Guest's blog

Sat, 2014-06-21 13:41Guest
Guest's picture

David Suzuki: Northern Gateway Approval Flies in Face of Democracy and Global Warming

Enbridge Northern Gateway protest

This is a guest post by David Suzuki.

There was little doubt the federal government would approve the Enbridge Northern Gateway pipeline project, regardless of public opposition or evidence presented against it. The prime minister indicated he wanted the pipeline built before the Joint Review Panel hearings even began. Ad campaigns, opponents demonized as foreign-funded radicals, gutted environmental laws and new pipeline and tanker regulations designed in part to mollify the B.C. government made the federal position even more clear.

Canadian resource policy is becoming increasingly divorced from democracy. Two infamous omnibus bills eviscerated hard-won legislation protecting Canada's water and waterways and eased obstacles for the joint review process, which recommended approval of the $7.9-billion project, subject to 209 conditions. The government has now agreed to that recommendation.

The time-consuming hearings and numerous stipulations surely influenced the government's decision to restrict public participation in future reviews, making it difficult for people to voice concerns about projects such as Kinder Morgan's plan to twin and increase capacity of its Trans Mountain heavy oil pipeline from Alberta to Burnaby from 300,000 to 900,000 barrels a day, with a corresponding increase in tanker traffic in and out of Vancouver.

And to keep democracy out of fossil fuel industry expansion, the government switched decision-making from the independent National Energy Board to the prime minister’s cabinet.

Sat, 2014-06-14 12:35Guest
Guest's picture

Why Are Pipeline Spills Good For the Economy?

oil spill

This is a guest post by David Suzuki.

Energy giant Kinder Morgan was recently called insensitive for pointing out that “Pipeline spills can have both positive and negative effects on local and regional economies, both in the short- and long-term.” The company wants to triple its shipping capacity from the Alberta tar sands to Burnaby, in part by twinning its current pipeline. Its National Energy Board submission states, “Spill response and cleanup creates business and employment opportunities for affected communities, regions, and cleanup service providers.”

It may seem insensitive, but it’s true. And that’s the problem. Destroying the environment is bad for the planet and all the life it supports, including us. But it’s often good for business. The 2010 BP oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico added billions to the U.S. gross domestic product! Even if a spill never occurred (a big “if”, considering the records of Kinder Morgan and other pipeline companies), increasing capacity from 300,000 to 890,000 barrels a day would go hand-in-hand with rapid tar sands expansion and more wasteful, destructive burning of fossil fuels — as would approval of Enbridge Northern Gateway and other pipeline projects, as well as increased oil shipments by rail.

Mon, 2014-06-09 09:54Guest
Guest's picture

Years of Living Dangerously Concludes with Obama Slamming Climate Deniers

This is a guest post by Brandon Baker, originally published on EcoWatch.

You’re not the only one who gets frustrated when John BoehnerMarco Rubio and others in Congress turn a blind eye to devastating, scientific evidence regarding climate change.

In an interview with Thomas L. Friedman scheduled to air tonight as part of the final episode of Years of Living Dangerously, President Barack Obama revealed that he’s really no different than many of us when it comes to climate deniers.

Does he ever just want to “go off” on those who ignore extreme weatherrainforests getting steadily less green and more, Friedman, an author and New York Times columnist, asked. Does he ever feel like asking, “What is wrong with you people?”

Absolutely,” Obama said with a smile. “Look, it’s frustrating when the science is right in front of us.” 

The president went on to challenge the leadership of deniers because they overlook reality.

Tue, 2014-06-03 23:00Guest
Guest's picture

Climate Sceptic Roger Helmer Hopes to Be First MP From UK Independence Party

This is a guest post by Andy Rowell, originally published at Oil Change International. 

The three main British political parties are still reeling from the success of the United Kingdom Independence Party (UKIP) at the recent local European elections.

