Essay On Carbon Sands

Currently, the Canadian government is taking several initiatives to control climate change. In 2017, Canada signed the Paris Accord and agreed to cut 30% of carbon emissions by 2030.

Stewart Elgie, a University of Ottawa law and economics professor and chair of the green economy think-tank Sustainable Prosperity suggests that British Columbia’s per-capita fuel usage had fallen more than 4 per cent compared with the rest of Canada and its economy (Ebner, McCarthy, 2011) Evidently it is reducing the amount of green house gasses emitted by fossil fuel use. However this is not the concern many had with the introduction of the tax, but the concerns were focused upon the externalities caused by this and the effects it would have on the economy. Three years since the carbon tax introduction and the Provincial level of GDP has remained approximately the same, (Greenery in Canada: We have a winner) With the provincial level of GDP remaining around the same, this suggests that at the very worst the carbon tax has had no negative effects to the provincial economy. Furthermore the tax also promised to remain carbon neutral and promised to cut corporate and private income tax. British Columbia has become the province with the lowest income tax regime and the lowest corporate tax regime (Greenery in Canada: We have a winner). Although the carbon tax is being praised by many, it still faces concerns as many still argue the ineffectiveness of the tax and what that means for the province.

The main purpose of the carbon tax is reducing greenhouse gas emissions, which contribute to climate change. It would be unreasonable to ignore this environmental problem, because British Columbia is located in the region which is highly affected by the climate change impacts like flooding and wildfires. Therefore, B.C. government

Replace Cap & Trade Carbon Tax with environmentally responsible initiatives which reinvest revenue in Northern Ontario, a Carbon Tax placed on imports from excessive carbon producing countries of 10%.

These goals support the Canadian Federal Government targets set in 2012, allowing Nova Scotia 7.5 million tonnes of CO_2 emissions by 2020 (a 25% reduction from 2007 levels) and 4.5 million tonnes by 2030 (a 40%

It is also important to recognize Canada and in particular Alberta’s dependence on the development of natural resources to be economically secure. In the past resource development has had less tangible consequences with smaller populations, less advanced extraction methods, and inability to access reserves. In a contemporary setting it appears that natural non-renewable resources are being rapidly depleted in a sequential manor by their most economically redeemable characteristics. Michele Heng, Keith Hipel, and Liping Fang also validate this argument in their paper that the rapid oil sand development does not consider future generations economic, social, and environmental well being. This displays many clear intersections present the issue of oil and gas development in Alberta. The ramifications however can be seen across provinces and globally. The pollution resulting from form the tar sands effects water sheds and ecosystems that are nation wide. A new discussion and analysis of not only the long-term adverse environmental implications, but also the political and socio-economic inequities is needed (Heng, M. Kipel, K. Fang, L. pg. 1137). This change in discourse and policy is discussed as well by Jeff Galius in An Act of Deception. Galius emphasizes the need for a scientific based creation of a strong environmental assessment

Canada is one of the developed nations in the world and with that comes a certain type of lifestyle that its citizens are accustomed to and often expect. This lifestyle is definitely not conscious of the environment at most times, however is trying to improve or at least find some kind of alternative to environmental problems that we can’t actually fix because they’ve become an important part of our everyday life. For that, our lifestyle has been measured by way of an ecological footprint and the results obviously haven’t been something to be proud of. Although there are many reasons why the ecological footprint of Canada is so high, one of the reasons is because of our excessive fossil fuel emissions from our cars, trucks, busses and planes.

Alberta has the second biggest recoverable oil patch in the world after Saudi Arabia, which hides underneath Canada’s boreal forest. Indeed, the Albertan oil patch consists of tar sands, also referred as oil sand, a combination of clay, sand, water and bitumen – a thick and sticky form of crude oil. Tar sands are mined and transported to extraction installations, where the oil-rich bitumen is extracted from the mixture. Alberta holds at least 175 billion barrels of crude bitumen throughout its vast territory, thus the industry disturbs a 149 000 square kilometers area – about the size of England –, where the land was removed due to the mining required to access the oil sands. The bitumen is separated from the mixture by using large amounts of fresh water – about four barrels of water to produce one barrel of oil – and is heated by natural gas, thus requiring larger quantities of energy and water than conventional extraction. Indeed, the industry itself results in the emission of more carbon dioxide in a year than all Canadian cars combined, thus accelerating climate change at an alarming rate. The Albertan industry exploits the water from the Athabasca River, which is fed by the Canadian Rocky Mountains’ glacier, which shrinks at a frightening rate and is further endangered by the carbon emission of the industry. Therefore, the extraction of oil sands in Alberta results in a cycle of consumption that truly endangers the environment. The clay and minerals from the oil

