Saying no to Kyoto

[cakadu]

Klein has been reported as saying that he is prepared to fight the Kyoto accord and won't see Alberta paying more than it's fair share for compling with the accord, if it is in fact signed.

If we have the greatest oil/gas capacity in the country, then wouldn't it stand to reason that we would pay the bigger share? How long can we expect to keep taking these resources out of the ground and not pay something for the right/privelege of doing so?

Isn't this like the piper wanting to be paid?

[rodbradshaw]

Cakadu
Kyoto would be a big blow to Alberta's economy because it is not the end user that will pay for the costs but the producer. If the Middle East or for that matter any US producer doesn't have the same expense or tax we will see the same thing that has happened to the farmer.

The Alberta government has done a good job of lessening its dependence on oil and gas but it still pays a large part of the bills whether through royalties or economic activity.

This does not mean that we shouldn't look at other forms of energy. Ethanol and wind and solar power are just a few things that we should be looking at. We also have the worlds largest supply of low sulfur coal. If we could develop a method to utilize this coal in an environmentally friendly way we could help control the greenhouse effect and yet not have to curb our life styles.

Rod

[cakadu]

There are more "costs" than just royalties and taxes in this whole equation. As a province and good citizens, we still have a responsibility to preserve the environment and not leave a big ecological footprint.

We are just borrowing this land and I would hope we could leave it a little better off than what we found it for the generations to come. I wonder how many years away drilling in the national parks is going to be.

As an aside, I saw an interesting program on Waterton the other day and it talked about how the drilling technology in the early 1900's was not good enough to dig into the rock down there and by default it became a national park in 1911. What would the area look like now if it hadn't been designated as a national park?

There are still a number of things that could be tidied up in the oil and gas industries and I commend them for their efforts thus far. I don't see why we can't give a little back. Would it be as severe as the NEP was?

Please help me gain a better understanding!

[cowman]

Kyoto is a complete joke. It has absolutely nothing to do with reducing green house gasses but with money. Sometimes you need a lot of posturing to pick the peoples pocket, especially when you've pretty well got them on the ropes from robbing them for decades.
With the "energy credits" what will change? If I am a major polluter I will be allowed to go out and buy some "energy credits" from my local(or not so local) farmer. Therefore it's business as usual...I pass the cost onto the consumer. The farmer gets a few bucks, which he gets to pay tax on. Of course he comes out the real loser because he will be paying massive amounts for his energy and fertilizer expenses. Also everything else he buys because he has to pay the added cost on everything he consumes. And the government will say "Look how we solved the global warming problem...I think we deserve a raise!!" when in fact not one thing will have changed. It is all smoke and mirrors! A massive con game!(Also put those damned uppitty Albertans in their place!)
It's time to lose this country?