Skip navigation

 Login or Register | Member Centre

Avoiding a guilt trip

DOUGLAS MCARTHUR

From Wednesday's The Globe and Mail

Latest comment posted at 11:27 PM EST 21/07/08

Douglas McArthur reports on how airline passengers can minimize their carbon footprint and what the world's airlines are doing to reduce emissions ...Read the full article

This conversation is closed

  1. Alistair McLaughlin from Canada writes: I swear, if I hear the phrase "carbon footprint" one more time....
  2. Jim **** from Canada writes: Relax, Alistair. 'Carbon footprint' is about to be replaced by 'fuel crisis'.

    I don't think planting a tree does much beyond assuaging guilt, unless one is tearing up a little concrete or asphalt to do it.
  3. Tom Gray from Canada writes: There is only a finite area in the world that cna be planted with forest to produce carbon offsets. This mans that there is only a fintie amount of carbon that can be offset and when that is used up, there will be no more. So when I hear about wealthy people, such as Al Gore, squandering carbon offsets to support their unsustainable lifestyle, then I can only smile. Heating a pool and air conditioning a mansion but till being carbon-neutral -- indeed! So may virtuous environmentalists buying indulgences with their money. This country needs Luther to bring an end to this carbon nonsense.
  4. John Zylstra from Bluesky, Canada writes: Perhaps we should be talking about an energy footprint?

    But what many people don't realize, is that for long trips(not short trips), large jets are virtually as efficient in energy per passenger, as many cars, that carry only one or two passengers, as long as the jets are full of passengers.
  5. D. MacKay from Atlantic, Canada writes:

    Doug McArthur:

    I'm sorry but this story is nonsense.

    Economy over business class? Why not design planes so people can be stacked 4 high ?

    Anyone feeling guilty for flying ?

    Give me a minute to set up a website and send me your guilt. Tough job but I'll deal with it.

    Visa or MC accepted.

    Beats working for a living.
  6. J Albert from Toronto, Canada writes: How about going on a starvation diet before flying - this will help get used to the abscence of food on the plane.

    One could also fly naked.

    In TO/Niagara we can drive to Buffalo to fly - this way the carbon used is counted as US carbon use.
  7. J D from BC, Canada writes: When I take a trip on an airliner the last thing in the world I think of is my carbon footprint. I'd like to leave my carbon footprint on David Suzki and Al Gore's, and all those "carbonite's" butt!
  8. B to the A to the R to the T from the left coast, Canada writes: Last year unfortunately my wife and I had to attend a few conferences and at year's end we calculated our carbon footprint, it wasn't that pretty. We did some research and found a few gov't assessed and approved carbon offset programs. We tried to avoid the ones that just plant trees and do nothing else and opted for ones that help bring clean energy online or do other creative things. We then asked family to buy us credits for Christmas, since I like to buy my own sweaters and socks. More importantly, our carbon audit prompted us to keep travel light this year and prompted our switch to a more efficient vehicle and more transit use. While seeing the world is important, we figure one sunny vacation not too far away in the winter and summers spent closer to home are better for the planet and pocket book than more distant vacations few times a year. Especially here, in BC, I don't think anyone will argue that we got some beautiful country and diverse places to explore here. We also tag vacations in foreign countries with work related trips. After a work trip or wedding in Vegas we see Death Valley or Zion NP, etc. while we're there. Trip chaining on far off travel really pays off. Offsetting is not the greatest solution and benefits from it are hard to quantify but being mindful of reducing carbon emission so that they do not need to be off set is a very effective way of taking personal responsibility.
  9. Mike M from Toronto, Canada writes: All the carbon footprint messaging seems to be missing the point that Canada's biggest "problems" are the fact that our population is growing (largely due to immigration) and our GDP is growing. If you look at environment Canada's figures, our GHG emissions per person and GHG emissions per $ of GDP are both declining (GHG per person peaked in 2000 and GHG emissions per $ of GDP peaked in 1992).

