Leap Manifesto: 'A Call For A Canada Based on Caring For the Earth and One Another' 2

63 posts / 0 new
Last post
MegB
Leap Manifesto: 'A Call For A Canada Based on Caring For the Earth and One Another' 2

Continued from here.

Issues Pages: 
Regions: 
epaulo13 epaulo13's picture

Scotland just produced enough wind energy to power it for an entire day

For the first time on record, wind turbines have generated more electricity than was used in the whole of Scotland on a single day.

An analysis by conservation group WWF Scotland found unseasonably stormy weather saw turbines create about 106 per cent of the total amount of electricity used by every home and business in the country on 7 August.

Gale-force winds lashed much of the country with a speed of 115mph recorded at the top of Cairngorm mountain.

quote:

In May this year, renewable energy in Germany supplied almost all of the demand at a specific time of day, prompting power prices to turn negative during several 15-minute periods, meaning that consumers were being paid up to 50 euros (£43) per MWh to use electricity. Last year, wind energy supplied 140 per cent of demand in Denmark.

According to a new study by Bloomberg New Energy Finance (BNEF) last year, wind power generates the cheapest electricity in both the UK and Germany.

Talking about the UK-wide situation James Court, head of policy at the Renewable Energy Association, accused the Westminster Government of standing in the way of green energy.

“The UK already has 25 per cent of generation from renewables, and that was from a standing start 10 years ago,” he said.

“We are now at a point where renewables such as solar and wind are already cheaper than new gas plants; biomass and energy-from-waste are comparable to new nuclear; and grid-scale energy storage is being deployed commercially in the UK without subsidy.

epaulo13 epaulo13's picture

Crude oil to carrots: Geothermal makeover eyed for Alberta’s old wells

Disused oil and gas wells dotting Canada’s energy heartland may bear fruit for Alberta’s farmers under a proposal to use waste heat from the idle facilities to allow crops to grow, even in the country’s harsh winter conditions.

Provincial legislator Shaye Anderson wants the Alberta government to allow an old well to be converted to geothermal energy to heat an 8,000-square-foot greenhouse. Currently the wells can only be used for extracting hydrocarbons.

The Living Energy Project pilot could help tackle the issue of Alberta’s 78,000 disused wells and provide jobs for thousands of unemployed oil field services workers, laid off as a result of the two-year slump in global crude prices.

quote:

Provided the government gives the green light, renewable company Sundial Energy Ltd will insert polyethylene pipe, used in high-pressure plumbing, down the wellbore’s steel casing to a depth of more than 1 kilometre, where temperatures are 70-80 degrees Fahrenheit (21-27 degrees Celsius).

A fluid containing water blended with methanol and a pump conditioner, to prevent freezing and rusting, is pumped on a continuous closed loop between the bottom of the well and the surface, where the heat is extracted.

The closed loop means the fluid does not come into contact with hydrocarbons underground or produce on the surface.

epaulo13 epaulo13's picture

The Leap Manifesto: Could This Be Canada's Progressive Answer?

quote:

LEWIS: But we don't have the same situation that we have in the United States and the UK, where we have a dominant neoliberal party like the Democratic Party or like the Blair Labour Party, where there needs to be a revolt against that party. That's the Liberal Party in Canada. And there's no sign of a revolt from its left flank. We've just elected with a massive majority this, you know, hot young prime minister, Justin Trudeau, who's enjoying an unprecedented long honeymoon of popularity with the Canadian people and is saying all these beautifully progressive things. But they can't do anything, because they're a committedly neoliberal party.

We're in a time where we come out of ten years of the most viciously right-wing government we've ever had in this country, the Harper government. Activists got a lot of new people to our causes because they were doing so many horrible things. So we've grown in strength. But we were also fighting like mad for that ten years, and people are a little tired. So we don't have this surge of new energy in the Canadian social movement landscape that you have in the Bernie moment in the United States, or that you had in the early days of the Corbyn moment in the UK.

HEDGES: The other challenge for progressives in Canada is that the country's last-standing center-left government is in Alberta, home to the largest energy project in the world, the tar sands. The Leap Manifesto has faced criticism for calling an end to all fossil fuel infrastructure, which many worry would mean a heavy loss of jobs.

LEWIS: We're in an accident of history right now where the only NDP government, the only center-left government left in Canada, is in Alberta, which means that the center of oil production in Canada and the heart of the fossil fuel economy now is in the hands of a center-left government.

It's totally understandable that people who are in freefall as the oil industry is collapsing would find that to be a threat. That said, the threat is not coming from the Leap Manifesto. It's the oil industry, the most powerful industry and the richest industry in the history of humanity, which has abandoned tens of thousands of families in Alberta, they're the ones who were squeezed, over-rewarded with crazy salaries but squeezed for every drop of effort that went into producing that oil when the boom was high, and then they just get tossed on the trash heap by the industry as soon as the price crashes.

mark_alfred

Quote:
LEWIS: But we don't have the same situation that we have in the United States and the UK, where we have a dominant neoliberal party like the Democratic Party or like the Blair Labour Party, where there needs to be a revolt against that parned to partiesrty. That's the Liberal Party in Canada. And there's no sign of a revolt from its left flank.

I suspect that a reason for this is that the economic crisis of sub-prime mortgages in 2007/2008 didn't hit as hard here, so people here did not suffer to the same extent that people in Britain and the US did.  There was no collapse in the housing market here as there was in the States.  So people in the US and Britain turned to parties or politicians who were expressing disatisfaction with the status quo more than they were here.  Instead, here, it was people expressing disatisfaction with the unpleasantness of Harper, but not necessarily with the system.  That's still the case now, which is why the calls for a Canadian Sanders won't be the panacea that some people feel it would be.  What will be the exact panacea I don't know, but continued activism with both social movements and with the NDP seems a good thing to continue here.

epaulo13 epaulo13's picture

..i believe work became much harder to get and this continues today. especially better paying work. employeers have a larger pool of unemployed to draw from which made them more demanding of working folk. job clubs began to change how they counselled their clients and instruction became much more intense. at the same time governments services were reduced.

mark_alfred

Full agreement regarding the precarious work situation in Canada.  Things are very competitive now.

epaulo13 epaulo13's picture

Canadian Medical Association completes divestment from fossil fuels

The Canadian Medical Association’s General Council, held last week in Vancouver, may well be remembered as the moment that Canadian MDs made climate change — dubbed “the biggest health threat of the 21st century” by the World Health Organization — a priority.

