Robertito Posted April 1, 2011 Report Share Posted April 1, 2011 Alright ecology lovers (and others), do you think that environmental protection laws are sufficient or too lenient or stringent? Are they necessary? Reply Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drake Glau Posted April 1, 2011 Report Share Posted April 1, 2011 Might help to list a few of the protocols and what specifically you want to look at? Kyoto protocol for example? The U.S. is the only country to not ratify it so far But I don't like ecology so MEH! Reply Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Proletariat Posted April 1, 2011 Report Share Posted April 1, 2011 US: What environmental laws?Canada: Could use more. And that's speaking as an Albertan, a resident of a province that benefits enormously from the oil sands industry. Now, I think the individuals/orgs like Greenpeace, who are calling for a complete stop to the oilsands industry, are just as ridiculous and insane as the right-wing fanatics who couldn't care less about polluting river systems if it means profit. But there are so many other dimensions to this issue to consider. For instance, the federal government spends over $2 billion to subsidize the oil and gas industries in Canada every year, the same industries that are racking up some of the biggest profits in all of Canada. That should stop. Instead, the subsidization should go into alternative energy research, as well as environmental initiatives that the oil companies could be taking, but might not due to financial reasons (clean-up of tailings ponds, for example.) Plus my provincial government is run by the same incompetent nincompoops who have been in power for the last 40 years, individuals who completely mismanage what meagre royalties we've negotiated from Big Oil, resulting in our province, popularly claimed to be the wealthiest in all of Canada, currently running a deficit (Conservatives here should learn economics from Norwegians.)I'm not sure about other areas though. Canada's research and innovation sectors lag behind the worlds, and the province most capable of investing in that area (mine) could hardly care less. Our current emissions reductions target is set for decades into the future, a point that our current Prime Minister doesn't have to give a **** about. Last election, the leader of the opposition tried campaigning on a carbon tax and it was a terribly unpopular concept with Canadians. But as for "are environmental laws necessary"? Of course they are. Corporations do things for profit, so any environmental measures they take on their own are always only reaction to public perception/demand. And god knows unions don't give a crap about nature (and they shouldn't.) 1 Reply Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.