    Can we make better progress? yes. But the message that gets reported in these, and similar articles, is that Canadians are not doing anything and we're all ignoring the advice / science that's out there. That's a flat-out contradiction of facts. From 1993 through 2000, Canadians steadily increased their GHG emissions (21.21 tons of CO2 equivs per person to 23.49 tons of CO2 equivs per person). We've now not only decreased the growth rate, but we're actually starting to decline the amount we emit (23.14 tons of CO2 equivs per person in 2005 - that's a 1.5% decrease).

    We're making progress. Perhaps not as quickly as some would like, or even perhaps as quickly as necessary. But the trend is showing that we're making progress.
  10. B to the A to the R to the T from the left coast, Canada writes: J D from BC, don't forget your also leaving your footprint on your kids and grandkids butts as well. Gore and Suzuki both admit that they'll be long gone of this earth before oil runs out and climate change impacts are at thier worse.
  11. G Jeff from Kitchener, Canada writes: One thing that can be done at airports is to use the tow vehicles to tow airplanes all the way to the end of the runway before the airplane engines are turned on. The tow vehicles can also haul landed planes with engines off from the runway to the gate.

    Saves burning aviation fuel to push the plane along the ground.
  12. Jeff S from Canada writes: To heck with 'carbon footprint'.

    I won't buy it, donate to it, or care for it.

    I'll fly as long as i am economically able. It won't have anything to do with feeling bad about it.

    The enviromental wackjobs want us to actually regress back several hundred years. most of these tools wouldn't be able to handle the physical labour that would be required when you have to grow your own food.

    they all look pale and sickly from doing nothing for a day's wage but attending rally's and protests.
  13. Antonio San from Canada writes: Guilt spewing of the higher order yet... What's next? Abstinence for a year because effort rejects too much CO2? The free publicity press the suzuki and other ecomarxists lobbyist are getting is incredible. Avoid airports known for delays... yeah, fly to Moose Jaw...

    MSU satellite global temperatures are showing cooler 2008 despite record CO2 emissions but none of those reporters dare to mention it.

    Politicians who cave in to this eco lobby will soon get my carbon footprint you know where...
  14. Craig Cooper from Toronto, writes: The fashionistas are out in full force.

    "Carbon footprint" = rubbish.

    "Carbon offsets" = rubbish squared.

    This ain't nothing but a cash grab.
  15. James Eaton from Nepean, Canada writes: It's so disappointing that the 'Rush Limbaugh' school of 'I have no decent argument so I will throw slurs on those I don't agree with' school of 'comment' is appearing about this story... I used Air Canada's 'approved' offset partner last year to offset a trip to London, and was quite appalled at the price per tree. So at Christmas, I offset another flight (as a gift for an environmentally conscious relative) and found a more useful place to buy the offsets: CPAR's 'plant a tree in Africa' campaign. The trees are cheap (I bought twice as many as needed) and they produce economic development (fruit, nuts, etc.) as well as producing wood fuel that offsets kerosene and manure burning in rural Africa. I'll do the same this year against holiday flights.
  16. Prairie Boy from Canada writes: If you feel guilty about this then get a life. There are alternatives though. Lose weight, think you were like a feather on takeoff. Ask the pilot to "just glide it in" for as long as he can without crashing. (are downdrafts due to carbon?) As they taxi to the runway throw half the baggage off. (makes it easier to find later too..bonus!)
  17. Overtaxed and underlaid from Canada writes: LOL carbon offsets! Almost choked on my plastic spork there.
  18. Anant Mathur from Toronto, Canada writes: Carbon offsets are convenient ways of assuaging Al Bore's guilt for jetting around the globe to deliver his snoozer of a presentation on the ..."Unnnnbeleeeeeavvablleee TRUTHH"....kapow!

    If you're so worried about pollution and the fuel crisis, how about just turning off the lights when you're not using them, turning off appliances when not in use (i.e. the constantly running PC and TV)...I swear, if every one of us in North America did just this tiny amount, we'd be ignoring Gore as he should be...there's no great change required, no big sacrifice on traveling...just turning off your lights when you don't need them.