Canada is one of the biggest energy producers in the world. Currently Canada is ranked fifth in regards to the production of energy. Canada 's energy policy should revolve around the natural resources and their optimum use to create cheap and clean energy, which should be environmentally friendly. Our policy should be beneficial for all the Canadians living in different parts of the country and that the policy should not discriminate among the provinces. Canada is also the biggest consumer of the energy in the world, as it consumes most of energy per capita because of the extreme weather conditions that it faces. We need to keep ourselves warm through the winter and have to transport goods and people from one place to another. Canada 's

Despite its well-known Economic Action Plan and its continued emphasis on the need for more jobs and growth, it is still quite disturbing that the Canadian government gave a cold shoulder to environmental concerns in its 2014 budget. However, what has become clear in the last few years is that Canada is not committed to fighting climate change. In truth, it is not Canada that is uncommitted to the climate change cause. It is its Prime Minister, Stephen Harper, who is blocking all efforts to put Canada at the forefront of climate change efforts . And Canada should be leading climate change initiatives because it is one of the largest emitters in the world, and it is also a rich

Ontario has its own creative and effective strategies to combat climate change. One of Ontario’s goal is a low-carbon future. To accomplish this the province started making carbon reductions in 1990 and are on track to reduce carbon emissions by 15% in 2020, 37 per cent in 2030 and 80 per cent in 2050 (Climate Change Action Plan, 2017). Ontario’s target of reducing emissions by 6% was met on schedule in 2014 (Climate Change Action Plan, 2017). One of the reasons this has been made possible is because of Ontario’s investment in carbon reduction. For example, in 2015 Ontario committed $325-million payment to Ontario’s Green Investment Fund to support programs that help households and businesses implement

The neo-liberal idea that oil and gas are primary sources of revenues for the country are very out dated. This is something that needs to be addressed if we want to sustain our economy and our environment. Without a stable environment, how could we possibly have a good economy, don’t they go hand in hand? Since the industrial revolution, our economy has increased significantly, however, it has a tremendous impact on our environment. Today, we can easily see the destruction of our environment take place all over the world, thus moving towards sustainable and renewable energies isn’t as far-fetched as it once was. The political ideologies of revenues through natural resource is strong, but the people are not realizing that this is not the only way to generate revenues within a province. Some provinces have said no we do not want pipelines or no we do not want fracking, but this is at a cost of getting the blame of not following the “Canadian Dream”. By that I mean, following the greedy corporate world in destroying the planet at the cost of becoming a wealthy province to satisfy the Canadian government, and be less reliant on government subsidies. Starr fails to mention the initiatives that the Nova Scotia provincial government has been leaning toward sustainable energies, such

The economy in Canada can be altered by many incidents. It can either be for the better or worse. Global warming is one of them. Global warming is a serious matter and should be a focal point of discussion for the future of all countries. This one thing can destroy the whole planet and everything that comes with it in the future.

An article from Chris Nelson (2015, December 10) frames the agreement as a waste of time, beginning with the words: “So imagine what 36,276 men and women accomplished in Paris these last weeks to deal with another global threat - climate change, if you answered ‘not much,’ then grab the first-prize ribbon.” These openly biased attacks on pro-environment initiatives are examples of how oil is framed in a way that legitimizes itself and rejects climate leadership to the degree where helping the environment is framed as a tactic to appear virtuous for other jurisdictions. Coverage from August of the same year reinforces the partiality of a paper that believes the government’s climate change adaptation strategies have little to do with humanitarian motives. To illustrate, Priaro (2015, August 22) writes, “there is little need for government to intervene to reduce the rate of increase in GHG emissions from Alberta with a misguided, unnecessary and debilitating climate-change plan that will only lead us to an economic dead end.” Journalist David Marsden (2015, January 6) follows, “we don’t need to create more means of harming our economic competitiveness” when speaking about climate change adaptation in Alberta. He continues to claim that the Premier “and her ragtag band of brothers and sisters in cabinet [are] intent on social engineering us to economic death” (ibid). The Calgary Herald was not entirely pessimistic; there is

This section will deal with government’s legislative and regulatory frameworks in fossil fuel industries. Because fossil fuel industries play a big role in Canada’s economy, it can affect a large proportion of a population. Therefore, government’s involvement in legislative and regulatory frameworks must be effective as Harvie notes in his study that an intention of government’s legislative and regulatory involvement in fossil oil industries “is to develop an outcome based land use decision-making process that promotes sustainable economic growth by balancing economic activities with social and environmental goals” (Harvie, 296). Because foreign investors own the majority of the largest oil companies in Canada’s oil industries, one of the prominent