The uselessness of Canada’s current climate alarmism
With nearly every candidate in the current federal election kowtowing at the Altar of Climate Doom (and an increasing number of municipal councils declaring “climate emergencies”), it’s important to understand just how useless it would be even if we sacrificed Canada’s entire economy in an attempt to save the planet.
There is no practical way to reduce our carbon emissions by 30 per cent below their levels in 2005 or reach “net zero” emissions by 2030 or even 2050.
That makes every party’s climate commitments meaningless, since all of them (except the People’s Party) have pledged (roughly) to achieve one or the other of these two goals.
But say it was possible to reduce carbon dioxide production so drastically, just what would that require?
We could stop every new pipeline ever dreamt up by oil companies (and under the Trudeau Liberals that is effectively what Ottawa has done), but that wouldn’t even come close.
We could prohibit the use of every vehicle in Canada — and I mean every one. Every bus, car, pickup, semi, train, boat, airplane and tractor. No more commuting to work or school, no more mechanized farming (oxen anyone?), no more deliveries to grocery stores, no more trips anywhere you couldn’t walk or bike. Nothing.
Even if we did that, we would only reach two-thirds of the goals pledged by our illustrious political leaders.
We’d also have to stop building any and all new buildings. That, combined with shutting down all transportation, might help us fulfill our promises.
Stopping all oil and gas production wouldn’t do it either. (Besides it would be difficult to heat our homes in the middle of a Canadian winter using just dung-burning stoves.)
If we stopped all agriculture AND all manufacturing, that, too, would only get us two-thirds of the way there. Turning off all electricity production gets us only halfway.
So the eco promises of our political party’s (except the PPC) are so fantastical they’re meaningless. Never going to happen.
Consider that in four years under the greenerthan-thou Liberals, Canada has increased it’s CO2 production by roughly as much as it increased in the last four years of the Harper government.
But let’s play-act at being a Canadian political leader for a second and pretend we could return Canadians’ standard of living to mid-19th Century levels — without heated hospitals or reading lamps or paved roads, televisions, refrigerators and phones.
Even if we turned out all the lights and shut down all the life-saving machines, Canada’s contribution to global carbon dioxide is so small that our society-wide suffering and lowered life expectancy would do nothing to stop climate change.
For one thing, man-made greenhouse gas emissions are only three per cent to five per cent of the worldwide annual total. The rest (95 per cent or more) comes from natural sources such as oceans, decaying plants and carcasses and other natural processes.
Of that small amount, Canada contributes just 1.6 per cent — a tiny fraction of a tiny fraction.
If all the greenhouse gases in the atmosphere were a case of 24 one-litre water bottles, CO2 would be one bottle. The manmade contribution would be 50 ml and Canada’s contribution would be 0.8 ml — less than half a thimbleful. (The whole atmosphere — greenhouse and non-greenhouses gases — would be 2,400 bottles.)
Do you honestly think shutting down major industries and radically altering our lifestyles to prevent the production of one-sixth of a thimbleful of CO2 is really going to save the Earth?
Or is it merely going to let us feel morally smug as we sit in our cold, dark shacks dying from easily preventable diseases?
Consider that China, the world’s largest emitter, contributes somewhere between 10 and 15 times as much CO2 as Canada does. And it has added an amount equivalent to our entire production every three to four years.