First, the diagnosis of climate change as a health emergency was laid out in detail by one of Canada’s most well-respected doctors, Dr. James Orbinski, who accepted the Nobel Peace Prize on behalf of Doctors Without Borders (Médecins Sans Frontières) in 1999. The Canadian Medical Association then confirmed it had in fact completed the divestment of its organizational funds from fossil fuels.

 The meeting kicked off with a keynote address by Dr. Orbinski, one of Canada’s most noted humanitarians. “There is no question that climate change is the biggest health threat of our time,” he said, adding that "we cannot possibly live, we cannot possibly survive, we cannot possibly thrive” without a functioning biosphere. He spoke of the disproportionate impacts on Canada’s North, where temperature increases are already in the range of three degrees Celsius, and about the risks of extreme weather, wildfires, flooding and changing patterns of infectious disease.

One of the most passionate moments of Dr. Orbinski’s speech came when he was discussing the malnutrition and food-security risks of climate change.

“In 2011, climate-change driven drought affected 13 million people and 500,000 people died, in the Horn of Africa. This is utterly unacceptable," he said. "That we simply know this and we allow it to continue. It requires that we see ourselves differently in relation to others in the world. This is the consequence of climate change. It is profound and it is utterly unacceptable.“

epaulo13 epaulo13's picture

Leap Manifesto: A Climate Change Debate

Thu, 15 Sep at 6:00 PM, Ottawa, ON

Program Outline:
6:30 pm - 6:45 pm: Reception 
6:45 pm - 7:00 pm: Traditional Algonquin Greeting by Verna McGregor
7:00 pm - 9:00 pm: Leap Manifesto a Climate Change Debate

*****

Debaters: 

1) Avi Lewis  

 Is one of the leading proponents of the Leap Manifesto as well as a Canadian documentary filmmaker, author, and activist. Avi Lewis offers insightful and valuable points of views in regards to the complex current issues faced in Canada. Some of his important and informative talks include topics ranging from climate change and crisis, Canadian political parties, to the role of governments.

2) Thomas Homer-Dixon

Chair of Global Systems at the Balsillie School of International Affairs and Associate Director of the Waterloo Institute for Complexity and Innovation and Professor at the Faculty of Environment, with a cross-appointment to the Political Science in Waterloo, Thomas is focused on using innovation to solve complex issues. Some of his primary research interest includes complex threats to global security, causes, and resolution of violent conflict, the structure, and change of ideologies, climate change, energy security, and public policy. He also writes books, reviews, and articles on various global issues. His take on the leap manifesto, Start the Leap Revolution Without Me, was published in the Toronto Globe and Mail, April 22, 2016

epaulo13 epaulo13's picture

This New Electric Bus Can Drive 350 Miles on One Charge

In the world of electric vehicles, Tesla gets most of the love. Over 100,000 of Elon Musk’s big, bad autos are zooming around the world, gasoline-free. But how many of those can claim to take an additional 40-odd cars off the road—each?

That’s the promise of the Catalyst E2 Series, a new electric bus debuting today that’s aimed squarely at city public transit.

The bus from Proterra, a leading North American manufacturer, is set to hit the streets next year. Musk’s top of the line Model S gets 315 miles per charge. Proterra’s newest? Up to 350 miles on city streets—enough, in many places, for a full day’s worth of routes. Last month, this Goliath logged 600 miles on a Michelin track on one juice....

NorthReport

My hunch: A lot more people support Notley's approach as opposed to the leap off the cliff manifesto.

By-the-way Notley is the only NDP leader of any government in Canada so perhaps, just perhaps, NDP supporters need to listen to her, that is unless they wish to continue committing political hari-kari.  

Notley confident in Alberta's pipeline plan despite continued opposition

http://calgaryherald.com/news/local-news/notley-confident-in-albertas-pi...

epaulo13 epaulo13's picture

World's first large-scale tidal energy farm launches in Scotland

The launch of the world’s first large-scale tidal energy farm in Scotland has been hailed as a significant moment for the renewable energy sector.

A turbine for the MeyGen tidal stream project in the Pentland Firth was unveiled outside Inverness in the Scottish Highlands.

After the ceremony, attended by Nicola Sturgeon, the turbine, measuring about 15 metres tall (49ft), with blades 16 metres in diameter, and weighing in at almost 200 tonnes, will begin its journey to the project’s site in the waters off the north coast of Scotland between Caithness and Orkney.

The turbine will be the first of four to be installed underwater, each with a capacity of 1.5 megawatts (MW), in the initial phase of the project.

But the Edinburgh-based developer Atlantis Resources hopes the project which has received £23m in Scottish government funding will eventually have 269 turbines, bringing its capacity to 398MW, which is enough electricity to power 175,000 homes....

epaulo13 epaulo13's picture

NDP publishes discussion guide on Leap Manifesto

Renewal Guidebook

Discussion Guide II:Policies and Principles

Given that the Leap Manifesto is a document encompassing many policy areas, it has been broken down into smaller sections and those sections have been organized into specific issue categories. The relevant sections of the NDP’s Policy Book and, in some cases, our 2015 Election Platform have also been included as a reference. These sections are followed by suggested questions and launching points for group discussions.

As always, the options for Electoral District Associations are to discuss the Leap document in its entirety, in part or not at all, with or without the help of the following set of workbooks. This is an EDA driven process. If your EDA wishes to follow another path for discussions, that is also encouraged. Our staff will consider all feedback collected by September 30th, 2016.

Given the complex nature of this document, our hope is that EDAs will provide our team with fulsome responses for consideration. In turn, these responses will be taken as recommendations to guide us forward....

Mr. Magoo Mr. Magoo's picture

A guide?  For how to discuss something?

Well.  It's about time.

You wouldn't let your teenager drive the family car without some Driver's Ed, would you?  So why would you feel like you could discuss something without similar instruction?

Rev Pesky

From the posted guide:

Quote:
Create a cabinet-level committee chaired by Prime Minister Tom Mulcair to ensure that all government decisions respect treaty rights, inherent rights and Canada’s international obligations.

Oops.

Mr. Magoo Mr. Magoo's picture

Ah, but a man's reach should exceed his grasp, Or what's a heaven for?

Rikardo

Just read Naomi K.'s article in Sat G&M.  What crap!  She hardly mentions global warming.   It's an anti-capitalist diatribe.  Global warming=too much fossil fuel, especially coal, then oil, is NUMBER ONE not inequality, First Nations, water or even pollution. Wake up and forget your green-socialist dreams to concentrate on green energy even capitalist green energy.

