectively in the middle of the record, which started in 1882. As a result the overall trend since 1882 has remained virtually the same. But, of course, this is not the point, as it is the trend since the 1920’s that is significant.

We can see the effect on trends, using 5-year running averages in the chart below.


image

http://data.giss.nasa.gov/tmp/gistemp/STATIONS/tmp_620040630003_1_0/station.txt

http://data.giss.nasa.gov/tmp/gistemp/STATIONS/tmp_620040630000_12_0/station.txt

The original data shows that the period from 1930 to about 1950 was every bit as warm as the last decade. (Raw and adjusted data has been the same since 1990). There is also a clearly evident cycle.

After adjustments, there is just a steadily increasing trend, albeit with a flattish interval in the middle.

Although there were some adjustments made in 1948, an adjustment of 1.08C was made in 1966, effectively reducing previous temperatures. This was in reaction to a sharp fall in temperatures over the previous two years, from 4.70C to 2.18C, which the algorithm assumed was due to changes in observation practices.

When we check around the region, however, we find that there were similar temperature drops all over the place. I offer a few examples below, but, as we have seen, similar adjustments were made at nearly every station in that part of the Arctic at around that time.

1964 1966 Diff
Angmassalik, Greenland -0.28 -2.29 -2.01
Stykkisholmur, Iceland 5.05 3.10 -1.95
Reykjavik, Iceland 6.04 4.24 -1.80
Jan Mayen, Norway -1.29 -2.48 -1.19
Archangel, Russia 1.07 -1.07 -2.14
Murmansk, Russia 0.58 -2.47 -3.05
It is worth noting what the Iceland Met Office have to say about the sea ice years:

A comparison of annual temperatures at three stations, Stykkishólmur in the west, Akureyri in the north and Reykjavík in the southwest reveals some inter-station differences.

The first cold interval, the "ice years", was the coldest of the three in the north and east, but the 1979 to 1986 was the coldest in southwestern Iceland.



This would explain why the temperature drop at Akureyri was greater than the other two.

One other thing worth pointing out is the timing of the onset of cold. In Nuuk, which unlike Angmassalik, lies on the west side of Greenland, the cold came a year later, with the temperature dropping by 2.28C between 1965 and 1967.

Over in Siberia, however, the cold came earlier. For instance, there was a drop of 4.51C between 1962 and 1964. Other stations such as Salehard and Ust cil Ma experienced similar drops.

Certainly, this different timing may have confused the algorithm.

It is ludicrous to assume that all of these drops in temperature were due to station moves or equipment changes.

But we don’t have to make assumptions at all, as there is overwhelming evidence of this dramatic climatic shift. For instance, Dickson & Overhus:

The East Icelandic Current, which had been an ice-free Arctic current in 1948-1963, became a polar current in 1965-1971, transporting drift ice and preserving it…..

Aided by active ice formation in these polar conditions, the Oceanic Polar Front spread far to the south-east of normal, with sea ice extending to the north and east coasts of Iceland….

However, the Great Salinity Anomaly is certainly one of the most dramatic events of the century in the Norwegian Sea.

Or, Lawrence Hamilton, Sea Changes Ashore: The Ocean and Iceland’s Herring Capital:

In the mid-1960s, northwesterly winds associated with a prolonged negative NAO/AO state drove unusual volumes of polar surface water and ice through Fram Strait into the Greenland and Iceland seas.

Dickson et al. (1988:103) described this as “one of the most persistent and extreme variations in global ocean climate yet observed in this century.”…

From 1920 until 1965, relatively warm conditions prevailed over the northern North Atlantic. In 1965, a sudden change occurred; drift ice and polar water covered the north Icelandic shelf during spring.



And then there is HH Lamb, “Climate, History & The Modern World”:

A greatly increased flow of the cold East Greenland Current has in several years (especially 1968 and 1969, but also 1965, 1975 and 1979) brought more Arctic sea ice to the coasts of Iceland than for fifty years. In April-May 1968 and 1969, the island was half surrounded by ice, as had not occurred since 1888.

