All posts by Chris Tindal

No Water For Oil!

Ok, so it doesn’t have quite the same ring to it as “no blood for oil,” but it’s becoming the rallying cry for a cause that’s very serious and very close to home.

If you’ve got Insider Edition access to theglobeandmail.com, or if you can get your hands on a hard copy, read Jeffrey Simpson today. In a column titled Alberta’s tar sands are soaking up too much water, he outlines concerns that the Green Party and others have been raising for some time.

In summary, it takes anywhere from 2 to 4.5 barrels of water to extract and refine one barrel of oil from the Alberta tar sands. That province, which is already one of most dry provinces in Canada, is using more than 7% of their water on the oil and gas industry. (Oh, and funny story, that’s made worse by the fact that they’re also losing glaciers and snow packs faster than I lose elections. How’s that for ironic?)

So that’s a problem. To say nothing of the acids (yes McBain, real acid), mercury, and other toxins that are left over after the oil is separated from the bitumen, sand, and other residue. Not to mention all the other reasons that continuing to increase oil extraction and consumption is a bad idea, including Peak Oil (we’re gonna run out of the stuff…) and the Climate Crisis (…unless we wipe ourselves out first).

And it’s not just airhuggers who are worried. The Pembina Institute released a 154 page study a few months ago reaching the same conclusions, and even the Canada West Foundation thinks it’s maybe not such a good idea for the government of Alberta to be practically giving this water away for free.

In the mean time, I’m open to other clever slogan ideas. So far I’ve got “make love, not pools of toxic sludge,” and “all we are saying is give renewables a chance.” They could use some work.

Will Someday Come Soon Enough?

In 2004, the Green Party of Canada ran on the election slogan “Someday is Now.” It was a way of speaking to the many people who want to support the Green Party someday, just not “this time.” They’re going to wait until we have a chance, or until things get really bad.

Of course, the first condition is circular. People won’t vote for us until we have a chance, and we won’t have a chance until people vote for us (unless they vote for this first). As for the second condition, it’s already been met, even if it’s not yet tangible.

It’s never been a question of if the Green Party will be elected. The question is if we’ll get elected in time.

In time for what is another question. More and more scientists are of the opinion that global warming has become a self-sustaining reaction and can’t be stopped, and Stephen Hawking is suggesting that we give up on this planet and find a new one. In that case, our job will shift from averting disaster to dealing with it.

In his new book, Thomas Homer Dixon argues that, while he believes a total global collapse is avoidable, a number of smaller collapses have become inevitable and will fundamentally change the way we live. The good news is that this presents an opportunity for what he calls catagenesis: a chance to rebuild these systems from the ground up, exploiting all the things we wish we knew then.

At a breakfast forum a month ago, I introduced myself to Tad (that’s what his friends call him, you see) as a former candidate and asked how he thought that idea could be presented in a way that would be politically popular and earn votes. He responded that he sees very little chance of voters showing any desire to deal with these problems until they’re already upon us. Once we’re in the middle of it, he says, will be the real opportunity for political ingenuity and problem solving.

This Canada Day weekend, the Dominion Institute and The Toronto Star published an essay by Andrew Cohen imagining what Canada will look like in 2020. The good news? Cohen predicts the Green Party will form a government as soon as 2012. The bad news? The main reason is that’s when “global warming began to wreak havoc.”

So, I’ll meet you in Ottawa in six years. Dress lightly, bring sunscreen.

Two Climate Crisis Quotes

Normally I wouldn’t devote a post to reproducing what others have said, but 1) I’ve already made a real post today, and 2) these are both too good to ignore.

The first extract is the final paragraphs of Jeffrey Simpson’s column in yesterday’s Globe and Mail. The second is a letter to the editor, also published in yesterday’s Globe, from Green Party leadership contestant Elizabeth May.

Enjoy.

The government’s entire political/re-election strategy is based on adopting tangible, easily understood policies that touch the daily lives of citizens. Whether those policies make good sense is almost beside the point, politically speaking, provided they are popular.Climate change doesn’t meet that tangible test, except in the Arctic or perhaps regions infested by the mountain pine beetle (whose spread is aided by the lack of cold winters). Air pollution such as smog is much more tangible, which is why the Conservatives were much more specific about that challenge, promising to “develop a Clean Air Act.”

If the Conservatives ever got serious about climate change — and that’s a very big if — they would start using the price mechanism to encourage behavioural change.

As in, adopting much tougher, California-style vehicle-emissions standards and allowing the auto companies to price their fleet mix differently. As in, mandating emissions for companies such as oil and natural gas extraction, but offering companies taxation incentives for disposing of the carbon dioxide. As in, a beefed-up, domestic carbon-emissions trading plan.

As in, a whole range of initiatives that a government even half-serious about climate change would adopt, remembering that the root of the word Conservative is “conserve.”

The Stanley Cup contest provided an iconic backdrop for a climate-change debate. As a Canadian, I rooted for the Oilers, but my money was on the Hurricanes.We know from Katrina that hurricanes hit oil production hard, whereas producing and burning more oil only makes hurricanes stronger.

Stolen Bike, Angry Boy

Claire’s and my bikes were stolen yesterday. They were locked together to the same ring-post with a cable lock, and a U-lock doubled up on Claire’s bike. We left them outside of the Toronto Reference Library for approximately three hours. The cable lock must have been cut, but the U-lock remained, attached to the ring-post and Claire’s bike’s abandoned quick-release wheel. (Learning #1: U-locks work better than cable locks, but shouldn’t be attached to things with the words “quick-release” in their name.)

I felt worse about Claire’s bike than mine. Aside from some money I’d just put into a tune-up and some new tires, my bike had more sentimental value than monetary (I’ve had it since I was 14 or younger). Claire’s was fancier and newer. I felt all the things people feel when they’ve been robbed, and had a hard time getting to sleep last night.

One particularly frustrating point is that the theft took place in daylight, in a high-traffic area, and would have been transparent to anyone in the area (picture 2 bikes being removed at once, bolt cutters, a wheel being left behind, someone either carrying a one-wheeled bike away or loading it into a vehicle).

But hey, let’s get past my emotions. Claire and I will get nice new bikes from craigslist (or, come to think of it, maybe somewhere else that’s less likely to sell us someone else’s stolen bikes). Instead, let’s look at some good ideas to cut-down on bike theft (aside from advanced locking techniques mentioned earlier).

One of the best ideas I’ve heard is to require bicycle shops that buy used bikes to record the identity of the seller, in the same way pawn shops do. This is relatively simple to implement, and would be both a deterrent to thieves and a tool for police.

And speaking of police, I know they’ve got a whole lot to do and that they’ll never be able to enforce all laws perfectly. But given the number of public complaints they receive about how they treat bike theft, I’d like to see it bumped up on their priorities list. Here’s one place they could free-up some resources. (As I write this I’m waiting for them to call back. They told me to keep the line free. That was over 2 hours ago.)

As for my pain and loss, maybe I’ll just resort to poetry.