One just can't trust that government

This is an email from the David Suzuki Foundation that I received:    

Tell the government to honour its commitments to our oceans

If a panel of doctors told you to take better care of your health, would you listen? Ten leading marine scientists with the Royal Society of Canada just told Canada to take care of its oceans before it’s too late.
With the budget speech just weeks away, now is the time to tell Finance Minster Jim Flaherty that our oceans desperately need proper investment. Rising ocean temperatures and increased salinity in certain areas are just two of the serious threats they face. In last year’s budget speech, the government promised to create six new marine parks by 2012. That hasn’t happened yet, and they only have 10 months left to meet their commitment.

Join the thousands of Canadians telling the government to listen to its doctors and honour its commitments to the oceans.




You see the link, it does not take long to send that letter. Considering the government's stance to the environment I can't believe that they made such a promise. Probably with their fingers crossed behind their backs. To say "Six marine parks" is a bit of a vague statement anyway. How big is each of them going to be? The ocean around Canada is incredibly vast and protecting an inch here and there will not make a difference. Will the fishing industry stop being short-sighted and support marine parks? I doubt it. But keep the number in mind and we'll see what happens by the end of 2012.     

I wished I had that optimism

I read this article in The Record a while ago and quite liked it, apart from the comments some dumbhead posted below: Ottawa should heed local green initiatives


The article is about Canadian government's stance on the Kyoto Protocol, their behaviour at the United Nations Climate Change Conference and Harper's environmental ignorance. Although a lot of Canadians probably (hopefully) shook their heads at all of those, I'm sure there are, tragically but true, Canadians who share the government's and prime minister's stand. Alone this sentence from the article makes me wonder how much idiocy is still left (lots, too much): "Environment Canada’s 2011 report on Canadian emissions showed that we will increase our output of greenhouse gases by 18 per cent by the end of this decade, with continued upwards momentum." Who's proud of that?



Canada is looking to export oil to China, meantime the USA is having their own internal fights over the Keystone XL pipeline. Others again suggest to build refineries in Canada and use the oil here instead of selling it. For the greedy oil companies in the tar sands just nothing moves fast enough.They want to expand until they've ruined half of Alberta (and Saskatchewan). Subsidies for citizens who'd like to support alternative energies have been cut, as in the case of solar power. The "Environment Minister" Peter Kent gave his go-ahead for Brewster's Glacier Discovery Walk in Jasper National Park and more Disney-esque attractions are already in the planning for another national park. What's next? My hope is that people boykott all of it! 

The author of the article points out that local, municipal and provincial initiatives can take actions towards a more sustainable life but all of them will have a hard time considering the lack of support from the feds. The important sentence here is possibly, "Demonize the government all you want, but do not use that as an excuse for inaction." Unfortunately, there's only so far you can get with these initiatives and I am sure more people would think about change towards an  environmentally-friendly behaviour if the government set a good example, or let's say if the government pressured its citizens into it. It's good to see there's optimism but the power of polluting corporations in this country goes way to far. 

 

Re-occupy your body or accept the 3 reasons to die for

Veggies on Wheels is the newsletter that comes with Pfenning's organic box and this time it reports on Pfenning's participation at the Guelph Organic Conference (which I did not go to because it's in Guelp and I don't have a car to get there). One of the biggest issues were GMO, courtesy of Monsanto. Apparently the majority of Canadians still don't know anything about GMO (which box do they live in?). The reader is then referred to the article Re-occupy your body and a pamphlet has been enclosed from Cban.ca (Canadian Biotechnology Action Network) with info on GMO but I talk about that in another post.   


I have not read the whole article yet because it's long but I'm sure it's good. The three reasons that are most threatening to our health, and according to the newsletter make up the primary causes of disease and death nowadays, are: 
- bad food 
- most prescription drugs
- a poisoned environment

Which one disturbs you most and which one can you influence the best? Go figure. 
I am not concerned with the second point (yet) as I don't take any drugs. The first one is half-concerning to me. I know we still do not eat completely organic.  I am not feeling great about our daughter drinking non-organic milk but she drinks lots and the non-organic costs enough. Also, I am sure we'd eat a bit more meat if the organic stuff did not cost a fortune. But it's not actually that difficult to eat healthy and decent food. You do the shopping, you decide what's in your cart, it's in your hands. And by the way, buying non-organic produce and peeling it in the hope to get rid of the bad stuff does not seem the best idea. You are still supporting the farmers who contaminate our environment and the bad stuff will go through the skin of some fruits and vegetables. 