    And this goes double for the office buildings we all work in...Times Square, Dundas Square...do we REALLY need those bleeping lights on??
  19. B to the A to the R to the T from the left coast, Canada writes: Jeff S credible environmentalist do not want us to revert hundreds of years. What they are saying is that in a finite world with a growing population and more importantly the building of wealth in previously poor countries each person needs to be mindfull of the impact of thier actions on the biosphere. Whether your a WASP or a person in China you both deserve a high quality of life. At present westerners and especially North Americans use a disproportunate amount of resources and emit a disproportunate amount of pollution and GHG which according to our scientific methods are shown to effect the world's climate. That effect and industral pollution and geopolitical forces, all heavily western influenced, are felt disproportunate by the poorest. The problem with conservative and right wing policy and inaction is that the costs are rarely felt by the policies' advocates and the meat hook realities are left to be experienced by others instead.
  20. Don Bryant from Calgary, Canada writes: Guilt? What guilt? I couldn't care less about this "carbon footprint" crap. I work damn hard for my money and lifestyle. If the fact that I choose to reward myself by flying somewhere for a well-deserved vacation upsets the environmentaloonie half-wits, too bad.
  21. B to the A to the R to the T from the left coast, Canada writes: Don Bryant, spoken like a true Calgarian. Your money, your lifestyle, the results...some one elses problem.
  22. Don Bryant from Calgary, Canada writes: B to the A to the R to the T from the left coast, Canada writes: Don Bryant, spoken like a true Calgarian. Your money, your lifestyle, the results...some one elses problem.

    ---------

    That's right, Buck-o. It's MY money and MY lifestyle. And, if that causes YOU a problem, too bad.
  23. Mike M from Toronto, Canada writes: B to the A - the problem with your statement is that you say there has been inaction, when in fact, the numbers show that people are making significant progress. Take a look at the data and charts produced by Environment Canada - the people in this country are doing things. Until the broader environmental groups start to recognize this, they're as guilty as the global warming deniers at ignoring facts.
  24. Chris S. from Toronto, Canada writes: I am so sick and tired of hearing/reading about this nonsense that I'm going to start retaliating by producing/emitting more waste/carbon. The complete opposite of what's being rammed down my gullet, and I will NOT feel guilty about it. I'll bet it will be liberating.
  25. Greg R from Canada writes: Reality check on global warming:
    No surface warming since 1998 - even according to NASA (climatology head a big global warming believer)
    No oceanic warming from 2002 - 2006 (dates bathyspheric readings available)
    No tropospheric warming at all

    So if the seas, land, and air are not warming, what part of the globe is affected by my "Carbon Footprint"?
  26. Able Bodied Man from It's NOT 'VICTORIA' Island, Canada writes: I'M ON A CARBON GUILT TRIP ALL RIGHT... Carbon offsets? Just about offset the methane eruptions I get from the horrendous guilt I take on when flying: I sit hours on end in airport waiting rooms with 200 other severely depressed people. I stand in loading lines in loading ramps showing my documents with pictures for the umpteenth time to someone who has seen more ugly portraits than Kodak. I stand waiting in the aisle while 17 ahswholes throw their entire lives' possesions into the overhead bins; I sit in a cramped seat feeling the blood clotting in both legs. Then I have the pleasure of gulping in stale germs from that sniffling woman 2 rows over and having my eardrums pierced by that fat baby in seat A -- ladies, please! you would do the flying world a great favour by sticking your t!ts in your kids' mouths, please! I squirm with my fingers pressing my bladder while flatulent Frank whacks off in the plane lavatory. Then I stand again in the aisle waiting to deplane while those same 17 ahswholes pull down their lives' collection of junk from the overhead bins and march down the aisle like a convoy of semis on the 401. Almost finished, I stand watching everyone's bag but mine going round the luggage carousel. Finally... I get to figure out for myself how to get out of the airport, a place that surely the devil designed to make me feel guilty I ever thought about travelling... Yep... I'm on a freakin' guilt trip all right...
  27. R. Carriere from Maritimes, Canada writes:

    "Many airlines now sell carbon offsets so passengers can pay to ease their guilt.'

