« conservative party ads. | Main | softwood lumber, forum shopping, the damn american boyfriend, and canadian cojones »




From a student's perspective, it may not mean much. But what percentage of Canadians are students?

Looking at Kyoto overall, we could likely debate for days. Instead, let's narrow it down to one question.

Can you explain, in plain, non-economic-business-political English (i.e. layman's terms) how Syncrude cutting a cheque to ... I dunno, Korea (I could have the wrong country picked, don't shoot me), for "carbon tax credits", while continuing to pollute (and I'd recommend you check their site - they and other AB companies have instituted a number of changes in view of Kyoto, sort of environmental kevlar if you will) as is... will do anything for our environment?

I'm not being cheeky, I'd really like to know the logic behind this. I'm not seeing any sense to Kyoto.


im in favour of a multilateral approach to emissions reduction because pollution knows no borders. local initiative is important as well, but the fact of the matter is it must be a global priority. the conservatives stressing 'made in canada' seems like theyre politicizing the issue, trying to curry favour from people who have a predilection against multilateralism.

some things are more effective and efficient when you fly solo, but i really dont think *global* warming falls in that category.

the emissions credits aspect of kyoto is actually the one i find most troubling.

i brought up the upass to discuss the effects of a similar transit subsidy on the 40 000 students of ubc.

The comments to this entry are closed.