The poisoned environment is a huge concern, especially with this government that's big on setting up environmental disasters. You can't really "un-poison" the environment and get rid of all the harm that has been done but we can slow down the add-on of chemicals and toxic substances to our air, water and soil. Looking around me it still doesn't happen enough. For example, when I cycle or walk I probably breathe in more greenhouse gases than the car drivers. That's nuts! I'm the victim of other people's polluting habits. I noticed that most people are happy to give me a ride (if I ask) but carpooling is still not very common. That's nuts too! Driving is just one issue, but you scan make up the list yourself of activities that harm our environment. And then start ticking off the bad habits you give up. This should become a mandatory, annual exercise for everyone. I wonder how slowly or quickly things would change and how big the procrastination rate is.  

Sorry, World

http://sorryworld.ca/   That's an interesting link! 

The New Year is coming

Do you believe in  New Year's resolutions? I don't. I just hope next year is better than this year. 



One must not think that the residents or the city of Kitchener knows when and how to clear snow and ice off sidewalks (and streets). I don't care too much about the streets right now because I don't commute by bus and so far the roads cleared simply by having cars driving on them but the sidewalks matter - to me at least. I don't think to too many other people because most  Canadians keep their ass attached to a (heated) car seat during the winter so what do they care what the sidewalks look like. Argh! Two days ago it first rained, then snowed fairly wet snow. Clever people would have gone out that evening and cleared the slush off their sidewalks before it could freeze. And they would have burnt off a lot of turkey calories at the same time! But nobody did. So yesterday my daughter and I stepped out the door and after my first step I thought, "oh shoot, ice!". By that time my daughter was already lying flat on her back, slipped in the ice (no, we did not have to go to ER). Poor baby, she will not be walking much outside this winter. Salt seems the most common "tool" in the fight of winter here in Kitchener and I don't like it.  The slush sticks far too well to the stroller. Never mind the puddles we leave behind every time we go into a shop or other building - stop starring, I am not going to clean it up. Get out the snow shovels and sand., they are much more effective and better for the environment. But I have not seen any yet.
 
So, I got a little book for Christmas called Life Lines. One of the first ones is, "We own nothing, everybody rents." It's true, especially when it comes to our planet. I received an email today from CPAWS asking  for donations and listing their achievements for this year. I am not even happy about the achievements, even though I probably wrote letters to lots of MPs telling them to help protect this or that space or area. But the tarsands are still there, still operating, still expanding. No change. Kyoto, a disaster - Canada, the big loser, bailed out. F*** this. The Canadian government ought to be jailed for it. Or have above phrase tattooed onto their foreheads. Do they really not get it? No they don't. That's far more than embarrassing.

Oh, and the worst, last year at this time we did make donations to different environmental organisations, this year we are far from it, low tide in the bank account due to a dead job market. Instead, we have the prospect of taking our building management to court over our windows. Hey, there's a new experience looming! When it rained inside our bedrooms the day we moved in we were told this problem is new. Recently I found out leaking windows have been an ongoing issue and the windows were apparrently repaired last spring. With no improvement obviously! Our building management is well aware of the problem, it has been contacted by our superintendents verbally and by us in writing at least twice. Nothing has happened. As soon as the temperatures dropped the outside window panes froze shut they were so wet. (Are they going to burst when too much ice accumulates?) The inside panes are daily covered with water and mould grows everywhere on the frame and surrounding area unless I clean it off every week. We think the windows do not comply with the local building standards. Neighbours have unsuccessfully tried to change the situation, with the management getting away with their poor maintenance. How can that be, I wonder?