Let us recall that the GHCN adjustments are triggered by “an abrupt shift in temperature”. There was indeed such an abrupt shift in the 1960’s, and it was real.

Final Thoughts

A few further thoughts:

1) Whenever I raise the question of temperature adjustments, some nonentity usually jumps up and down and tells me to check the algorithm and work out how the adjustments were calculated.

I have no intention of doing so. The adjustments have been made by GHCN, and it is up to them to explain and justify, which is precisely what I have been asking them to do on numerous occasions, without response.

Can I make it clear then that I do not intend to get into any more debate with anybody who thinks they have the right to tell what I should or should not be doing. Any such comments will in future go straight into the spam box.

2) All warming and cooling adjustments balance out.

This is a common defence, but I fail to see the relevance. If incorrect warming adjustments are cancelled out by incorrect cooling ones, then we appear to have twice as many errors.

This hardly gives much confidence in the “robustness” of the global temperature datasets.

If, on the other hand, the cooling adjustments are correct, then clearly global warming has been overstated.

All I can say to those who put forward the “cooling adjustments” defence is to contact GHCN if they feel they are incorrect.

3) Accusations have been made that it is being “unscientific” to object to adjustments, as there may be good reasons for them.

My reply is that it is certainly not scientific to defend such adjustments, unless you can offer concrete evidence for them. And it is definitely “unscientific” to defend them, when real world scientific evidence contradicts them.

4) Some have suggested that we should simply trust the algorithms, and that we should let the “scientists” carry on with their work, as they must know best.

In other words, any evidence which suggests they may be wrong should be suppressed (unless, of course, you write a pal reviewed paper and get it past their gate keepers).

I find this view astonishing. Scientists, particularly public funded ones, should always be held accountable for their work. And any legitimate concerns must be addressed in an open and transparent manner.

The idea that these concerns should be hidden away from the public is abhorrent.

 

[agentaqua]

for those in AB and NE BC that fish:

 

[agentaqua]

http://www.pembina.org/blog/speeding-up-climate-action-in-the-transportation-sector

Speeding up climate action in the transportation sector
Published Feb. 13, 2015 by Cherise Burda

Yesterday the Ontario government released a new discussion paper http://news.ontario.ca/ene/en/2015/02/ontario-releases-climate-change-strategy-discussion-paper.html to engage people across the province on climate change. It's great to see the provincial government tackling the climate challenge head-on, and talking about what we can do to address it.

Ontario’s coal phase-out is widely celebrated, and was critical in allowing the province to meet its 2014 climate target. In fact, it’s the single most effective climate policy introduced in Canada to date.

Now it’s time to build on that momentum so Ontario can meet its 2020 and 2050 climate targets. To succeed, the province will have to address its largest and fastest-growing source of carbon pollution: transportation.

Looking at the numbers
The transportation sector is currently responsible for 34 per cent of Ontario’s carbon pollution. That share is expected to rise to nearly 36 per cent by 2020.


Ontario’s 2012 carbon emissions by sector. Source: Government of Ontario, Climate Change Discussion Paper 2015.


Ontario’s current policies are projected to cut 42 megatonnes of carbon pollution by 2020. Of those reductions, 4.6 Mt will come from the transportation sector. That’s a problem: a sector that pumps out more than one-third of Ontario’s carbon pollution will only be contributing about one-tenth of its 2020 emissions reductions. Clearly, the transportation sector isn’t pulling its weight yet.

Making the Big Move
The Big Move, the regional transit plan for Greater Toronto and Hamilton, is the provincial policy that promises the largest cuts to carbon pollution from the transportation sector. It’s also significant at a national scale, ranking as number six in the list of Canada’s 10 most effective climate policies for meeting our 2020 climate targets.

It’s therefore critical that the Big Move is fully implemented. The province has already allocated $15 billion for investment in transit infrastructure in Greater Toronto and Hamilton over the next 10 years. That’s an excellent start, but the price tag for the full next wave of Big Move projects is $34 billion. Funding and building the entire plan — so that a truly interconnected regional network is put into place — is necessary in order to realize its full climate benefits.