Some really interesting postings in this topic

Geoff

Rikardo wrote:

Just read Naomi K.'s article in Sat G&M.  What crap!  She hardly mentions global warming.   It's an anti-capitalist diatribe.  Global warming=too much fossil fuel, especially coal, then oil, is NUMBER ONE not inequality, First Nations, water or even pollution. Wake up and forget your green-socialist dreams to concentrate on green energy even capitalist green energy.

Some really interesting postings in this topic

None of the issues you list are separate from one another. Until we appreciate the interconnectedness of the problems we face, we have no chance of coming close to solving any of them. Okay, so Klein's article wasn't riddled with specific references to global warming. Is there anyone out there who isn't aware of her opinion?

Yes, she takes a position on capitalism that makes many liberals and social democrats squirm, but as long as we pretend that the problems are 'particular' and that there's there's nothing wrong with the system, in 'general', we have no hope of making progress. Excellent article, I thought. We're in it for the long haul, but we're in it, nevertheless.

epaulo13 epaulo13's picture

..well said geoff.

The Preston Model

When Labour took control of Preston City Council from a Conservative-Liberal Democrat alliance in May 2011, it appeared a bittersweet victory. The city had been battered by the recession that followed the financial crisis of 2007/8, and now faced massive central government funding cuts as the austerity budget of David Cameron’s Coalition government, formed a year earlier, got underway. The council would lose half of its government grant over the next three years, placing it among the top 10 worst-hit local authorities in Britain. Private investment plummeted too. In November 2011, plans for a £700 million shopping center development – 12 years in the making – collapsed following the withdrawal of its flagship retail store, John Lewis.

Traditional city growth models, based on attracting inward investment for big infrastructure projects, could no longer be relied upon. Nor, under conditions of recession and austerity, could conventional tax-and-spend redistribution. Instead Preston, a small city with a population of 140,000 in England’s northwest Lancashire region, embarked on a remarkable community wealth building program, which aimed to ensure that the large amounts of money leaking out of the local economy were instead invested in local businesses and, in particular, cooperatives. Although still at an early stage, the strategy is generating interest from other regions in Britain and elsewhere in Europe. National politicians are starting to take note too, with Labour’s Shadow Chancellor John McDonnell recently hailing Preston’s creativity and vision.

Getting started

In 2011, Preston’s incoming leadership asked Matthew Brown, a councillor since 2002 and now Cabinet Member for Social Justice, Inclusion, and Policy, to look at ways to boost the local economy. Brown had a longstanding passion for worker cooperatives, and was inspired by the success of cooperative economies in Mondragón, Spain and Bologna, Italy. He was particularly impressed by the work done by The Democracy Collaborative and its partners in Cleveland, Ohio, where the innovative Evergreen project involved setting up worker cooperatives to provide goods and services to the area’s major quasi-public, nonprofit (or “anchor”) institutions.

Both Cleveland and Preston had experienced unemployment and urban decay following waves of deindustrialisation. In the 18th and 19th centuries, technological innovation helped Preston become a powerhouse of cotton textile production, until the industry collapsed after the First World War. During the mid-20th century, Preston became a centre of electronics and engineering, but this declined in the 1970s. Although there have been sputtering signs of growth since, poverty and inequality remain high.

In 2012, Ted Howard, The Democracy Collaborative’s President, was invited to Preston to present his ideas on community wealth building. Howard’s visit had been coordinated by the Centre for Local Economic Strategies (CLES), a Manchester-based think tank with considerable experience of working collaboratively with local authorities and other institutions to boost local economies. Preston and CLES formed a partnership, and the city’s community wealth building strategy got underway in 2013.

Anchors engaged

The project’s first phase comprised three aspects:

  • to engage anchor institutions and understand their spending.
  • to identify ways to change procurement practice at the anchor institutions.
  • to discover the local economy’s capacity to supply good and services to anchor institutions.

Six institutions signed up: two councils (Preston City Council and Lancashire County Council), a police force (Lancashire Constabulary), Preston’s largest social housing association (Community Gateway), and two further education colleges (Preston’s College and Cardinal Newman College). The members of this community wealth team were careful to engage the top leadership of each anchor institution at an early stage. They found a willing audience. Derek Whyte, Preston City Council’s Assistant Chief Executive, says: “To be honest, I thought it was going to be a harder sell. I think we were helped by the fact that all our institutions have a very strong sense of place and community. I’m not sure it would be so easy to get that in a city like London.”....

jjuares

I don't know why we are even discussing this we should implement it now. We would all have 6 figure jobs placing solar panels on our neighbour's house. Bicycle manufacturing would soar as we purchase new bicycles to plough through the snow of a Canadian winter. Oil and gas? We would hardly need the stuff. And what little we need we could have delivered to us by a trillion hummingbirds who would gently use their beaks to drop it into the gas tanks of our hybrid cars. No need for pipelines, those satanic devices. Well, of course most of us would be driving electric car models yet to be invented so they would not need any gas at all. As for members of the working class who worry about their jobs in the energy sector, we can just call them for what they obviously are, morons who don't have our developed consciousness. hmmm now where did I leave that article about the town of Kivenska in Sweden that was able to use the kinetic energy of butterfly wings to power it's traffic lights?

Geoff

jjuares wrote:
I don't know why we are even discussing this we should implement it now. We would all have 6 figure jobs placing solar panels on our neighbour's house. Bicycle manufacturing would soar as we purchase new bicycles to plough through the snow of a Canadian winter. Oil and gas? We would hardly need the stuff. And what little we need we could have delivered to us by a trillion hummingbirds who would gently use their beaks to drop it into the gas tanks of our hybrid cars. No need for pipelines, those satanic devices. Well, of course most of us would be driving electric car models yet to be invented so they would not need any gas at all. As for members of the working class who worry about their jobs in the energy sector, we can just call them for what they obviously are, morons who don't have our developed consciousness. hmmm now where did I leave that article about the town of Kivenska in Sweden that was able to use the kinetic energy of butterfly wings to power it's traffic lights?

Sounds like the 20th century and the 21st century are having a disagreement, and the former is getting frustrated.

epaulo13 epaulo13's picture

The New Climate Denialism: Time for an intervention

For decades, the urgent need for climate action was stymied by what came to be known as “climate denialism” (or its more mild cousin, “climate skepticism”). In an effort to create public confusion and stall political progress, the fossil fuel industry poured tens of millions of dollars into the pockets of foundations, think tanks, lobby groups, politicians and academics who relentlessly questioned the overwhelming scientific evidence that human-caused climate change is real and requires urgent action.

quote:

The bad news is we face a new form of climate denialism – more nuanced and insidious, but just as dangerous.

