Author Topic: The Wreck of BC  (Read 9980 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline TimG

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2616
Re: The Wreck of BC
« Reply #120 on: March 11, 2018, 12:38:33 am »
by way of comparison, the average household in Canada is:

2400 m3 of natural gas
11000 kwH of electricity
Average household size is ~2.5 which means 960m3 and 4400 kWH per person.

Offline cybercoma

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 2956
Re: The Wreck of BC
« Reply #121 on: March 11, 2018, 06:54:41 am »
Agreed, but there are several orders of magnitude between different Canadians in that regard.
That and there’s no operating outside the established system and that’s the only thing that will satisfy Tim’s claim. He’s implying that you can’t advocate for change unless you personally exist outside a system that’s well beyond any individual’s control. It’s like saying you can’t criticize capitalism if you practice it. You can’t exist outside a capitalist system. China doesn’t even exist outside a capitalist system.

Offline BC_cheque

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 2237
Re: The Wreck of BC
« Reply #122 on: March 11, 2018, 10:16:09 am »
I was thinking the same thing yesterday.

I think Wilber and Tim are hypocrites for vacuuming their house and fighting a massive land fill in their back yard just because they don’t clean their baseboards and wash their walls every day.

Offline wilber

  • Administrator
  • Full Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9121
Re: The Wreck of BC
« Reply #123 on: March 11, 2018, 10:24:05 am »
That pipeline goes through my town, right through Ledgeview golf course, home of Adam Hadwin and Nick Taylor amongst others.
"Never trust a man without a single redeeming vice" WSC

Offline ?Impact

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2941
Re: The Wreck of BC
« Reply #124 on: March 11, 2018, 10:34:40 am »
Average household size is ~2.5 which means 960m3 and 4400 kWH per person.

Yes good point. For some things like say hot water, then per person is a very valid metric. Others like cooking are somewhat influenced by per person, but do lean more to per household. The square footage of the house has more to do with the big cost items like heating. This does put a disadvantage to empty nesters who maintain the family home, usually for a few years until the kids are finally settled (gotta keep that room available for when they come back from college, etc). The bigger issue I see is for older couples when one spouse dies, they may have downsized but it becomes very difficult for the final survivor to move when their partner passes away.

On automobile transportation, the per person argument is silly. Way too many suburban houses with 4-6 cars in the driveway because someone is too lazy to share a ride.

Offline TimG

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2616
Re: The Wreck of BC
« Reply #125 on: March 11, 2018, 10:40:33 am »
On automobile transportation, the per person argument is silly. Way too many suburban houses with 4-6 cars in the driveway because someone is too lazy to share a ride.
I did not make the per person argument for autos. However, you could do a sensible calculation by adding the mileage on all vehicles owned by a household and dividing by the number of people. For example, my household has one vehicle that sits parked for emergencies and 1 primary vehicle which is shared.
« Last Edit: March 11, 2018, 10:50:18 am by TimG »

Offline TimG

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2616
Re: The Wreck of BC
« Reply #126 on: March 11, 2018, 10:44:50 am »
That and there’s no operating outside the established system and that’s the only thing that will satisfy Tim’s claim. He’s implying that you can’t advocate for change unless you personally exist outside a system that’s well beyond any individual’s control. It’s like saying you can’t criticize capitalism if you practice it. You can’t exist outside a capitalist system. China doesn’t even exist outside a capitalist system.
A red herring. The problem with most so called 'environmentalists' is they have no interest in making sacrifices that affect them personally. They are only interested in using the law to force other people to make sacrifices. Hence Vancouverites whine and moan about oil tankers when non-oil shipping has the source of 100% the spills in BC. If you really want to advocate for change start by demanding changes that  will hurt you personally and/or the city you live in rather that trying to impose the pain of conforming to your screwed up morality on people who think you are preening hypocrite who is only interested in virtue signalling.
« Last Edit: March 11, 2018, 10:48:31 am by TimG »

Offline kimmy

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 5033
  • Location: Kim City BC
Re: The Wreck of BC
« Reply #127 on: March 11, 2018, 10:53:28 am »
Oil and gas may be of varying importance to your daily lives, but to BC as a whole they are of immense importance.