    GUILT? GEEZ-There goes my lost coffee all over the floor...I'll plant my own $80 tree, thank you!

    By the way, call me when China stops building 1 coal fired plant per week. Believe that ends in 2030 or something like that. Until then, i won't miss a thing.

    I wouldn't be surprised if the airlines stated adding an additional charge determined by a person's weight in pounds. Like $1 a pound or some foolishness like that.

    ...the funniest was comparing Sardine and Business class! What a hoot!

    Guilt. Yea, right!
    .
  28. R. Carriere from Maritimes, Canada writes:

    Able Bodied Man from It's NOT 'VICTORIA' Island,

    That was one of the funniest posts I have ever read on these sites. Outright hilarious! ....you only missed security screening...any thoughts?
    .
  29. Able Bodied Man from It's NOT 'VICTORIA' Island, Canada writes: Chris S. from Toronto, Canada writes: I am so sick and tired of hearing/reading about this nonsense that I'm going to start retaliating by producing/emitting more waste/carbon. The complete opposite of what's being rammed down my gullet, and I will NOT feel guilty about it. I'll bet it will be liberating.
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Chris... Every time I read about carbon, footprints, what the "People can't do a freakin' thing without a tax" people are doing etc, I pass gas. A big cloud of methane. A big cloud of methane from between my glutinous maximuses. A big cloud of methane that no one can tax. I eat crap so my methane is more volatile. I'm going to send my own personal moon-shot to my MLAs with a note: TAX THIS!
  30. Gary Dare from Portland, Oregon, Canada, writes: J Albert writes, "In TO/Niagara we can drive to Buffalo to fly - this way the carbon used is counted as US carbon use." With fare increases and flight cuts in the US, especially after Labour Day, your savings will dwindle to nearly zero or even negative versus the extra driving and extra carbon emissions of the border entry waiting.

    And I haven't even mentioned that the US is starting to privatize their airports, yet.
  31. Overtaxed and underlaid from Canada writes: Able Bodied Man - Great post! I had to stifle my laughter since I'm at the office!

    Flatulent Frank whacking off in the lavatory... LOL!

    By the way, what about the GHG's of flatulence?? C'mon people, I want everyone to plant a tree everytime you fart. After that burritto for lunch, I'm going to be planting a damn rainforest...
  32. Harper-approved lies are scripted talking points from Canada writes: I see the Con-posters here avoid guilt by blaming everyone else and refusing to believe they can ever do anything with negative consequences. That's the Stephen Harper school of "accountability" - close your eyes, deny any problems, and blame everyone else when things go wrong.
  33. Mike M from Toronto, Canada writes: Harper-approved lies are scripted talking points from Canada writes: I see the Con-posters here avoid guilt by blaming everyone else and refusing to believe they can ever do anything with negative consequences. That's the Stephen Harper school of "accountability" - close your eyes, deny any problems, and blame everyone else when things go wrong.
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    One could just as easily say you are closing your eyes and denying progress towards the solution ... glass houses?
  34. Prairie Boy from Canada writes: As opposed to the L's that know beforehand they are infringing on a company's name and proceed with "we'll deal with them?"
  35. Harper-approved lies are scripted talking points from Canada writes: Able Bodied Man writes: I eat crap...

    ---

    It shows. You spew it too, to everyone's detriment.
  36. Don Bryant from Calgary, Canada writes: Harper-approved lies are scripted talking points from Canada writes: I see the Con-posters here avoid guilt by blaming everyone else and refusing to believe they can ever do anything with negative consequences. That's the Stephen Harper school of "accountability" - close your eyes, deny any problems, and blame everyone else when things go wrong.