In the new form of denialism, the fossil fuel industry and our political leaders assure us that they understand and accept the scientific warnings about climate change — but they are in denial about what this scientific reality means for policy and/or continue to block progress in less visible ways.

In the lead-up to the Paris climate talks, for example, the Oil and Gas Climate Initiative (OGCI) issued calls not only for a global climate agreement, but also for a global carbon pricing system. The OGCI includes most of the world’s largest oil companies (Shell, BP and Total among them), so this was a big deal. But as research by the UK-based InfluenceMap uncovered, “behind the scenes, however, [these companies] are systematically obstructing the very laws that would enable a meaningful [carbon] price.”

Here at home, the Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers (CAPP)—the most influential oil lobby group in the country—proclaims on its website that “climate change is an important global issue, requiring action across industries and around the globe.” Sounds nice and green. Yet CAPP continues to push hard for expanded oil sands production and new pipelines on behalf of its members, which include the country’s largest oil companies.

Claiming that we can take effective action on climate change and ramp-up fossil fuel production at the same time is what CCPA senior economist Marc Lee refers to as “all the above” policy-making.

It’s what former Prime Minister Harper was doing when he claimed Canada could be a climate leader while at the same time increasing fossil fuel production, so long as industry reduced emissions per unit of oil, gas or coal produced (i.e. reducing so-called “emissions intensity”).

It’s what Prime Minister Trudeau and Premier Notley are doing when they say we will have carbon pricing and various regulations, while at the same time supporting expanded oil sands production and new bitumen pipelines.

It’s what Premier Clark is doing when she proclaims BC will be a climate “leader” while at the same time pursing a ramp-up in natural gas fracking and the development of an LNG export industry.

And it’s what Canada is doing when we sign the Paris agreement on climate, while failing to adopt the stringent policies that will help keep global temperature increases to 1.5 degrees above pre-industrial levels.

The “all of the above” approach is wishful thinking at best. A recent study by earth scientist David Hughes published by the CCPA and Parkland Institute found that if Alberta and BC go ahead with planned expansion of the tar sands and development of an LNG industry, it will blow our Paris climate commitments right out of the water.

On a related front, the new climate denialism operates hand-in-glove with Indigenous Rights and Title Denialism....

epaulo13 epaulo13's picture

The New Climate Denialism: Time for an intervention

quote:

It may be difficult to imagine a world that isn’t dependent on fossil fuels, or a future where Indigenous Peoples exercise their full historic rights – and there’s no doubt it will take hard work to get there. But just as children today have never known smoking to be permitted in restaurants or driving without mandatory seatbelt laws (both changes that were fiercely resisted by industry but are now fairly universally accepted as the new normal), those born in the coming decades likely won’t know what a gas station is, except for what they see in old movies.

The reality of climate change means that one way or another, the next generation is going to live through an industrial revolution in high speed. That’s simply a fact. Our political leaders need to move past these current incarnations of denialism, and focus instead on making sure the transition can occur in a just manner.

jjuares

Geoff wrote:

jjuares wrote:
I don't know why we are even discussing this we should implement it now. We would all have 6 figure jobs placing solar panels on our neighbour's house. Bicycle manufacturing would soar as we purchase new bicycles to plough through the snow of a Canadian winter. Oil and gas? We would hardly need the stuff. And what little we need we could have delivered to us by a trillion hummingbirds who would gently use their beaks to drop it into the gas tanks of our hybrid cars. No need for pipelines, those satanic devices. Well, of course most of us would be driving electric car models yet to be invented so they would not need any gas at all. As for members of the working class who worry about their jobs in the energy sector, we can just call them for what they obviously are, morons who don't have our developed consciousness. hmmm now where did I leave that article about the town of Kivenska in Sweden that was able to use the kinetic energy of butterfly wings to power it's traffic lights?

Sounds like the 20th century and the 21st century are having a disagreement, and the former is getting frustrated.


Or maybe Fantasyland versus the real world. Anyways, the Leap Manifesto is a great weapon for climate change deniers. And if I was a climate change denier I would get down on my knees every night to thank god for this document. In the little cloistered world of the left the realization may not have sunk in but out in the real world it is understood that the more action on climate change is associated with this utopian document the fewer the chances are anything will actually be done about climate change.

Rev Pesky

The Leap Manifesto, by itself, says almost nothing. People should be examining the supporting documentation. It doesn't take much of a look at the documentation before you realize the premises the Leap Manifesto is based on is more or less fantasy.

One of the things it calls for is 270 new 1300 MW hydroelectric plants. That would be 270 new plants larger than the Site C project. Where will these plants be built. Well, I can tell you they will be built where there is water flow. That would include areas like the Peace River valley. But the greens are absolutely opposed to the Site C project, so where then?

But that is only a small part of what the document says is required. And that document, like the Leap Manifesto itself, has no indication of what all this might cost. However, I think we can take it as a given that those countries who cannot now afford to build electrical generation wouldn't be able to in the future, leaving the largest part of the world's population with no hope for increased standards of living.

What's kind of funny is that Naomi Klein goes on and on about capitalism, yet the proposals in the support document for the Leap Manifesto would be an enormous boost to capital around the world. Money taken from taxpayers to fund a huge private enterprise project.

Rev Pesky

epaulo13 wrote:

..here's a bit of reality.

1. The leap must begin by respecting the inherent rights and title of the original caretakers of this land, starting by fully implementing the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples.

..everything follows from the above demand..first and foremost. which is what we are seeing happening across the country from indigenous folks coming together. resisting the pipelines. resisting the encroachment by governments and corporations onto their lands and territories. which is why there is a discussion about capitalism because at it's very centre is colonization.

..another reality is that the leap is a very broad coalition which includes but not limited to faith, labour, environmental and indigenous folks. it continues to grow both on a local, national and global scale.

How do you reconcile the need for 270 huge hydroelecric projects with the need to respect aboriginal title?

epaulo13 epaulo13's picture

..your treating a backgrouund document a if it were a demand which it is not.

epaulo13 epaulo13's picture

..here's a bit of reality.

1. The leap must begin by respecting the inherent rights and title of the original caretakers of this land, starting by fully implementing the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples.

..everything follows from the above demand..first and foremost. which is what we are seeing happening across the country from indigenous folks coming together. resisting the pipelines. resisting the encroachment by governments and corporations onto their rights and territories. which is why there is a discussion about capitalism because at it's very center is colonization.