For the first time ever, the anti-EU party, UKIP topped the British poll, recording 27.5% of the vote ahead of Labour and the Conservatives.  Nigel Farage, UKIP’s leader claimed the party had caused a political “earthquake” and is now targeting seats in the House of Commons at next year’s General Election.

The first test of UKIP’s growing popularity will come this Thursday at a by-election in the seat of Newark in the British Midlands. The seat was vacated after the incumbent MP, Patrick Mercer, resigned in a cash-for-questions lobbying scandal. The seat is traditionally seen as a safe one for the Conservatives, who polled 54 per cent at the last General Election, with UKIP polling just 4 per cent.

UKIP are fielding the veteran politician Roger Helmer who has been a member of the European Parliament for the East Midlands since the late nineties, first with the Tories and more latterly with UKIP. Helmer is currently UKIP’s spokesman on Energy and Industry.

The 70-year old is certainly controversial and has caused outrage for his recent opinions on rape, women and homosexuality. What has been less reported in the British press at least is that Helmer is a long-standing climate denier with deep ties to leading climate sceptic organisations in the US, such as ALEC, the Competitive Enterprise Institute and Heartland Institute. For the last few years, Helmer has been a key person fostering links between British and American sceptics.

In 2007, Helmer organised and chaired a Counter-Consensual Conference on Climate Change, whose speakers included the arch climate sceptics, Lord Lawson from the UK-based Global Warming Policy Foundation and Chris Horner from the Competitive Enterprise Institute (CEI), amongst others. For years, the CEI received millions from Exxon to deny climate change.

Wed, 2014-05-28 00:06Guest
Guest's picture

Mounting Global Warming Evidence Underscores the Need to Act

This is a guest post by David Suzuki.

Because we enjoy relatively pure air, clean water and healthy food systems, Canadians sometimes take the environment for granted. Many scarcely blink if oil from a pipeline spills into a river, a forest is cleared for tar sands operations or agricultural land is fracked for gas. If Arctic ice melts and part of the Antarctic ice sheet collapses, well… they’re far away.

Some see climate change as a distant threat, if they see it as a threat at all. But the scientific evidence is overwhelming: climate change is here, and unless we curb behaviours that contribute to it, it will get worse, putting our food, air, water and security at risk. A recent White House report confirms the findings of this year’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change Fifth Assessment report, and concludes global warming is a clear and present danger to the U.S.

Climate change is not a distant threat, but is affecting the American people already,” says White House science adviser John Holdren in a video about the report. “Summers are longer and hotter, with longer periods of extended heat. Wildfires start earlier in the spring and continue later into the fall. Rain comes down in heavier downpours. People are experiencing changes in the length and severity of allergies. And climate disruptions to water resources and agriculture have been increasing.”

Recognizing the problem’s severity is a start, but whether the U.S. will actually do anything is another question. Action to curb climate change is constantly stalled — thanks to the powerful fossil fuel industry, political and media denial, extensive fossil fuel-based infrastructure and citizen complacency.

Thu, 2014-05-22 11:47Guest
Guest's picture

Should Chevron Pay For the Mountain Pine Beetle Epidemic?

Pine Beetle Damage

This is a guest post by Andrew Gage, staff lawyer with West Coast Environmental Law

According to the B.C. Government, the Mountain Pine Beetle epidemic – a direct result of climate change – cost British Columbia billions in lost timber value alone – not counting environmental and other damages. This reality has influenced the public consciousness of British Columbians about the cost of climate change, and it doesn’t seem a stretch to suggest that public awareness of climate change’s impacts in B.C. was influenced by the pine beetle epidemic, and therefore that the pine beetle played an important role in B.C. adopting its carbon tax in 2008 – the only jurisdiction in North America to date to do so.

I have suggested that awareness that climate change is costing us here and now may finally drive real climate action to reduce our greenhouse gas emissions (because as John Oliver says, we’ve proven that we “cannot be trusted with the future tense”). It may even prompt discussion about whether the taxpayer – or the polluter – should be the one paying for those costs

Pages

Subscribe to RSS - Guest's blog