    -------

    Hey, half-wit, read the posts properly. Nobody's blaming anyone - I'm certainly not, anyway. I'm merely stating that I intend to spend MY money and live MY life in the way that suits ME. If I want to fly somewhere for my well-earned vacation, I will. And if I choose to purchase and drive an SUV, I will. I couldn't care less whether that upsets the self-righteous, sanctimonious environmentaloonies like yourself or not.
  37. slapdash dapoint from trawna, Canada writes: "Not only is most air travel decidedly unglamorous, today airlines and frequent fliers regularly stand accused by the environmental movement of making unnecessary contributions to global warming."

    sort of like the losers who follow politicians around the world to conferences just to complain about how much the politicians' flights hurt the environment...
  38. Able Bodied Man from It's NOT 'VICTORIA' Island, Canada writes: R. Carriere from Maritimes, Canada writes:
    Able Bodied Man from It's NOT 'VICTORIA' Island, That was one of the funniest posts I have ever read on these sites. Outright hilarious! ....you only missed security screening...any thoughts?
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Thank you, R. Gosh, it's hard to have any thoughts when you're in a line up with hundreds of potential terrorists all taking off their shoes, pulling out their pens and money and being security touched. However... the old "silent revenge" might be fun. Perhaps next time I must succumb to the ritual humiliation of the masses, I'll spend a day or two prior eating baked beans and cabbage.

    What would happen if say the gate of x-rays caused my digestive system to depressurize and blow off about 50 cubic metres of untaxed and unregistered high-sulphur content methane...?

    I guess there's only one way to check the system...
  39. Able Bodied Man from It's NOT 'VICTORIA' Island, Canada writes: Harper-approved lies are scripted talking points from Canada writes: Able Bodied Man writes: I eat crap... --- It shows. You spew it too, to everyone's detriment.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    I call it "Green Sh!_t."
  40. Chris S. from Toronto, Canada writes: Able Bodied Man from It's NOT 'VICTORIA' Island, Canada writes:

    Every time I read about carbon, footprints, what the "People can't do a freakin' thing without a tax" people are doing etc, I pass gas. A big cloud of................

    Thanks for the comment. You basically said what I wanted to say but wasn't sure they'd print the work a** in this family friendly newspaper. Your wording was well chosen.
  41. B to the A to the R to the T from the left coast, Canada writes: Mike M what I said is that the right advocates inaction and delay. I agree companies and canadians are taking steps, especially those steps that result in saving them money.
  42. Hap Stokes from Canada writes: Hello to any PILOTS

    We live in central Vanc Is which is directly underneath the major Asian flight paths (also Alaskan) from both Canada & US. Pilots there are often 15/25 vapour trails over head at times.

    My question is can these vapour trails cause weather changes to the ground below.

    I ask this Q because one beautiful clear (cloudless sky) evening enjoying a BBQ and watching the Big Birds coming and going, noticed all the vapour trails were melding into one big dark rain cloud and it looked like rain off to the east. A phone call to some friends off to the eastern side of Vanc Island confirmed it was indeed raining there.

    Is it possible that vapour trails blown by westerly winds (high up) can cause weather changes 40 miles away to the east?

    Bearing in mind that directly under the main flight route, there still wasn't a cloud in the sky off to the western side of the Island.

    This rarely happens, although similar localized squalls have occurred more than the time mentioned above--Thank You.
  43. B to the A to the R to the T from the left coast, Canada writes: Greg R. Your statement "No surface warming since 1998 - even according to NASA (climatology head a big global warming believer)
    " is false. http://www.nasa.gov/vision/earth/environment/2005_warmest.html