..another reality is that the leap is a very broad coalition which includes but not limited to faith, labour, environmental and indigenous folks. it continues to grow on a local, national and global scale.

edit

Rev Pesky

epaulo13 wrote:

..your treating a backgrouund document a if it were a demand which it is not.

I am treating the support document for what it is, that is, support for the contention that the world can be 'off oil' by 2050. I didn't suggest they put that document in there. They did that all on their own. Now, they either agree with the document, or disagree with it. I find it hard to resolve why they would put the document in there if they disagreed with it. To me that makes no sense.

If the premises of the support document are wrong, where does that leave the Leap Manifesto? Nowhere, is where.

Everywhere I look I see discussion around the Leap Manifesto concentrating on Naomi Klein and Avi Lewis, and almost no discussion of the foundation of their argument.

This is the way I see it. Tney wanted to push the idea of 'off oil', but realized that just saying so won't cut it. So they went looking and found this study by a couple of engineers that said it could be done, and they chose to base their argument on that study. Otherwise what would be the point of including that study as a reference to statements made in the Leap Manifesto? The problem is, I don't think they really looked at their support document, and I don't think any other Leap supporter has either.

Again, if the study they based their argument on turns out to be a pile of hogwash, where does that leave the Leap Manifesto? It leaves it out on the end of a very shaky limb.

epaulo13 epaulo13's picture

Rev Pesky wrote:

epaulo13 wrote:

..your treating a backgrouund document a if it were a demand which it is not.

I am treating the support document for what it is, that is, support for the contention that the world can be 'off oil' by 2050. I didn't suggest they put that document in there. They did that all on their own. Now, they either agree with the document, or disagree with it. I find it hard to resolve why they would put the document in there if they disagreed with it. To me that makes no sense.

If the premises of the support document are wrong, where does that leave the Leap Manifesto? Nowhere, is where.

Everywhere I look I see discussion around the Leap Manifesto concentrating on Naomi Klein and Avi Lewis, and almost no discussion of the foundation of their argument.

This is the way I see it. Tney wanted to push the idea of 'off oil', but realized that just saying so won't cut it. So they went looking and found this study by a couple of engineers that said it could be done, and they chose to base their argument on that study. Otherwise what would be the point of including that study as a reference to statements made in the Leap Manifesto? The problem is, I don't think they really looked at their support document, and I don't think any other Leap supporter has either.

Again, if the study they based their argument on turns out to be a pile of hogwash, where does that leave the Leap Manifesto? It leaves it out on the end of a very shaky limb.

..i don't see this document or the leap itself the way you do. and i don't speak for the leap. but i believe that if you want answers to the issues you raise the leap folks will accommodate you. you can contact them from their web site or facebook page.

..my support for the leap lies in those 15 demands and the processes of implementation that begin at the community level. also support for all those folks behind the leap. and my greatest concern is not can we actual accomplish the stated goal by 2050 is but that through the use of police/military we will not be allowed to even try.

Rev Pesky

Ontario cancels plans for more wind power

Quote:
Ontario's Liberal government took steps Tuesday to take some pressure off of rising electricity rates, cancelling plans to sign contracts for up to 1,000 megawatts of power from solar, wind and other renewable energy sources.

Ontario has been paying inflated prices for wind and solar, then selling the surplus for a quarter of cost of production. The difference is made up by the taxpayers.

epaulo13 epaulo13's picture

Public Record - The Leap Manifesto: A Climate Change Debate

"The Leap Manifesto: A Climate Change Debate" is held in Ottawa featuring Avi Lewis (documentary filmmaker, author, and activist) and Thomas Homer-Dixon (Chair of Global Systems at the Balsillie School of International Affairs). (September 15, 2016)

Geoff

epaulo13 wrote:

NDP publishes discussion guide on Leap Manifesto

Renewal Guidebook

Discussion Guide II:Policies and Principles

Given that the Leap Manifesto is a document encompassing many policy areas, it has been broken down into smaller sections and those sections have been organized into specific issue categories. The relevant sections of the NDP’s Policy Book and, in some cases, our 2015 Election Platform have also been included as a reference. These sections are followed by suggested questions and launching points for group discussions.

As always, the options for Electoral District Associations are to discuss the Leap document in its entirety, in part or not at all, with or without the help of the following set of workbooks. This is an EDA driven process. If your EDA wishes to follow another path for discussions, that is also encouraged. Our staff will consider all feedback collected by September 30th, 2016.

Given the complex nature of this document, our hope is that EDAs will provide our team with fulsome responses for consideration. In turn, these responses will be taken as recommendations to guide us forward....

The NDP convention ended on April 10, and the party gave ridings until September 30 to organize and hold their group discussions. I can't understand why the window of opportunity for input was so small, especially given that the summer months are a challenge to organize anything?

Now, if I were a skeptic, I'd say the party brass weren't all that interested in getting input from the membership, and the tight deadline made it more difficult to hold the meetings and provide that input.

If I were a big-time skeptic, I'd wonder if the report was pretty much written before the party brass received much of the input, and then inserted the odd quote, here and there, to make it look as if they had listened.

Thankfully, I'm not a skeptic, so I know that couldn't be true.

epaulo13 epaulo13's picture

The Carbon Tax Is Doomed

Climate change is often chalked up to “market failure.” We’re told that, despite prevailing assumptions that prices accurately transmit “signals” about the costs of goods and services, emitters like power plants, refineries, automobiles, and households simply do not pay the full ecological costs of their emissions. Hence, the market has failed.

To fix the problem, the argument goes, we must internalize the costs of emissions into the price mechanism so that emitters pay the full costs of their actions. If we could craft a policy that accurately monetized the ecological costs of emissions — a carbon tax, or fee and dividend scheme — fossil fuels would become costlier and renewables would be more competitive and cost effective. The failure could be corrected, and the market would succeed in guiding us to a clean energy future.

Accounting for ecological costs has become the primary way of crafting environmental policy for public officials and legal experts. But the rhetoric of cost internalization is a political dead end for a left climate politics.

Focusing on getting the price right, and thereby assuming the market can be corrected, allows right-wing and fossil-fuel interests to effectively argue that any and all climate policy will be a cost to working people. Recently, the CEO of Chevron put it bluntly “I’ve never had a customer come to me and ask to pay a higher price for oil, gas, or other products.” Indeed, while many on the climate left attribute slow movement on climate to a problem of education and denial of climate science, popular opposition to climate policy is more often framed in economic terms, focusing on costs to the economy and to everyday people’s lives.