I read an article recently from an engineer who wrote a letter to The Record suggesting Canada should produce pre-fabricated houses, just like they put up here everywhere but smaller, and ship them overseas to help with the housing crisis in poor countries. After all, Canada has plenty of forest to turn into lumber and it would help the economy. My quick thoughts on that: Safe the forest, and safe the rest of the world from these poor constructions called houses. Unless of course they come without windows. Maybe new houses like in all those ugly suburbs are better than the oldish apartment buildings we live in but then again I don't want to live in suburbia. That's for car-addicted people, not people like me who dream of giving their bike an upgrade and have fenders and other handy things installed. That is once I earn money of course. 

Over Christmas we rented a small car and unlike in Edmonton we got one too. Wow! It was a Toyota Yaris and with the three of us, car seat, stroller, Christmas gifts etc. it was well loaded too. It worked well and still it was very fuel-efficient. We need more of those, the cars I mean, and rental agencies that rent them out. 

More ranting about politics

I started writing this a while ago too so it's slightly outdated but the government is still in place. 

A while ago I read this article Consumer group files complaint against 8 retailers and I just loved, loved, loved the comment from a Ruy Lopez who writes: "Since when did right wing gov't's start caring about the little person? I wish I could get treated as good as a Canadian company instead of just a lowly human being."

In my husband's latest CGA (Certified General Accoutants) magazine the editor's note talks about Parliament returning for the fall session. The article calls for "strong leaders who do not compromise on ethics and integrity." One of the MPs well known for "ethically intelligent leadership" was Jack Layton who will be missed. I think his death is the worst that could happen to Canadian politics! In German  there's an idiom that says "Unkraut vergeht nicht" (meaning 'weeds never die') and that's why it probably did not hit that irresponsible leader of this country.       

Did you read the articles on protests against the oil sands outside Parliament Hill in Ottawa. One politician said he could not believe that 200 people gather together to object to something that gives thousands of people a livelihood. What's wrong with that? These people had all right to protests. Let's see what will happen to the Wall Street protests - they have all reason for protesting too. After all our corporate-ruled capitalism does not keep us or the planet healthy.


A picture of skeletons posted by a friend on facebook reads: Get a job. Go to work. Get married. Have children. Follow Fashion. Act normal. Walk on the pavement. Watch TV. Obey the law. Save for your old age. 
Now repeat after me: "I am free'


Are you free?

Forget about the economy, think future

CPAWS has invited people to leave comments about 100 years Parks Canada. There's one from Judy Gibson pointing out very well what we all should know by now and that is that the new government sucks. They only think about economical growth, specifically through the exploiting or contaminating Canada's natural resources. She writes: "...but I am extremely worried that a number of new MPs have no real understanding of the enormous responsibilities awaiting them. They will need to be trained to think as responsible adults who care about social and environmental concerns, .... Much focus has been on ‘the economy’ as though it were not itself driven by a balanced and responsible management of the environment, and social programs, and ethical business practices."     

David Suzuki writes in his recent blog Science Matters that it's not our right to leave the world's devastated environment to our children and expect them to clean up. He also reports on a speech of his daughter that left world leaders speechless and on a boy who started at 13 his own organization to raise awareness of climate change. This boy wants children to ask their parents and leaders, "Do I matter to you?" ... For many adults, the honest answer would have to be, "No, we're more concerned about cheap gas, the economy, profits for the fossil fuel industry, and having more stuff."   

Richard Louv in Last Child in the Woods certainly has similar phrases in his books. There is far too much focus on the economy and one's own wealth than on the environment. Obviously, that's got to do with our lost connection to the environment and the scarce knowledge that we have about it makes us not care. 

Something in our economic model also seems to trigger a thinking that care for the environment and economic growth can't go hand in hand. I actually find it odd, but good, that our electricity provider, EPCOR, promotes ways on how to safe energy. Maybe they hope nobody listens. Any way, those two E's are not opposites like hate and love but it surely needs a will to make them run smoothly together. 