    This page from 2006 says: 2005 was the warmest year since the late 1800s, according to NASA scientists. 1998, 2002 and 2003 and 2004 followed as the next four warmest years. Credit: NASA
  44. Tom Gray from Canada writes: There is only a finite area in the world that cna be planted with forest to produce carbon offsets. This mans that there is only a fintie amount of carbon that can be offset and when that is used up, there will be no more. So when I hear about wealthy people, such as Al Gore, squandering carbon offsets to support their unsustainable lifestyle, then I can only smile. Heating a pool and air conditioning a mansion but till being carbon-neutral -- indeed! So may virtuous environmentalists buying indulgences with their money. This country needs Luther to bring an end to this carbon nonsense.
  45. B to the A to the R to the T from the left coast, Canada writes: Tom Gray we read that the first time.
  46. Mike M from Toronto, Canada writes: B to the A to the R to the T from the left coast, Canada writes: Mike M what I said is that the right advocates inaction and delay. I agree companies and canadians are taking steps, especially those steps that result in saving them money. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- No. The right advocates that government do nothing and that individuals should determine on their own what happens. That is how you get progress over the last 3 years. There is a huge and significant difference between laissez-faire and inaction / delay. You could just as easily say that the left advocates inaction and delay on the part of citizens while they wait for government to do something.
  47. B to the A to the R to the T from the left coast, Canada writes: Don Bryant please confirm if I got this right. Your Money and your SUV? I got that. But the true cost of you driving is paid not just by you. Unless you drive the think in a closed plastic bubble. Other's from sick people living close to the road to south pacific islanders those countries' land mass is disappearing do to slow but accelerating rise of sea in sea level the implact of your driving is like second hand smoke it effects not just the smoker. While I think it's your right to drive whatever you want you are not absolved from the effects your choices have on others.
  48. B to the A to the R to the T from the left coast, Canada writes: Mike, "You could just as easily say that the left advocates inaction and delay on the part of citizens while they wait for government to do something. " No, the left advocates both personal and gov't action. Gov't action in the US meant the doubling of fuel economy between 78-87 and inaction caused fuel economy stagnation from 87 to until recently.
  49. stand up mimi from Vancouver, Canada writes: As if people are joyriding in airplanes, using up fuel for the heck of it. Who flies unless they have to? It's not easy to get anywhere outside North America without flying. I'd love to take an oceanliner to Europe, but it's hard to get that many weeks off work, and I think ship travel is pretty limited these days. And thanks for the tip about trains. I'd like nothing more than to take that $4000 train across Canada. Maybe when I have more money to burn and no job to come back to.
  50. Don Bryant from Calgary, Canada writes: B to the A to the R to the T from the left coast, Canada writes: Don Bryant please confirm if I got this right. Your Money and your SUV? . . . you are not absolved from the effects your choices have on others.

    ---------------

    B to the A, etc: I couldn't care less what you think. As far as I'm concerned, this "carbon footprint" nonsense is simply the latest cool phrase for the environmentaloonies to use, but it makes really, really good press - I bet the halfwits Gore and Suzuki use it in every second sentence. Regardless, it makes no difference to me. I will continue to make the choices and live the life that I decide. If, as you suggest, it means that some Pacific islander catches a cold, I'll be sure and send him a bottle of aspirin along with my best wishes for a speedy recovery.
  51. Randal Oulton from Toronto, Canada writes: >> Harper-approved lies are scripted talking points from Canada writes: I see the Con-posters here avoid guilt by blaming everyone else and refusing to believe they can ever do anything with negative consequences. That's the Stephen Harper school of "accountability" - close your eyes, deny any problems, and blame everyone else when things go wrong.

    Does anyone else have a clue what he's on about? He's so off-topic that I'm sure he's hit a submit button in the wrong place. Perhaps he meant to post in today's home-canning article instead.
  52. Randal Oulton from Toronto, Canada writes: >> stand up mimi from Vancouver, Canada writes: As if people are joyriding in airplanes, using up fuel for the heck of it. Who flies unless they have to? It's not easy to get anywhere outside North America without flying. I'd love to take an oceanliner to Europe, but it's hard to get that many weeks off work, and I think ship travel is pretty limited these days. And thanks for the tip about trains. I'd like nothing more than to take that $4000 train across Canada. Maybe when I have more money to burn and no job to come back to.