In an ideological landscape dominated by an obsession with accounting for and trimming costs, environmental policy proposals often advocate raising costs—costs that are likely to end up being passed down to working people. Opponents of climate justice easily argue that any tax or cost will end up percolating throughout the economy and hitting ordinary people: wealth doesn’t trickle down, but costs do.

A left climate politics must move beyond a language of cost-internalization, and emphasize the real material benefits for a society beyond fossil fuel: not only in terms of a cleaner environment, but also cheaper energy and green jobs. This requires a language of public goods and collective action, not a language of markets and costs. If the Left must speak of costs at all, it needs to be framed in class terms — costs that the wealthy and corporations must pay to fund a better energy economy.

quote:

Yet the carbon tax appears entirely out of reach in the political context of the United States, despite Bernie Sanders’s clear support for such a measure. Even Obama’s cap-and-trade policy — with substantial support from the fossil-fuel industry — was politically defeated by only the second year of his first term (never to be revisited).

The defeat shows the magnitude of the struggle ahead. Both cap-and-trade and carbon taxes are market-based policies based in neoliberal ideology. Real progress will require a left alternative that focuses on the role of the public sector in actively constructing our energy transition....

epaulo13 epaulo13's picture

Oslo Is Creating The Model For How Cities Can Solve Climate Change

As cities around the world start to take climate change seriously, many of the goals are still in the somewhat distant-sounding future. New York City plans to cut emissions 80% by 2050. That's more than 30 years away, and even that will be a challenge.

Oslo is taking a different approach. The city plans to cut greenhouse gas emissions in half, compared to 1990 levels, in only four years. It's faster than any city or country has made changes in the past. When France shifted to nuclear power from fossil fuels, they reduced emissions by about 5% a year.

But experts say that's the pace needed if we want to try to keep global warming below 1.5 degrees Celsius, which is the most ambitious goal countries agreed to at the Paris climate talks, and the target that most scientists say is safest if we want to keep the climate—and all of the systems that humans rely on for survival—stable.

quote:

The city has different challenges than some others. Electricity comes from hydropower, and though recent research suggests some dams aren't quite as clean as they seem, they're still better than relying on fossil fuels. Rather than revamping electricity, Oslo will have to focus most on problems like pollution from waste disposal or transportation.

In 2015, the city decided to ban private cars from the city center; the new plan builds on that goal. Taxis will stop using gas by 2020; public transit will also go fossil-free. New infrastructure will help reduce freight emissions. The city is also rolling out new parking restrictions, tools, and building more bike lanes.

Unsurprisingly, there has been some resistance. "Like every country, I guess, people are addicted to their cars, so it would be really tough to reduce," says Peters. Adding bike lanes also means taking out parking spaces, which has caused waves of annoyance.

But people are also starting to see the benefits. Peters says the parking on his own street has been converted to a bike lane.

"Because there's no parking, there's basically no cars in the street," he says. "So I take the kids to day care in the morning, and there's a stream of bikes going down the hill on the way to work. I basically don't see any cars. You don't have to worry about the kids getting run over, and it's quiet. It's just like walking down a car-free street. I think people will see that and think, 'Oh, it's actually quite nice not to have cars coming down the street.'"

Though bike sharing isn't new in the city, it's become much more popular in the last couple of years as the network of bike lanes expands. "I think it's reinforcing that people see there's another way," he says. "It's actually quite convenient. I don't have to get my bike stolen if I park it in the city, and I don't have to decide if I want to ride my bike or not, I can just take a city bike."

epaulo13 epaulo13's picture

..this looks like it might be a little bit interesting. $250 a pop though is pricey

Want to Fix Climate Change? The Green Jobs BC Conference Is Coming

Fixing climate change could be a job for way more people.

Join Green Jobs BC on Nov. 24 and 25 for their 2016 conference to see a vision of what’s possible in the province. Good green jobs can strengthen communities, sustain the environment and build a thriving economy.

The conference will explore opportunities for job growth in British Columbia as we transition to a low-carbon economy. Expect to hear about new research, policy that’s working in other jurisdictions, leadership stories from within Canada and how climate goals are being met around the globe.

The conference will include panel discussions, breakout sessions, guest speakers, a trade exhibit and a networking reception.

This year’s keynote speaker is Bob McDonald, host of CBC’s science program Quirks & Quarks. He’s known across Canada for making complex scientific issues understandable, meaningful and fun. McDonald is an author of numerous books, and has written on why Canada needs a green industrial revolution.

There will also be a media workshop — in partnership with The Tyee — for journalists, students and communications specialists on new ways to frame public discussion about the climate and the economy. The six guest presenters include Tyee writers Geoff Dembicki and Ian Gill....

epaulo13 epaulo13's picture

..here's an idea that just came forward re transition for workers. i like it.

A Just Transition for Fossil Fuels Workers is Possible

video

You may have noticed that energy policy and climate change, one of the greatest issues facing human survival today, have not been at the forefront of this year’s presidential election. It is only over the issue of jobs where energy policy did get a brief mention during the second presidential debate. This is when Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton were asked about their energy policies and they both chose to focus in on how to save dying coal industry jobs but did not provide much detail on what they would actually do to solve the problem. A major new report from the political economy research institute titled The Economics of Just Transition: A Framework for Supporting Fossil Fuel Dependent Workers and Communities in the United States by Robert Pollin and Brian Callaci. This reports many solutions. It details a plan for how jobs in energy transition is viable while reducing the greenhouse gas emissions outlined by the UN intergovernmental panel on climate change.Joining us now to discuss this transition plan is one of the coauthors of the paper, Robert Pollin. Bob Pollin is a distinguished professor of economics and co-director of the Political Economy Research Institute or PERI, at the University of Massachusetts Amherst. He’s the author of several books including Greening the Global Economy.

epaulo13 epaulo13's picture

Oilpatch workers have a plan, but Ottawa needs to act

quote:

That’s why we’re calling on the governments of Canada and Alberta to foster job opportunities for skilled workers that are aligned with our climate commitments.

Our plan is simple. Oil and gas workers are highly skilled and can be rapidly put to work building renewable energy projects — they just need upskilling support.

They need Canada’s manufacturing sector and existing energy projects retooled for renewables. They need government to support contractors and unions that want to make a clean transition.

What they don’t need is to remain dependent on the boom-and-bust cycles of oil and gas.

We heard from real workers across Canada who shared their hopes and stories to help us build the Workers’ Climate Plan. We know they care about the environment, the health of their families and pioneering change....