That reminds me of a brochure my daughter picked up today. It advocates to stop animal cruelty by becoming vegan! But you don't have to be vegan to protect animals and assure them a happy life. If you are concerned about feed lots and inhumane slaughter methods, you could find out where your animal products come from and chose those that allow you to eat them with a clear conscience. Honestly, we would not keep cattle, pigs and hens just for cuddles if nobody was to consume their products (meat, eggs, milk). If the whole world turned vegan there's no need to keep livestock. So this can't be the goal of vegans and vegetarians. Returning them to the wild is impossible. Besides, we are not capable any more to live with wild animals around us, near us. It's scares the hell out of most of us to think of a bear in the backyard. 
Interestingly, Louv mentions that we are disconnected from the sources of our food too; that lots of people dislike hunting and think children shouldn't play shooting at birds. But we are hunters & gatherers! In my opinion there's nothing wrong with hunting or fishing as long as the animal gets used well, e.g. eating - eat more than just the filet or steak, turn the hide into clothing, make a pillow from the feathers, ..... Compared to this, killing an elephant to get the ivory and then leave the carcass to rot is plain wasteful and stupid and unacceptable. 

We don't have to go to the extreme ends of options. But our priorities certainly need a makeover and reordering.    
                      

Suburbia live

Last week I visited a friend in Cochrane near Calgary. She lives in a new development on the outskirts of the town with a gorgeous view to the Rockies. Apart from the view there was not much to this development. Far away from anything you depend on your car. My friend admitted that if she was to walk shopping she'd have to carry her groceries uphill for 40 minutes. You better be a fitness-fanatic to do so. The houses were large but close to each other because gardens were practically non-existent. Since all houses are on dead-end streets there's no through traffic and therefore no sidewalks. It seems safe to walk on the street but how am I going to teach my child not to do it? For being a large house it had only 3 smallish bedrooms. Even the wardrobe between the living area and the garage was bigger than the bedrooms. Unless you host dozens of people regularly I don't see why you would want extremely spacious living roomS. 

It was my first trip from Edmonton to Calgary and luckily I did not have to go right into Calgary as Cochrane is located Northwest of it. I drove Stony Trail though, a new road around the outskirts of Calgary that helps you avoid going through the city. At the moment the road is surrounded by barren, of nature cleared land but soon there will be neighbourhoods everywhere as beginnings can already be seen. It's not looking beautiful. I said to my husband, in Alberta the population must be expected to double very soon or who is going to live in all those houses? I would not want to. Despite the fact that Calgary has an apparently pretty good LRT (Light Railway Transit) system these new neighbourhoods will not be connected right away. There's a Park & Ride (in driving terms) nearby but even those massive (ugly and space-consuming if built as a single level) parking lots can only take so many cars. In Edmonton Park & Rides opened last year in the two locations where new stations were opened and residents still complain that unless you are there at 7 AM you can't get a spot until 3 PM when the first commuters go home again. So Albertans will keep driving for many years to come - don't complain about gas prices!

The new federal government just looks stupid to ask oil companies why petroleum prices are high. It's a free market, you can do it as long as somebody pays the price. Besides, the oil industry is highly supported and subsidised by exactly this Conservative government - so shut the f*** up!     
         

4.5 years of suffering ahead

I will need a long time to recover from that devastating election on Monday. Still, I dared to look into the paper today, but only the Metro. The first page is sickening already. It reports on Harper's goals for the next term:

— Ongoing cuts to corporate tax rates.
— Ongoing increases to provincial health-care transfers.
— Many more felons behind bars for longer terms, in more prisons.
— An end to the long-gun registry.
— An end to the per-vote taxpayer subsidy of political parties.
— New laws targeting group refugee arrivals by boat.
— Relaxation of rules for the telecom industry and foreign investment.
 
Reading those goals I wonder what the average Canadian gets out of them - almost nothing!!, unless you are high in the hierarchy of a corporation that will pay even less taxes and stuff the pockets of its high ranking staff even more so. That's why the rich get richer in Canada, and the poor poorer. And where is the environment??? Harper possibly does not even know how to spell this word.           

The Metro also did a survey and asked readers how they spent election night. The results are as follows:
- watching Dancing with the stars:   0%
- cheering: 22% 
- crying: 22% 
- planning my emigration:  55% - There's an idea!!!, as the cousin of  my mother-in-law would say. 