    LOL. Perfect. The suggestions in the article are so disconnected with the reality of anyone who works for a living. Don't fly first-class? Uh, okay. I'm actually still saving for my next Air Canada hostility class ticket. I'll be sure not to buy a first-class one by mistake. Take the train out to Vancouver? hey great idea think anyone will miss me at my desk for the next 8 weeks? Make a solemn pledge to avoid flying for a year? hey if you're working class in Canada, you can make the pledge for 10 years, no sweat....
  53. B to the A to the R to the T from the left coast, Canada writes: Don Bryant the problem is, that your not giving a South Pacific Islander a cold, our actions are eroding his country and your claim to send him aspirin speak of conservative token gestures that result in no meaningful remedy.
  54. Scrappy Doo from Canada writes: BART, I wouldn't bother.... I'm sure you Bryant have tangoed on these forums before....

    Once a selfish jerk always a selfish jerk...

    End of discussion.
  55. stand up mimi from Canada writes: Randal Oulton - "hostility class" - Ha! Ain't that the truth.
  56. Hap Stokes from Canada writes: As a 71 yr old guy, I'm getting worn out with FADS.

    This latest GREEN fad is no different from the TERRORIST fad.
    How many fads have I lived through?
    There was The Flying Saucer fear fad.
    There was the Hippy fad.
    The Anti-Smoking fad.
    The Anti-Logging fad.
    The Anti-Seal fad.
    The Anti-Abortion fad.
    The Pro-Abortion fad.
    The Green Peace fad.
    The Save The Whales fad.
    The Save The Marmot fad.
    The Anti-Vietnam fad.---etc etc. etc et al

    Must be 50-75 fads (in total) and they are always the same. They always end as this Green fad will end sometime in a year or two; when some FRESH fearful new News Story breaks. Maybe a war, maybe a disaster, maybe hunger (here in Canada) another pressing 'Cause' to be against and that New Cause will end just as all the others have before. Blame, blame, and more blame by people that don't know what in hell they are talking about.

    Always brings to the forefront the quasi experts that know nothing.
    Why don't you EXPERTS get a life? Toss the ball with your kids or take momma to bed for playtime. Go have a beer or anything, watch hockey, don't worry about something you can't control.

    Remember the SUN has risen for the last 5 billion yrs and the SUN is going to keep rising for 7 more billion years after you are Tits Up.

    Speaking of tits--here come my sweetie back from shopping.
    Bye Y'awl--It's my fun, fun time again.
  57. ken g from Canadian in Mexico, Canada writes: Whatever, people who have the money will continue to travel regardless of pollution. Why is it always the individuals fault? Why can't the airline industry make airplanes that run on hydrogen or anything else but fossil fuels?
  58. Tom Gray from Canada writes: re "B to the A to the R to the T from the left coast" about the NASA (GISS) temperature

    Let me tell you about the NASA data. Last year, some researchers noticed that there had been a jump in the temperature recorded by NASA for some stations in Minnesota. People had a number of theories as to why this had occurred. It was originally found at a single station and some people sued this as evidence that some weather stations are unreliable. Others noticed that it had occurred in many stations across Minnesota and so it must be some sort of natural occurrence linked to global warming.

    It was linked to global warming but in an indirect way. Recorded temperatures have to be adjusted for a variety of technical reasons. The data that GISS provides to the public is the adjusted data. The jump in the NASA supplied readings was a result of this. A software update to the system had led to unadjusted data being supplied which led to the detected jump.

    Was this a minor problem that was quickly detected and corrected. Well one could say that but one would be wrong. NASA made the software mistake in the year 2000. It was detected by an outsider in the year 2007. That is no mistake, it was the year 2007. So for seven (count them 7) years NASA had been supplying incorrect data (temperatures too high by an amount that is half the warming in the 20th century) and no one in NASA or the broader climate science community noticed. An outsider had to tell them. The error was not just for Minnesota but for all of the US.

    This gets us back to the warmest year claim. NASA had always said that 1998 was the warmest year. With the required changes to correct the Y2K debacle, 1998 decreased in temperature and now was second behind 1934. The 1930's ( the years of the killer heat waves in Toronto and the dust bowl) were now the warmest to the century.
  59. A A from Canada writes: Use more video conference? TRust me I travel for business and you can ask most business travellers and they will tell you travelling sucks and we will avoid it at all costs.

