And successive governments, (provincial and federal) (particularly the Alberta government) have poured money in this rat hole, all in the name of "economic development"! Something like 3/4 of ALL Canadian infrastructure dollars, are spend on Tar sands projects! There is a very good book written about this folly, whose name escapes me at this point,, but if anyone is interested, a quick google search will find it. I posted a link on this forum a few months ago.
Remember the Chretien government initative called "Infrastructure Works?" According to Auditor General reports on the portions they could actually track down, 90% was pissed away on nothing This early audit claims half of the total projects approved didn't even meet specific standards or specifications, but rather vague things like "bringing community up to standard." Standard ... what? http://www.oag-bvg.gc.ca/internet/English/parl_oag_199611_26_e_5057.html No matter what time period or flavor of government (NDP, Liberal, PC, Bloc, etc) they do whatever they can to buy votes. Funny thing is, folks fall for it again and again
Infrastructure Canada - Canada Strategic Infrastructure Fund - Project Descriptions Could you please cite your source?
On this note, I saw a commercial today for Gulf Oil Spill | National Geographic Channel. Press release at Never-Before-Seen Footage Documenting First 36 Hours of Gulf Oil Spill Disaster, to Be Shown... -- WASHINGTON, May 24 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ --. I'm setting my TiVo to record it. It's on 2x on 5/27 and will be aired 2 more times in the next 2 weeks.
Jay, At present I CANNOT cite my source. (Which is why I prefaced my statement with "something like"). I am currently traveling in the UK and don't have access to the volume I was thinking about. I will, however try to remember to revisit this when I return in just over a weeks time. PS Here is a link to the book I was referring to, the dollar figures are in here if I recall properly http://www.borealbirds.org/nikiforukbook.shtml PPS. As I am remembering this, it surely wasn't public infrastructure spending, but rather capital spending in total,,if I remember. Like I say, I will have to refer back. In any case, the tar sands represent a vast suck of money, both public and private, as well as a vast environmental disaster!
Again, I agree on the Tar Sands being a giant Cluster F*** Capital spending can entail public grants, venture capital, stocks, etc. It's a bit harder to dictate how private funds are spent Good point. I should start smoking
Regulators Accepted Gifts From Oil Industry, Report Says Regulators Accepted Gifts From Oil Industry, Report Says - WSJ.com
If Bush was president, people would be blaming him for not responding for the oil spill. The hypocricy in this country is absolutely ridiculous! and +1 on the world ending in 2012. I think I'll sell my Prius and buy a sports car.
Hmm: http://tinyurl.com/35nlm6o I could come up with some witty response to your comment on "hypocricy" (sic), but I'll let the reader do that them self.
You're implying that people are not blaming Obama? That is incorrect. There is a sizable contingent on the left that is blaming Obama, as evidenced by debates at sites such as DailyKos.
Bush would be rightly blamed for supporting the oil economy. This oil spill is simply a consequence. The blame is not Bushes alone; every idiot who wants oil drilling in our oceans can take a bow. Every idiot who opposes oil taxes can take a bow. Every idiot who drives a gas guzzler can take a bow. Every idiot who voted republican can take a bow. Damn near every American can take a bow, but some should have their noses in the oil slick.
Here is another counter-example: Lawmakers frustrated with Obama administration's oil spill response - CNN.com
How about this once, we forget about trying to asses political blame, and instead focus on how not to do the BS kinda stuff going forward? There is plenty of blame to go around and as Sage said, we all (unless we are carbon free!) share some of it. Let's take this opportunity to really begin to make the changes we need to make,, including the transparent carbon tax I have been calling for for years! Just FYI, I am currently on a trip through Northern Scotland. People here are currently paying ~L 1.30 per litre for petrol! That is ~ $2.00 per LITRE or the rough equivalent (depending on the current exchange rate) of ~$8.00 per gallon! What you don't see here is any single occupant SUV's and pickup trucks commuting with white collar folks in them. What you do see, even in the remotest isles is reasonable bus service, both frequency and price. The North American attitude towards fuel and it's pricing makes me sick! If all you right wing supply siders out there want to see how the market works,, answer me why there are legions of small fuel efficient cars here that we don't see in N. America? Answer,, cheap fuel that doesn't cover it's environmental or social costs!
Uhhh, you mean take responsibility for our actions ? God forbid The L&R (libertarian and republican), pronounced 'liar' mantra: -------------- Drill Baby, Drill Spill Baby, Spill Kill Baby, Kill Help. Help. Help -------------
What I also see in Scotland is what appears to be (from an admittedly small sample) is a concerted effort to take control of their energy future. Wind turbine farms are quite common, especially on the Island and the North Coast. Many small communities have small scale community wind turbines. While the solar climate is not great you do see Pv solar, especially in remote locations to power signs and things. But perhaps most impressive was a notice I read on the Isle of Lewis, the farthest NW of the Hebrides Island. The local government was paying for someone to knock on EVERY occupied door on the island, explain the benefits of weatherization and explain to residents what grant and loan programes are available to residents. The leadership realizes that it is cheaper in the long run to sponsor and fund energy conservation programes than it is to find and build new sources of power. They also realize that efficiency is the key to their economic future going forward. That said, I am not oblivious to the fact that off shore, Scottish North Sea oil funds much of this, but the fact that they recognize the life cycle of the oil, and realize it finite quantity, and then realize that the money gleaned from royalties should go back to the people to better cope with what will inevitably be a more expensive energy future. (Regardless of CO2 impact, though they seem to get that way more than we do as well!).
Well, the leak sure does reveal the folly of drilling in the middle of the ocean. Funny nobody in the media thought of that when those political idiots were proposing it. And Obama was actually ponying up to it, in his characteristic appeasement of the Right. Strange politics how all that oil is contaminating the waters of those largely Republican southern states. The Right Wing is going to have to change its tune about the environment--and about regulation of financial markets--if this country is to survive. They need some leadership--from Lindsey Graham and company. Lindsey is smart enough to know the score. As a P.S. I suppose you could ask how do the Europeans get away with drilling in the North Sea without spilling oil? Well, they don't have accidents with all their nuclear reactors, either. Enough said. And by the way, there are wind turbines all over the desert outside of LA. Have been for years. Shh. that's a big secret. It might be contagious.