Yip, I fall into that last category, too. Thank goodness, I have a German passport, already, still, forever. My husband and I have been considering moving to Ontario but it just got the blues really badly and I'm now more inclined to join the French-Canadians. Well, not really, but we ought to live in a NDP riding. Unfortunately, that's not the only requirement since I'm pretty damn demanding when it comes to living where I ought to be happy (not complaining). House with garden, quiet location, close to childcare, grocery store, my husband's and my workplace, near countryside (preferably in walking distance - In Dunedin (NZ), Nelson (NZ), Edinburgh (UK), Malaga (Spain), Cozumel (Mexico) I could walk or cycle right from the town into the countryside, no vehicle required). Close means within walking/cycling distance or on a convenient bus route - think we can find that in Canada? Let me know where! I don't think we get away without a car but we don't want to depend on it.              


Here a little joke my husband told me. Justin Trudeau was asked if he would run for the leadership of the Liberal party. He replied he did not know if a cute leader would make a difference. My opinion: Yes, it does. Why would so many women otherwise vote for Layton. Not that he's cute (he's too old to be cute) but he was by far the best looking candidate. Surely, Trudeau would certainly bring a few more votes for the Liberals, no matter the policies (which obviously  didn't matter to 40% of Canadians who voted) and kick Harper's visage off the front pages. 

 

Losers!

I just posted on Facebook this comment: Annika Nicholson needs to stop herself from swearing because she's disappointed about all those stupid Canadians who made a Conservative Majority government possible. I don't think I will want to come back from Europe to this dictator-ruled country.


Great now, all you shortsighted Canadians who voted against the environment for some destructive idiots that only care about corporate issues and low taxes. Keep destroying the great Canadian wilderness that you are so proud of, apparently, for more oil sands, logging and mining. Another reason not to consider becoming a Canadian citizen any time soon. And my daughter will get a German passport at the next occasion ... and my husband ... well, he's certainly not happy either.


I know "only" 40% of Canadians voted for the Conservatives but unfortunately that results into more than 50% of all seats in parliament which is ridiculous in itself. And even 40% is pretty bitter.

Canada's biggest parties and their goals for the environment

.. if they get elected that is. CPAWS together with a bunch of other environmental organisations went to ask the 5 major parties to answer a few questions about greenhouse gas emissions, protecting public water sources, public transit, oil sands, chemicals in every day products and more. Follow the link to read the answers. Guess what, the blue party (Conservatives, for all Non- Canadians) did not reply at all! Do I dare to say it?: Don't you dare voting for them! 

Organic Milk

The Organic Box sells organic milk from Saxby Foods, an Edmonton business. In its latest newsletter they list all the organic dairies the milk comes from as well as some of the standards of how the cows are fed. The Edmonton Journal recently had an article on Saxby Foods too which is quite interesting. For example, does Saxby Foods not only sell their organic milk (and soon other dairy products) via independent retailers such as the General Earth's Store they also sells through the Safeway brand O Organics. As much as I dislike Safeway for being just another huge chainstore, it is the closest supermarket we live to and knowing that this milk is from local farms and processed by a local creamery makes me somewhat more inclined to buy it. Being a wholesaler the milk is also less expensive compared to other stores, unfortunately. 


In the newsletter I also hear from the infamous genetically modified crops again. Since most pasture crops are already contaminated with  GMO farmers are currently fighting to keep GM alfalfa out of the country. Alfalfa is at the moment still a very important food for organic cattle. If it becomes GMO contaminated organic farmers might be forced into what they usually try to avoid: feed grain. Looking at the link to the Organic Alberta Association an article catches my eye immediately:  Conservatives continue to block vote on moratorium on GM Alfalfa  Of course it's the effing Conservatives who spoil it, quote: “Conservatives are trying to play both sides of this issue because they know farmers want GM alfalfa stopped, but Conservatives don’t want to cross Monsanto. Presumably, Conservatives delayed the vote so that an election could save them from having to take immediate action to stop GM alfalfa.”

Too bad I can't vote and I am not convinced yet that there's enough smart Canadians to not tick the C box but this is just unbelievable. How can they even think about pleasing Monsanto, at the same time putting a large part of the organic food industry at risk of survival. Eating anything non-organic seems already almost suicidal to me and with a growing demand for organic food one really hopes the turn will come and people stop buying crap food so farmers stop growing crap food, I mean food stuffed with toxins. This would also stop the contamination of our soil, water and air with all those toxic chemicals.