    Problem is video conferencing is not 100% effective. Trust me if it was, you would see far business travellers.
  60. P Jones from NB, Canada writes: Carbon offsetting, cap and trade, carbon taxes ... what a bunch of scams. The government and industry are laughing all the way and we, the taxpayers/consumers are the village idiots for buying into it. Wake up people.
  61. Liam Smith from Canada writes: Oh yeah. And the elephant in the room is drought. . . if anybody was wondering. That's the civilization killer.
  62. Piet F from Canada writes: Well I guess it makes sense that all these doubters with blinders on make the most incredibly ignorant comments. They are clearly lacking a few needed brain cells.

    Look - if we don't do something about climate change it will cost our economy - and everyone one of you a heck of a lot more money tha doing something about it now. If Canada becomes a leader rather than a late adopter in energy efficient technology to reduce emissions - then we'll also benefit from increased jobs and industry.

    Wake up! Look at the science! The science that isn't funded by car companies or the US government...
  63. Jane Leaper from Edmonton, Canada writes: Work out your carbon footprint on at least an annual basis.

    Avoid short haul flights. Use train or car instead.

    Work out the carbon cost when making plans. It can, rarely, use less carbon by plane if the alternative is a long ferry trip (Edmonton to Victoria for example).

    Take holidays closer to home. One long haul flight every three years, one short haul the next year and then a holiday by car or train is a good system.

    Offset fliights but only after you've done all of the above.

    Don't guilt-trip. Just act responsibly.
  64. Tul Bo from Vancouver, Canada writes: Don Bryant from Calgary:

    I've got a pretty strong libertarian streak myself. But when I see people like yourself who seem to be just itching to pillage the rest of the world and to hell with the consequences for anyone else, it just reinforces my belief that, sadly, we need Big Government to prevent you from doing so. I, and I suspect a lot of others, vote accordingly.

    So by all means enjoy your SUV and your "well-earned" lifestyle, but I'll smile thinking about you every time the price of gas rises another cent, and I'll laugh out loud if/when you start paying a carbon tax on that gas.
  65. bilbo baggins from Canada writes: this is a bunch of crock especially the crap rolling out from Suzuki. The two times I have seen him on planes, he and his entourage were in first class and taking up just about the entire section of an Embraer..! I'll fly when and where I want, thanks.
  66. charles baris from Montreal, writes: What we should be doing is educating people on the fact that the cattle industry in north America makes more methane, CO2 emissions that all the planes, trains, boats on the planet combined on a yearly basis. At any given time there are between 90 -100 million cattle in the USA. Make more of an effort to eat healthy greens instead of eating meat. The water usuage footprint for a single person as a meat eater during a lifetime is about 100,000 gallons of water used to produce the meat. While a vegetarian during a lifetime will consume only about 10,000 gallons of water to grow all the greens needed to live a long healthy life...huge difference.
    But I highly doubt anyone will do anything about this...for whatever reason meat eater are fanatics when it comes to taking away their meat and replacing it with something else. Too big of an industry to attack...
  67. M V from Toronto, writes: My imitation of a 4 year old:

    "Mine! Mine! Mine! Me! Me! Me!"

    My imitation of Don Bryant:

    "Me! Me! Me! Mine! Mine! Mine!"

    The difference? The 4 year old will grow out of it. Too bad he'll be in a world of rapidly decaying ecosystems.

Comments are closed

Thanks for your interest in commenting on this article, however we are no longer accepting submissions. If you would like, you may send a letter to the editor.

Report an abusive comment to our editorial staff

close

Alert us about this comment

Please let us know if this reader’s comment breaks the editor's rules and is obscene, abusive, threatening, unlawful, harassing, defamatory, profane or racially offensive by selecting the appropriate option to describe the problem.

Do not use this to complain about comments that don’t break the rules, for example those comments that you disagree with or contain spelling errors or multiple postings.