elasticsoul’s Recent Comments

• Click here to view comment in original post

  We Need a New Green Economy

  We're past the point of individual actions being enough - it is time for some help from the government, which hasn't the courage to lead, the humility to follow, or even the sense to get out of the way.

  • I would love to take a high-speed train rather than an airplane - but I can't, because our government subsidises aiports and highways rather than directing my tax dollars to rebuilding the train system.
    
  • I would love to eat only organic, but I can't because our government subsidises agribusiness industrial farming practices.
    
  • I would love to live in a home that is built with natural, local materials and is heated by the sun, but our government subsidises Big Oil so heavily that it is "cheaper" to build particle board cubes heated by mega-energy plants.

  The list goes on-and-on, and affects every area of our lives. A carbon tax would favour local manufacturing, as the farther something is shipped, the higher the tax. Cap-and-trade for carbon emissions would favour cleaner businesses. Shifting taxes from income to pollution would give us more money to spend on cleaner products, and would favour cleaner companies.

  It is time for our government to start being part of the solution. Big corporations have monopolized control of our elected officials, and it is time for us to take it back.

  For my part, I first joined the local Green Party and then decided to run federally, and support for the Canadian Green Party is rising steadily in response to the non-leadership displayed by the other parties.

  The time has come to vote with your feet, by supporting only candidates who 'get it' and will do the right thing. United we stand, and so far we have not been. Our elected government is supposed to be an expression of our collective will, and it is not. It is time to make it so.

  * Inconvenient Truth presenter * Green Party of Canada candidate

  On Tidwell responds to scientists responding to Tidwell posted 2 years, 1 month ago 28 Responses

• Click here to view comment in original post

  Conservation needs to become 'cool' again

  We really do need to change our whole way of thinking; it's not enough to throw money at alternative energy.

  First, we must look at how to use less but have more when it comes to our standard of living. For example, a solar-heated house can cost about the same to build, yet can cost much less (obviously) to heat and cool. It can also be far more comfortable to live in (because of the thick walls that hold heat) and can hold its value much better (because if you build a house out of cob rather than 2x6s, it can easily last 500 years or more).

  Every decision must take into account how to live in harmony with the environment, and progressives must stop being 'protestors' and instead become leaders. There are countless examples around the world of better ways to do things - we must show and tell how we can implement those ways in our country as part of a 'new green economy,' as I've been calling it.

  * Inconvenient Truth presenter * Green Party of Canada candidate

  On Carl Pope reviews Break Through by Ted Nordhaus and Michael Shellenberger posted 2 years, 1 month ago 14 Responses

• Click here to view comment in original post

  PETA may win the battle but lose the war

  For all of us. PETA's latest ad series is divisive, and that's just dumb. They're promoting their particular agenda (and I am a vegetarian) over saving the planet and moving to a more sustainable way-of-living. Denigrating Al Gore? That's just stupid, whatever you think of him. You'd think PETA was being funded by the Republican Party.

  United we stand, divided we fall is as true now as it ever was. PETA's stance - that you can't be a meat-eating environmentalist - will rightly be mocked as hypocritical, and will paint the sustainable movement as unrealistic and fanatical. Detractors will latch onto PETA's message and say that:

  1. Anyone who drives a car is not an environmentalist.
     
  2. Anyone who flies in a place...
     
  3. Anyone who uses a computer...
     
  4. Anyone whose home is not passively solar-heated...
     
  5. Anyone who works for a large company...

  Etc, etc. Therefore, it is impossible to be an environmentalist, and so why even try? PETA has provided an easy way to mock people who want to make the world a better place, by implying that you go all-the-way - or you're nothing.

  * Inconvenient Truth presenter * Green Party of Canada candidate

  On Animal-rights group makes the stupid claim that enviros must be vegetarians posted 2 years, 1 month ago 208 Responses

• Click here to view comment in original post

  The future is not (yet) predetermined

  [just posted this comment in another, similar thread]

  And nobody is saying we should ignore reality, which is that we are in a bad way and getting rapidly worse. The best scientific estimates (Hansen and others) are that we have less than ten years to make significant changes or we will pass a tipping point of no return. Beyond this point, catastrophic climate change will be unavoidable, and it is quite likely that civilization-as-we-know-it will be destroyed or at best severely damaged.

  When I took the Inconvenient Truth training, Mr. Gore talked about a "Hope and Despair" budget. Focus too much on the negative, and people give up because the problem seems overwhelming or believe that it is already too late. This is not what the scientists are saying - we do have some time, but not much.

  The point of this article was that we need to get much better, fast, at protraying a better world. Use the impending disaster to motivate people to get moving - but toward what? I have been trying to show what Canada could be like, if we so choose, here: A Vision of Canada

  Can it be done? It must be done. To quote Churchill: "It's not enough that we do our best; sometimes we have to do what's required."

  * Inconvenient Truth presenter * Green Party of Canada candidate

  On Al Gore does both posted 2 years, 3 months ago 6 Responses

• Click here to view comment in original post

  The point of the article...

  
  is not that we should ignore reality, which is that we are in a bad way and getting rapidly worse. The best scientific estimates (Hansen and others) are that we have less than ten years to make significant changes or we will pass a tipping point of no return. Beyond this point, catastrophic climate change will be unavoidable, and it is quite likely that civilization-as-we-know-it will be destroyed or at best severely damaged.

  When I took the Inconvenient Truth training, Mr. Gore talked about a "Hope and Despair" budget. Focus too much on the negative, and people give up because the problem seems overwhelming or believe that it is already too late. This is not what the scientists are saying - we do have some time, but not much.

  The point of this article was that we need to get much better, fast, at protraying a better world. Use the impending disaster to motivate people to get moving - but toward what? I have been trying to show what Canada could be like, if we so choose, here: A Vision of Canada

  Can it be done? It must be done. To quote Churchill: "It's not enough that we do our best; sometimes we have to do what's required."

  * Inconvenient Truth presenter * Green Party of Canada candidate

  On How to talk about the future without depressing everyone posted 2 years, 3 months ago 54 Responses