White Water, Black Gold

is a film by David Lavalee, who was born & raised in Alberta, is a hiking guide on the Columbia Icefields, teacher, film maker and more. I watched this film about great Canadian waterways and the dirty tar sands yesterday at an Edmonton theatre amidst a bunch of rather old residents of the province Alberta. Alberta has been in the spotlights more and more often recently because of the disastrous environmental consequences of the tar sands operations but not much has changed. I was surprised to see lots of white haired people in the theatre. They did not match the types of person I have seen at other tar-sands-related events. I'm glad different generations get concerned and want to be informed though. 


Although I have seen several oil sands films there was still something new in this one, and it was very much up-to-date, including some of the most recent tar sands issues. Of course, in the film there were lots of well-known faces such as Dr David Schindler, Dr Kevin Timoney, Dr. John O'Connor, George Poitras ... activists, scientists, authors, first nations ... there were also representatives from Suncor!, the Alberta government and the National Energy Board which was surprising because they tend to avoid these films for obvious reasons.            


David Lavalee basically followed the imaginary drop of water that originates from a glacier off Mt Snowdon and follows it across the Columbia Icefield into the Athabasca River all the way to Fort McMurray and beyond to the Beaufort Sea. A lot of controversy comes up on the way. It was all there again, the toxins in air & water, the dead or deformed fish, the large number of rare cancers in downstream communities, the leaking tailings ponds stuffed with arsenic, mercury and PAHs, the destruction of boreal forest ... the lies that come with the tar sands. Apparently, the corporations in the tar sands are only allowed to take out 3% of the water flow of the Athabasca River - that's with high water though. In January when the river is frozen and the water under the ice is especially vital for the fish to survive industry wants 30% of the flow. Suncor used to have glorifying signs up along the tailing ponds road to inform visitors of their heroic tar sands operations but these signs disappeared since hundreds of birds died on the tailing ponds and Suncor was fined $3.3 Mio (half a day earnings for them). Curious visitors are not wanted any more on this road.   


After the film Lavalee pointed out the reverse alchemy of using natural gas to produce tar sands oil - it's like turning gold into lead. He also added that conventional oil produced 100 barrels from the energy of 1 barrel. At the tar sand they need 1 barrel to produce only 2 barrels - where's the point? For him the tar sands are an indicator that peak oil has passed, the same as the production of shale gas is a sign that the peak of natural gas has passed - rear mirror view, he called it.                  

There were a lot of good quote in the film but I don't have the memory to bring them up here. One of the worst comments though came from the Suncor spokesperson at a first nation's community meeting. She apologised for not having showed up at the last meeting but the good thing about it was that instead of muffins she ordered KFC this time. Nobody smiled. 
         
to be continued ...
                       

Stephen Harper's oil addiction

I am posting this link here in the hope more people will support the cause. David Suzuki Foundation asked a while ago to write to Harper asking to stop sudsidies to the oil & gas industry. The foundation is aiming at 5000 letters but only half of this number has been reached so far. Please sit down and write free lines, especially if you are a tax payer in Canada! The government pumps more than 1.4 billion taxpayers dollars each year into an industry that all but deserves it.  Here's the link, hurry up http://action.davidsuzuki.org/subsidy

Bound to extinction: Alberta's caribou

Watching the documentation “Being Caribou” last autumn, sequences of both Bush presidents were shown with a 10 year lapse in between where both of them said that they did not care about protecting the caribou and their habitat, they only cared about the American people and jobs for these people. The issue was that the USA wanted to drill for oil in the calving grounds of the caribou in North-East Alaska. Why I am mentioning this? I think that attitude also applies to the Alberta government – it neither protects the caribou nor the caribou's habitat despite the fact that scientists have long realised and asked for a protection of both. You have to read the following article There's something fishy about Alberta's caribou because paragraph for paragraph it's a great article. It does mention an earlier article from February that did not go down well with politicians and the Edmonton Journal was apparently forced to apologize and  rephrase it. Here's the link:  Conservatives not conserving our caribou.