..from the climate plan page where the report was posted today.

quote:

We have an opportunity to take start fresh in the energy sector in Canada. This plan put forth by by the WCP wants to " put Canada on the path to becoming a leader in renewable energy, and a net exporter of renewable energy products, services and technology" and to take the opportunity to improve the quality of life of trades people, their families and the nation by reorienting labour toward new and diverse forms of energy production and energy efficiency retrofitting. " Those quotes are from WCP and I support those concepts whole heartedly. I also see this as an opportunity to reap the benefits of value added production and get out of the traditional approach of the past, of exporting raw materials fpr processing and manufacture elsewhere. We also have the opportunity to build equity and ownership in the energy sector rather than turning it over lock stock and barrel to multi-national corporations. Let’s get moving!

Martin N.

Install a 5 - 10 kw grid tied solar system on your home and you instantly gain enough street cred to avoid the endless bloviating about "caring for the earth and each other" forever. That's a 'leap'. Leap, don't jawbone it to death.

Rev Pesky

Quote:
...net exporter of renewable energy products, services and technology"

Which highlights a couple of things. First, this wonderful plan for retraining workers needs a bunch of things, but the one thing it needs most isn't even mentioned. That is, it needs money. The export of fossil fuels brings in the money needed to sustain the industry. There is nothing in this Workers Climate Plan to indicate where the expect the money to come from. Which leads us to the above quote.

Yes, we need to be an exporter of something in order to pay for the WCP, but this doesn't tell me anything that I don't already know. The details of exactly what it is we'll export in order to pay for the WCP are missing completely.

I can tell you what we won't be exporting. We won't be exporting manufactured goods. The only real manufacturing left in this country is automobile manufacture, and that only exists because we have a specific agreement with the USA, the largest consumer of automobiles on the planet. Without Autopact Canadian manufacturing would have more or less dissapeared (I'll exclude forestry in that lumber, while a manufactured product, is really a commodity).

So, what exactly are the 'renewable energy products' that we're going to export? What specifically are the 'services and technology' that we're going to export? Without those details, the Workers Climate Plan is not much more than hot air.

 

epaulo13 epaulo13's picture

 ..again i see things different than you. that these folks are my allies in the greater struggle, rev. and we are all trying to figure it out as we go along. because you need allies if your going to make change..and change is in the making. you do see that don't you? it's all around us. and now you can't hold it back. so time to get on board the train, to hopefully a better place Wink

edit

..if i may..the solution to most of our major problems is not of a tecnical nature but political. things will change if, when and how movements influence the politics. but it begins with organizing together in greater diversity and numbers then we have done in the past.

epaulo13 epaulo13's picture

Let's Go Fossil Free AND Tuition Free

When I entered University in 2007, I thought a post-secondary education was all about the courses you took and the GPA you graduated with. What I didn’t know, was that the education that would get me pretty much every job I’ve had since graduating came from the education of the student movement more than the classroom. Today, Universities and colleges are once again becoming sites of grassroots organizing. Students today are one of the biggest forces of power for justice, but they shoulder an incredible financial burden.

quote:

Divestment is an incredible movement to work within. Not only does it coalesce moral, scientific and financial imperatives to take real, immediate action on climate; it is led by an incredibly motivated, inspired and empowered community of young people who are willing to take that action into their own hands. The more time I spend working with students and young people, the more I find that the same organizers on campus fighting pipelines; are the same students fighting for divestment; are the same students demanding tuition reductions; are the same students standing in solidarity with frontline communities being impacted by climate change and irresponsible oil and gas development. Because when we narrow in on just one issue, we fail to see the big picture - that all struggles for justice are connected - and not only by the people working on them.

The federal government puts less and less money into education while dolling out billions of dollars in subsidies to the oil and gas industry every year. The consistently rising cost of education is saddling students with mortgage-size debts in order to go through an undergraduate degree. Universities function more as businesses than social institutions - increasing the cost of tuition, not to mention ancillary and auxiliary fees as often as they can. The irony is that students face consistently rising costs of education while the oil and gas industry enjoys unfettered access to our educational institutions. As divestment organizers, we don’t want to attend institutions that are complicit in the climate crisis - and we certainly don’t want to put ourselves into debt for the next 25 years in order to do so.

Rev Pesky

epaulo13 wrote:

 ..again i see things different than you. that these folks are my allies in the greater struggle, rev. and we are all trying to figure it out as we go along. because you need allies if your going to make change..and change is in the making. you do see that don't you? it's all around us. and now you can't hold it back. so time to get on board the train, to hopefully a better place Wink

edit

..if i may..the solution to most of our major problems is not of a tecnical nature but political. things will change if, when and how movements influence the politics. but it begins with organizing together in greater diversity and numbers then we have done in the past.

It did call itself a Plan, right? So what is the plan? Ah yes, when it comes to how it is going to be accomplished, sorry, the plan didn't get that far.

What exactly are 'renewable energy products? I won't even ask the other questions. Just that one. The Plan said we were going to export 'renewable energy products. What are they?

epaulo13 epaulo13's picture

..you ask things of me that i can't answer. i posted this piece to show where iron & earth was landing. they are a new organization of oil workers. this in itself should garner at least a little interest. and how they are calling on both the prov and the feds to pony up on the side of climate..i like that. like i said to me an ally. this is what is important to me and i believe to the movements as a whole.

eta:

..i believe no one can make a plan to do anything on a scale for what is needed to change direction. where our wisdom lies is were we come together as people in common struggle.

epaulo13 epaulo13's picture

..more re: post #41

Canada’s Students and Workers Unite for Free Education

We’re proud to have the support of Hassan Yussuff and the Canadian Labour Congress behind our plan for free education. Post-secondary education must be universally accessible, and protected and strengthened like any public service.

Education is a right- join us on November 2nd to demand access for all students in Canada and fairness for our families.

Rev Pesky

epaulo13 wrote:

..you ask things of me that i can't answer. i posted this piece to show where iron & earth was landing. they are a new organization of oil workers. this in itself should garner at least a little interest...

That's fine. I have nothing against the organization, nor their objectives. But something you have to understand is that when they say, without being prompted, that they will finance their plan is such-and-such a way, I have a right to question their plan.

Further, if the financial plan includes something like 'the export of energy renewable products' I have a right to ask what that means. To me it means nothing.