Speeding things up
That being said, even if the Big Move stays on track, Ontario’s transportation emissions will continue to grow. It takes decades to build new rapid transit. To see results by 2020, we need more action and we need it quickly.


Congestion pricing can ease traffic problems while also cutting carbon pollution.

The provincial government has announced that it will put a price on carbon — something we support wholeheartedly at the Pembina Institute. If Ontario’s approach effectively covers transportation fuels, that could help reduce vehicle emissions.

But there are other options worth considering. A congestion charge in the Toronto region could cut carbon pollution while also reducing crippling traffic — it’s a climate policy that boosts productivity and saves drivers time and money. The trick is to develop a pricing mechanism that encourages mode shift, but doesn’t place an undue burden on drivers who don’t have a lower-carbon alternative.

That’s critical if the government wants to address the Greater Toronto Area’s congestion problem. A growing number of voices, from the Manning Foundation to University of Toronto engineers, are saying that simply building transit infrastructure is not enough. Road pricing is needed to actually make a dent in congestion — especially for a region projected to add three million residents by 2041.

Cleaner vehicles and freight
There was a time when the provincial government was striving to make one out of every 20 new passenger cars an electric vehicle. Thanks to the coal phase-out, Ontario's grid is a much lower-carbon source of energy for both public transit and private vehicles than fossil fuels, so the subject is worth revisiting. The province needs to consider strategies beyond costly rebates to increase the uptake of electric vehicles.

We'd also be remiss not to mention the freight sector. By switching fuel types and implementing solutions to move goods more efficiently, it's possible to significantly reduce emissions from freight trucks. Some goods could also be shifted to rail, which provides a significant benefit: freight trucks produce 12 times as much carbon pollution and are five times as emission-intensive as rail.

Insuring reductions
Looking beyond transportation infrastructure, there are other provincial policies that significantly impact the sector’s emissions. For example, the province’s plan to reduce car insurance premiums could result in more carbon pollution if it’s designed as an across-the-board reduction in the cost of driving. That would work against both the province’s climate and congestion goals.

A climate-smart approach to car insurance would introduce the “pay as you drive” model to Ontario, charging drivers based on the distance they travel. It’s a win-win policy that reduces premiums while also creating an incentive to cut pollution. This option is now available in 39 U.S. states, where it has produced an average cost savings of 10 to 15 per cent for drivers.

Planning wisely
Finally, traffic and tailpipe pollution are as much the result of land-use planning as they are of transportation planning. Ontario needs to ensure that when it builds new rapid transit lines, municipalities are surrounding them with compact, walkable developments that serve a range of family types and income levels.

Living near a rapid transit lines offers families the opportunity to give up one car and save $10,000 annually while dramatically cutting their transportation-related emissions. We can’t squander those kinds of opportunities with poor planning, such as building subways in areas that lack the policies to create compact, transit-oriented neighbourhoods.

 

[agentaqua]

http://www.theonion.com/articles/the-pros-and-cons-of-fracking,37882/

The Pros And Cons Of Fracking
INFOGRAPHIC • Environment • Oil • News • Business • ISSUE 51•04 • Jan 29, 2015
Facebook10.4KTwitter1.2KGoogle Plus60

Gas prices are plummeting across America thanks in part to the country doubling its daily oil exports, which is made possible by chemical fracturing technology that scientists have said wreaks havoc on the environment. Here are some pros and cons of fracking:

Pros

Blasts tens of thousands of gallons of chemicals deep underground, out of harm’s way
Prompts important conversation about whether or not people have a right to clean water
Chemical balance of breathable air getting a little staid
Fact that shale well blowout could happen at any moment emphasizes ephemeral beauty of life
Cancer research could use few more confounding variables
Those hardest hit will be the voiceless
Cons