I don't think as long as this Conservative government exists anything in favour of the caribou is going to happen. It took 8 years to start protecting the grizzly bear in Alberta. The caribou might need to have more patience, or survival skill as for that. 

The first article clearly states that the reason why the government avoids protection of endangered species and their habitat is due to certain industries, obviously forestry and oil & gas, ever the same culprits. I watched The Story of Citizens United versus F.E.C. http://www.truth-out.org/story-citizens-united-v-fec68121 last night, a project from The Story of Stuff producer Annie Leonard. It's about the USA and how corporations and big industries happily pay money to political parties in order to get their way, no matter what the people want ("the people" must be those citizens that do not work for the corporations). I don't think it's quite that bad in Alberta (and Canada) but sure enough politicians listen too closely to industry ignoring what the people want and what independent scientists say. But then again, most people just can't be bothered to do anything about it  - so who do we want to blame if everything goes downhill from now on? Ourselves.

I also wonder: Who do politicians want to create jobs for when people suffer from floods and droughts & when people come down with cancers, pulmonary and heart diseases because all warnings about climate change, air and water pollution, toxins released by industry etc. have been ignored and denied; when people are so obese or ill that they can’t move? I don’t think they think that far! 

Tools for change

I found this Canadian website (you can tell by the maple leave) that focuses on Tools for Change. I looked particularly at the Topic Resources and there at the first column called Environment. http://www.toolsofchange.com/en/topic-resources/
Seems like there's a lot of initiative out there to reduce waste, improve public transit, remove mercury from old cars, stop the use of pesticides on public land, electric vehicles ...   I have not found an initiative happening especially in Edmonton but I got a story to share. 


Edmonton actually tried to reduce the use of chemicals on parkland. They figured that to apply alternative ways to deal with weeds and insect pests they would have to spend double the current amount on park land maintenance. It has not been said if the city will go ahead with this. Obviously, this money has to come from tax payers but there are always lots of other issues that require this money and Canadians are paranoid about taxes too. Maybe municipal park land one day is handled like provincial and national parks - with user fees. You use it, you pay. You don't use it, you don't pay. Funny enough people complain about the user fees here too. There's a fee for entrance, for camping, for making a fire, for parking ... well, the money to run the parks does not rain from the sky. It's either taxes or user fees. In Germany we have a tax based system more so than user fees. People get used to taxes, the complaints don't last long. I bet almost nobody remembers the time when GST was 16% (now it's 19% - yes, they did that in one raise and it did not kill anybody!)           


Cars - recently I read an article about Manitoba's car insurer. It's a monopoly and the plan is to force people to recycle their old car with legislation. The article pointed out the impact on poorer people who depend on old cheap cars to keep or get a job. It also pointed out that lots of cars build before 1995 were more fuel efficient than new ones and therefore should not be replaced. Last but not least the retired cars need to be recycled and new ones are needed as replacement which puts unnecessary strain on resources, material. The Canadian government, though not forcing it, also advertises their retire your ride campaign where you can trade your pre-1996 car in for money or transit passes. Deadline is March 31, 2011. European countries have done similar things. I believe Germany requires car manufacturers to take their old vehicles back for recycling. Generally, there's nothing wrong with these retire-your-rides initiatives but it would be better if their were more selective - get the polluters off the road independent from the age of the car. 

We are in the Water for Life Decade

Yes, that came to me as a surprise as well. I had not noticed although it started already back in 2005! That means we are more than half way through this decade. I found out thanks to a talk that will be held at the Royal Alberta Museum by Robert Sandford. He has written several books on water issues and is considered a Canadian water issues expert. All of the following links are from organisations or projects that he is somehow involved in. And as great as all these initiatives are I am somewhat disappointed that I had not heard of any of them before. So how successful will they be, I wonder? 


The water for life decade is a program of the United Nations and deals with lots of water related issues such as scarcity, financing, quality, access, water in cities .... http://un.org/waterforlifedecade/background.html   In 2010 the UN also started a Decade for deserts and the fight against desertification. 2011 is the year of forests and March 22 is World Water Day.


