Wednesday Morning Links

Miscellaneous material for your mid-week reading.

- The Edmonton Journal makes it clear that the Cons' efforts to stymie any global climate change agreement aren't without some serious controversy even in the party's Alberta core:

The year 2011 had better not go down in history as one in which Canada skated progress on climate change into the boards.

Because if it does, the Harper government has made an all-in wager that global warming is not being aggravated by human beings, and that proof positive of this fact will soon be established in a new global consensus.

And if that reckless Texas hold'em bet proves a loser, there won't enough public relations firms on the planet to sell a more positive picture of Alberta's energy industry, or of our Canadian commitment to fighting change to the political, environmental and meteorological environment on which our prosperity depends.
...
(I)f Canada really believed man-made climate change was an existential threat, we wouldn't be making a virtue of following the laggards, regardless of how the latter viewed the matter.
...
It should be a cardinal principle for an energy-producing land like Canada to be seen internationally as willing to act on climate change, and willing to sacrifice. We should recognize that what's important is not how we think foreigners should see us, but rather how they choose to see us, on the basis of self-interest and the evidence we give them.

And as evidence goes, failing to comply with Kyoto, and then arguing it was a failure because some countries didn't comply, wasn't the best. Neither was vowing not to take action more vigorous than the United States. And then there was the risibly illogical "ethical oil" argument, which effectively says we shouldn't worry about climate change because Venezuela violates human rights.

- But then, it's also worth noting that responsibility for greenhouse gas emissions is also rather unbalanced within Canada - and a similar level of responsibility would seem like a must in developing a strategy that can work for the entire country:

According to Environment Canada, Alberta was the country’s heaviest greenhouse gas emitter in 2009, responsible for almost 34 per cent of the 690 megatonnes released into the atmosphere nationwide. Ontario, and its manufacturing economy was once the largest emitter, but Alberta leapfrogged it in recent years as petroleum production for export markets soared.

Road transportation, which includes everything from motorcycles to heavy duty diesel trucks, accounted for 19 per cent of nationwide emissions. That’s still lower than what California tailpipes alone spit out.

Still, fossil fuel industries (coal, oil and gas) and transportation in Canada were the main culprits, making up the 17 per cent increase in emissions this country has experienced between 1990 and 2009.

- Meanwhile, to the shock and amazement of anybody paying no attention whatsoever, the Cons' gratuitous cuts to the public service have started to have a serious effect on the availability of the programs involved. But I'm sure we can count on the Cons to point out the problem is that we shouldn't bother with such frivolities as Employment Insurance in the first place.

- Nor for that matter running water, at least as far as First Nations are concerned.

- Finally, I don't doubt that it's worth exploring some new planning options in Saskatchewan's health sector. But is there a more sure sign of a project that's proceeding from questionable assumptions than to have the price suppressed in the name of efficiency?