Dilutes perfectly good chemicals
Family history providing enough birth defects as it is
Class action lawsuits always take forever and are super boring
Noise of drilling day and night could keep up the oh-so-precious rural farmers who live nearby and need all the sleep their sweet little heads can get
Fewer excuses to spend time with oil-rich dictatorships
Gas still not zero dollars

 

[agentaqua]

Wonder if Imahofe has read this - or cares:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/02/09/pope-francis-environment_n_6646922.html

Pope Francis: A Christian Who Doesn't Protect Creation Doesn't Care About The Work Of God
Religion News Service | By David Gibson
Posted: 02/09/2015 2:18 pm EST Updated: 02/10/2015 9:59 pm EST
POPE FRANCIS

VATICAN CITY (RNS) If you are a Christian, protecting the environment is part of your identity, not an ideological option, Pope Francis said Monday (Feb. 9).

“When we hear that people have meetings about how to preserve creation, we can say: ‘No, they are the greens!’” Francis said in his homily at morning Mass, using a common name for environmental activists.

“No, they are not the greens! This is the Christian!” he said.

“A Christian who does not protect creation, who does not let it grow, is a Christian who does not care about the work of God; that work that was born from the love of God for us,” Francis continued. “And this is the first response to the first creation: protect creation, make it grow.”

The pope — who took his name from St. Francis of Assisi, the patron saint of the environment — has made care for the environment a hallmark of his papacy since he was elected nearly two years ago.

In fact, the pontiff is preparing a major document, called an encyclical, on the environment. It is likely to reiterate his frequent calls for governments and individuals to take steps to combat climate change, a phenomenon he attributes in part to human activity.

That conclusion, and his focus on protecting creation, as he calls it, has angered some conservative Catholics in the U.S., who see it as further evidence that Francis is pushing a liberal agenda that slights traditional Catholic talking points on issues like abortion and gay marriage.

The issue is likely to get more heated in the coming months: The encyclical is expected by July, and Francis will be making his first visit to the U.S. in September.

In his homily on Monday in the chapel at his Vatican residence, Francis dwelt on the first reading of the Mass, the passage from Genesis that recounts the creation of the universe.

“In the ‘first creation,’” the pope said, “we must respond with the responsibility that the Lord gives us.”

“Even for us there is a responsibility to nurture the Earth, to nurture creation, to keep it and make it grow according to its laws,” he said. “We are the lords of creation, not its masters.”

 

[agentaqua]

https://www.policyalternatives.ca/s...e/2014/10/CCPA Budget Submission Oct 2014.pdf

CCPA Submission to BC Budget Consultations 2015
SUBMITTED TO THE SELECT STANDING COMMITTEE ON FINANCE AND
GOVERNMENT SERVICES OF THE LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA

3. Climate Action Initiatives
A reduction in global greenhouse gas emissions is absolutely crucial for tackling climate
change. Starting in 2007, BC took some important steps on climate action, including
legislated goals to reduce greenhouse gas emission and introducing North America’s first
carbon tax. Unfortunately, funding for many of the energy-efficiency programs has ended,
the government has thus far ruled out continuing annual increases in the carbon tax, and
the LNG development strategy threatens BC’s legislated greenhouse gas (GHG) reduction
targets.

 

[agentaqua]

http://www.energypost.eu/historic-m...nd-oil-age-coming-opens-valves-carbon-bubble/

Historic moment: Saudi Arabia sees End of Oil Age coming and opens valves on the carbon bubble
January 22, 2015 by Elias Hinckley

 

[agentaqua]

Waves = short-term climatic events, Tide = longer time scales

 

[agentaqua]

Sign found in dumpster behind the Koch residences:

 

[agentaqua]

sign found in Koch residences:

 

[agentaqua]

sign found in dumpster behind OBD's residence:

 

[agentaqua]

Sign found in Gate's residences - and NOT the Koch's:

 

[agentaqua]

http://www.cbc.ca/news/business/gas...mystery-of-what-you-pay-at-the-pump-1.2955763
Gas prices: Unravelling the mystery of what you pay at the pump

 

[OldBlackDog]

You guys sure fit this with your posts.