What Does It Strike The Right Balance?

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.

The government responsible to take charge for this issue are global, federal and provincial. As a planet, we must coalesce with each other to find solutions to preserving the planet. World leaders are meeting with each other, discussing ways to fix the damages humans created. The government of Canada is dedicated on working with leaders all over the world to make changes that will help resolve the effects of climate change. Also, Canada is committed to supporting and helping out third world countries who need help in accommodating to the effects of climate change. Investments are being made to reduce emissions as well. The government of Canada and its provinces and territories are uniting together to encounter the effects of climate change. They aim on federal funding, the flexibility to design their own carbon pricing policies on putting a price on carbon and reducing carbon pollution.

In my opinion, all pollution standards should be tightened but over a period of time. I agree totally that pollution is out of hand at the current time, however it is a problem that has built up for many years and can’t be solved all at once. I feel that it is somewhat unfair to those companies who depend on their current status. By implementing procedures and regulations that are to occur over a period of time, it allows many companies to adjust gradually. I also feel that this policy of carbon trading should be eliminated. Although it does generate income for industries that currently comply, it allows many others to evade responsibility. I also feel that such things as public transportation and carpooling should be stressed. It provides an alternative that will drastically

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.

For example, under a cap-and-trade system, a company with large carbon emissions might pay $1 billion dollars upfront for a high cap, or pay almost $2 billion under a carbon taxing system. With our Cap-and-Tax program, a company might pay $500,000 to get a high cap on their emissions, then pay $750,000 in gas taxes. The company doesn’t have to pay a massive amount upfront, and doesn’t pay as much to carbon taxes. This system will make large carbon taxes more manageable for struggling companies, and save companies money from carbon

Air pollution is huge globally. With the earth warming and looking at the future and all the problems were going to have if this isn't fixed soon. Most countries are trying hard while some and Canada aren't trying as hard. The reasons of air pollution are cars, factories, land filth, etc. There are about 10 million Canadians at risk from exposure to traffic pollution. You may not think that's a lot, but Canada has a population of about 35.16 million people. So there about ⅓ of at risk while the others are still exposed to traffic pollution. If eco-rights was in the charter of rights then there would be less air pollution. If they put a taxes on carbon then it's a win-win. Because then fewer people will be buying cars that take oil. They will buy more hydrogen vehicles and electric cars. Then there will be more companies that make those kinds of cars, and they will make more money because more people buying them. There will also be less oil being pumped out, which will cause less environmental issues. Over time, there will be less carbon in the air and the earth won’t be warming as fast. Also, Canadians would have the right to clean

While this is a main concern which has yet to rise to the forefront of the media, another such concern is the lack of Utilities Commission review mandatory by law. For approximately the last 37 years since its establishment the Utilities Commission has been an important independent oversight that was formed to prevent any government or politician to dictate the operations of utilities for political consideration. Its sole responsibility is to protect BC taxpayers from the greed of politicians teamed with corporations. And yet, despite its creation the Site C project was able to bypass the BC Utilities Commission (BCUC) by conducting a Joint Review Panel that took 9 months to complete which did not look at the environmental, social and First Nations impacts. 370 scholars and scientist deemed the decision to forge ahead without such a review was an “unprecedented imposition of numerous significant adverse environmental effects” (Ducklow, 2017). The BC Liberals stand by their decisions to make exceptions in their favour, with no research or studies to back up

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 following discussion will provide an analysis of King County’s Strategic Climate Action Plan (SCAP); detailing the original action plan’s goals, available resources, progress tracking, and summarize recent progress updates. This discussion will also address resident participation and community climate change adaptation.

In recent years, Canada’s lack of climate action at the federal level has damaged our international reputation. With the UN climate talks in Paris, Canada has an opportunity to step up and take meaningful climate action and be viewed as a climate leader on the

The Envorimental protection agency was created in 1970 and since then has been doing it's best to protect the Enviroment. The Envorimental Protection Agency collects emissions data to find opportunities to reduce emissions. (EPA 2016). Obama also implimented a clean power plan that would reduce carbon emission by 30% .(enviormental America 2012). However, Even with these new programs it's still will not be enough. The United States will also have to become comfortable with the fact that the entire nation will need to make the switch to solar and wind energy, as well as create some sort of treaty with other countries that may encompus the entire world to reduce carbon emissions. If the United States does not act quickly or refuses to act then the entire earth will suffer and society as we know it will change forever. In less than a hundred years we may lose all of our coral reefs and the oceans will become acidic "If climate change continues unabated, nearly all coral reef habitats could be devastated. Under our best-case scenario, half of all tropical coral reefs are still threatened" (Kieffer 2012) . For the sake of the future generations we must change now. It's like there is a meteor that's going to hit the earth in 50 years and no one wants to talk about the meteor even though there are viable ways to stop it. We can not wait any longer. If we don't do something then the entire world will suffer. It is time to take action. No more arguing about climate change being a myth. It is a scientific fact that humans are causing the rise in tempature. The world is literally ending and we're the only ones who can stop

While the plan appears to be thorough and complete, this very characteristic may also prove to be a weakness. As sustainable technologies and even planning methodologies improve, a plan as cohesive as the current Portland Plan may leave little breathing room to accommodate the integration of future improvements without large investments and comprehensive re-planning. In addition, plans as comprehensive as this one is tend to leave less room for the creative expression, which adds diversity and charm to the cities neighborhoods. In terms of raw efficiency, the choice to make this plan a joint effort between the city government and the citizens themselves, though a noble cause, can cause each step to take much longer, and even the delay of the project in its entirety due to the volatility of entire populations. One final risk of the plan, is the risk associated with time. As any program needs money to continue on, people must continue to vote for the Portland Plan’s various programs over the years in order for them to maintain funding, so that they may continue bringing about the sustainable Portland as exists within the plan. The plan is to take place over 25-years, over the course of which any number of variables may change. The issue is things may change over the course of those 25-years, that could cause people to lose support for the plans various programs. Likewise, over

The Battle for Balance Edgar Allan Poe was an American writer of the 19th century best known for his poetry and short stories. One of his most well-known literature pieces is entitled, “The Fall of the House of Usher.” This story involves an unnamed narrator who arrives at his friend’s (Roderick Usher) house to help with his illness and his mysterious twin sister Madeline.

The project would result in a negative NPV since the EPC market is small. Tewitt claims this negative NPV would be offset by Greystock’s renovation plan. The committee rejected the plan based on economic reasons. In my opinion, Tewitt’s plan is a waste of money to spend in something that holds a small part of the market rather, the money should be spent on something that have a high impact on the market. Also, I have my suspicions about Tewitt’s plan, mainly because of his comment to Greystock and Morris after the committee rejection. In that comment “ in a hushed voice” he told Morris and Greystock that their anuual bonuses are begged to the size of this operation. This makes me think that Tewitt’s plan has a self-interest tied to it, which presents an obvious agency problem. Therefore, I strongly reject his proposal.

Balance. Our world depends upon it physically, psychologically, and spiritually. This principle, although easy to overlook, is the foundation of my personal philosophy. Without balance there is no harmony, no conflict and no growth. Any productive result, any achievement, any strength is useless without it.