The authors of the plan, understanding that some might question where the money will come from, conjured up an export industry of things that don't exist. That makes me wonder about the rest of the plan. 'Cause if the rest of the plan is no better supported than the part about the financing of the plan, it's not really a plan at all. It's just someone's lovely dream, and has about than much chance of becoming reality.

peterjcassidy peterjcassidy's picture

This may help the discussion:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Renewable_resource

Renewable resource From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

A 'renewable resource' is an organic natural resource which can replenish to overcome usage and consumption, either through biological reproduction or other naturally recurring processes in a finite amount of time. Renewable resources are a part of Earth's natural environment and the largest components of its ecosphere. A positive life cycle assessment is a key indicator of a resource's sustainability.[1]

Definitions of renewable: resources may also include agricultural production, as in sustainable agriculture and to an extent water resources.[2] In 1962 Paul Alfred Weiss defined Renewable Resources as: "The total range of living organisms providing man with food, fibres, drugs, etc...".[3] Another type of renewable resources is renewable energy resources. Common sources of renewable energy include solar, geothermal and wind power, which are all categorised as renewable resources.

...

Early modern times and the 19th century saw the previous resource base partially replaced respectively supplemented by large scale chemical synthesis and by the use of fossil and mineral resources respectively.[28] Besides the still central role of wood, there is a sort of renaissance of renewable products based on modern agriculture, genetic research and extraction technology. Besides fears about an upcoming global shortage of fossil fuels, local shortages due to boycotts, war and blockades or just transportation problems in remote regions have contributed to different methods of replacing or substituting fossil resources based on renewable

Rev Pesky wrote:

epaulo13 wrote:

..you ask things of me that i can't answer. i posted this piece to show where iron & earth was landing. they are a new organization of oil workers. this in itself should garner at least a little interest...

That's fine. I have nothing against the organization, nor their objectives. But something you have to understand is that when they say, without being prompted, that they will finance their plan is such-and-such a way, I have a right to question their plan.

Further, if the financial plan includes something like 'the export of energy renewable products' I have a right to ask what that means. To me it means nothing.

The authors of the plan, understanding that some might question where the money will come from, conjured up an export industry of things that don't exist. That makes me wonder about the rest of the plan. 'Cause if the rest of the plan is no better supported than the part about the financing of the plan, it's not really a plan at all. It's just someone's lovely dream, and has about than much chance of becoming reality.

Rev Pesky

peterjcassidy wrote:

This may help the discussion:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Renewable_resource

Renewable resource From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

A 'renewable resource' is an organic natural resource which can replenish to overcome usage and consumption, either through biological reproduction or other naturally recurring processes in a finite amount of time. Renewable resources are a part of Earth's natural environment and the largest components of its ecosphere. A positive life cycle assessment is a key indicator of a resource's sustainability.... 

In fact that doesn't help. It wasn't the definition of 'renewable resources' that was in question. It was 'renewable resource products'.

When coal or oil gets dug up, it can be sold to some other country, who will pay the price of extraction, plus enough extra to help run the economy. I don't see where wind-generated electricity gets sold to pay the cost of building the windmills. It's the old problem of the commune, where people thought they could build an economy by trading crafts amongst themelves. It doesn't work. Some money has to come in from outside.

The authors of the posted plan (Workers Climate Plan) recognized this fact, and posited the means by which it could be financed. One of the money generators was the export of 'renewable energy products'.

All I ask is for someone to name a 'renewable energy product'.

By the way, coal and oil and natural gas are renewable energy sources. The problem with them isn't that they're not renewable, the problem is the time scale of the renewal, and the release of CO2 that results from burning them.

 

epaulo13 epaulo13's picture

Bulletin 52 - November 3, 2016
Energy Democracy at the “People’s Forum on BRICS”

John Treat, reporting for TUED

On October 13-14, more than five-hundred delegates from dozens of countries convened at the Xavier Centre of Historical Research in Goa, India, for the “People’s Forum on BRICS.” I had the pleasure of representing TUED at the meeting, and of speaking as part of a panel co-organized with Transnational Institute (TNI) entitled “State of Power: Energy Democracy and Labor Perspectives” (details below).

Timed and structured as a grassroots, critical alternative to the official, state-led “BRICS Summit” — which took place over the two days following the People’s Forum (October 15-16), and also in Goa — the People’s Forum builds on two previous similar meetings, in Durban, South Africa in 2013 and Fortaleza, Brazil in 2014.

Under the theme, “Building Solidarities Across Communities,” the meeting addressed a range of issues facing progressive forces in the BRICS countries, as well as broader challenges to achieving justice, development and international solidarity and cooperation. Full plenary sessions of the meeting heard testimony from representatives of various countries, organizations and movements about the role of the BRICS countries in advancing neoliberal agendas and policies, including the heavy and intensifying reliance on “extractivist” approaches to resource exploitation, including in energy. A range of smaller workshops over the course of the two days explored in more depth issues of food sovereignty, urbanization, the BRICS bank and development finance, international financial institutions, international solidarity, the struggle against trans-national corporations, and more.

TNI has been working closely with TUED on advancing the struggle for energy democracy, through deepening the analysis and extending the discussion that informs this work. TNI’s publication in May 2016 of Towards Energy Democracy provided a very valuable contribution to these efforts; the report summarises discussions and outcomes from an international workshop on energy democracy held in Amsterdam in February, organised by TNI in partnership with Global Justice Now, Rosa Luxemburg Brussels, Platform London, Switched on London, the Berlin Energy Roundtable, the Alternative Information and Development Centre, Public Services International, and TUED....

epaulo13 epaulo13's picture

Rev Pesky wrote:

I have a right to question their plan.

..i fully agree

epaulo13 epaulo13's picture

..from the above piece. my bold.

quote:

For my presentation on behalf of TUED, I gave highlights from another forthcoming TUED Working Paper entitled, Is the World Really Moving Away from Fossil Fuels? Co-authored with TUED Coordinator Sean Sweeney, the paper engages with the wave of “green growth” optimism that has gathered strength over the past year or two, especially as a result of the decline in coal consumption, the growth in renewable energy (103 GW last year) and the levelling off of CO2 emissions levels. While these empirical trends are real, we show that the optimistic narrative that relies on them — which aims to confirm that markets will be able to deliver the energy transition we urgently need, if only policy makers will “send the right signals” to investors — is based largely on a selective reading of energy and emissions data. Shared by the likes of Al Gore, Nicholas Stern, and echoed by some large environmental NGOs, this “we are winning” perspective falls apart quickly when these superficially encouraging data points are considered in the context of larger trends — among them the global rise in the use of oil and gas, as well as the sharp growth in methane emissions in recent years. The fight to achieve the science-based targets adopted at COP 21 in Paris in December 2015 and to avoid dangerous climate impacts therefore requires another approach — one that is grounded in social ownership and democratic control over energy resources, infrastructure, and options.

Pages