These websites are especially for Canadians with information on the fresh water situation in Canada, how they are approached by politicians and how we can change our own behaviour to save water.  
http://www.flowcanada.org/

http://www.goblue.org 


One or the other corporation has set up a grant program and support network for community initiatives and organisations like Evergreen and Tide. Some aim specifically at water related issues, others help with the protection of our environment in general:
http://www.unilever.ca/sustainability/Environmental_sustainability/Community_partnerships/

http://bluewater.rbc.com/index.php


Then there's the scientific side to the issues: 

http://www.wwcrc.ca/  
The Western Watersheds Climate Research Collaborative is a non-profit organization established in association with the University of Lethbridge. The mission of this collaborative is to establish a broad scientific basis for understanding and
responding to climate related impacts in the Canadian West.

http://www.waterinstitute.ca/ The Alberta water institute has to deal with some oil sands related water issues of course: http://www.waterinstitute.ca/accelerating_dewatering_of_oil_fine_tailing.htm

That's a paragrpah that caught my attention on Flow:

"The Federal government has responsibility over various aspects of water including navigable waters and inland fisheries, interjurisdictional waters and federal lands and waters - such as military bases and First Nations reserves. At one time, the Federal government was keen to address fresh water concerns. They created institutions with a specific water focus (i.e., the Inland Waters Directorate and the Canada Centre for Inland Waters); passed legislation (i.e., Canada Water Act, 1970) and signed international agreements (i.e., Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement, 1972). Notably, the Government outlined its commitment to water through the Federal Water Policy, tabled in 1987.
Federal interest in water, however, has declined over the last couple of decades. The Inland Waters Directorate, for instance was disbanded in the early 1990s and despite the significant amount of resources dedicated to developing the Federal Water Policy, few if any of the recommendations were ever implemented in a meaningful way." 

Big SIGH! Canada, you will have big problems one day if your resources keep being used so recklessly and without consequences. Generally, I would not want to burden the government with regulating every aspect of our life, including all natural resources. But as we know all too well industry does not take care of the resources they use as much as they should and not even the little man in the street does. But if the little man in the street does care he has still limited power. E.g., I can't go and buy a river and dictate that nobody uses the water, or determine how the water should be used and returned to the river. But the government can. I like to believe the government is not stupid enough that they don't realize the urgency of protecting our fresh water. Their ignorance is there for certain reasons. In Alberta the governent now is proud to have set up a committee to investigate the environmental impacts of the tar sands operations but it will take lots of time until first results come up and actions will be taken. I still doubt the indepence of that committee and I think they aren't in any rush because the province depends on the tar sands and does not want to hinder their development.  I think this country needs a massive natural catastrophe, like a big wake-up call, to realize things aren't right the way they are.

As if this was going to happen

The National Round Table on the Environment and the Economy (NRTEE), an independent federal advisory agency, suggested to the Canadian government the implementation of Canada's very own emissions regulations such as new vehicle emissions standards and a cap-and-trade-system to start addressing the problem of rising greenhouse gas emissions. This would be a dream come true if that government actually did a step towards emissions cut-downs, especially since we are now in 2011 and the issue has been present for a not insignificant number of years and lots of other countries worldwide have reacted long ago. 
 
Anyway, the NRTEE is at the same time concerned about the economy so they want to have a solution that helps the environment and the economy which is very ambitious but not impossible. It seems to be the big problem though. If Canada's regulations were to be stricter than what the US does or intends to do they suspect it will weaken the Canadian economy.  Personally, I am against the cap-and-trade system since it turned into more emissions in Europe. Alone the phrase "to allow firms to pollute more" (through buying carbon credits) sounds wrong. The goal is to REDUCE pollution, not to shift it from one place to another. But Canada obviously considers the trade system because the US does so. The sovereignty of Canada does not seem to go far once it comes to the environment. I wished for once Canada would just ignore the fact that the 'Big Brother' exists at all and do the first step. Germany implemented lots of environmental regulations and still has a fairly strong economy. We are not so depended on one trade partner though. May I conclude that Canada lacks a "yes, we can"- attitude? This reminds me of a book that was written recently about Canadians, by an Indian who lives in Canada, saying that Canadians have a 'head-in-the-sand"-attitude when they face problems. And I thought ostriches lived in Australia.