Mines and smelters and saw-mills aren't running on wind power. Timber doesn't come down from the hills by bicycle. Groceries and supplies don't arrive in remote towns by bicycle. Tourists don't arrive by electric scooter.  Tractors and other farm equipment aren't electric-powered.  Our lumber and mining products and agricultural products aren't being delivered to customers by electric scooter.

That somebody in Vancouver can get to their office-job and work a typical day and come home to to a warm apartment without burning a drop of fossil fuel is very nice, but BC's largest industries-- forestry, mining, agriculture, tourism-- all depend on plentiful and affordable fossil fuel.

 -k
Paris - London - New York - Kim City

Offline SirJohn

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5801
Re: The Wreck of BC
« Reply #128 on: March 11, 2018, 12:22:53 pm »
No thank you.  I don't think wanting to keep our city oil-spill free needs re-evaluating.

Then you're in favour of Alberta cutting off all oil to BC?
"When liberals insist that only fascists will defend borders then voters will hire fascists to do the job liberals won't do." David Frum

Offline SirJohn

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5801
Re: The Wreck of BC
« Reply #129 on: March 11, 2018, 12:31:07 pm »
I honestly don't give a fig what Alberta wants.  I'd rather pay $4/litre than have a pipeline going to Burnaby.

Speaking of which, so do the thousands of people marching today in Vancouver.  Our opinion matters.  It's our city.

No, it's not. Cities are nothing more than legal constructs of the provinces. Neither the cities nor those in them have ANY power over ANYTHING unless the province grants it. And the province has only what power the constitution gives it. In this case - none.
"When liberals insist that only fascists will defend borders then voters will hire fascists to do the job liberals won't do." David Frum

Offline cybercoma

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 2956
Re: The Wreck of BC
« Reply #130 on: March 11, 2018, 12:35:09 pm »
The problem with most so called 'environmentalists' is they have no interest in making sacrifices that affect them personally.
I’ve seen absolutely no indication that this is true. Every environmentalist I know does what they can. Provide a reference that shows “most environmentalists” don’t make sacrifices or don’t do things to help improve the environment. Otherwise, I feel pretty confident in assuming you’re talking out of your ass.
Agree Agree x 1 View List

Offline wilber

  • Administrator
  • Full Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9121
Re: The Wreck of BC
« Reply #131 on: March 11, 2018, 01:18:15 pm »

That somebody in Vancouver can get to their office-job and work a typical day and come home to to a warm apartment without burning a drop of fossil fuel is very nice, but BC's largest industries-- forestry, mining, agriculture, tourism-- all depend on plentiful and affordable fossil fuel.

 -k

They can’t. Even if they don’t live in a building heated by fossil fuels, everything they depend on to live that lifestyle has to be brought to them in transport that does use fossil fuels.
"Never trust a man without a single redeeming vice" WSC

Offline TimG

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2616
Re: The Wreck of BC
« Reply #132 on: March 11, 2018, 01:30:19 pm »
I’ve seen absolutely no indication that this is true. Every environmentalist I know does what they can. Provide a reference that shows “most environmentalists” don’t make sacrifices or don’t do things to help improve the environment.
Examples on this thread: the port of Vancouver is going to double the number of ships over the next 15 years - only 20% of those will be oil from Kinder Morgan. All of the fuel/oil spills around Vancouver have come from non-oil ships yet no one in Vancouver talks seriously about blocking the port expansion to 'save the environment'. The reason is simple: people in Vancouver understand that the port is essential and shutting it down would hurt their city. Same question comes up with BC coal exports and the so called concern over GHGs or natural gas exports which Horgan is now promoting. All of this means anti-pipeline protesters are a bunch of shameless hypocrites that want to make other people pay the price for their moral concerns.

When individuals make "choices" that they believe to be environmentally friendly is a very rare person who actually sacrifices something. In most cases they just do something they would do anyways or pay a little more which they can afford to pay. No one quits their job for the environment or chooses a life of poverty for the environment. The environment only matters as long as they can have a comfortable lifestyle while pretending to "protect it".
Agree Agree x 1 Dumb Dumb x 1 View List

Offline cybercoma

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 2956
Re: The Wreck of BC
« Reply #133 on: March 11, 2018, 01:33:04 pm »
Still nothing to indicate that most environmentalists don’t do anything.
Dumb Dumb x 1 View List

Offline TimG

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2616
Re: The Wreck of BC
« Reply #134 on: March 11, 2018, 01:49:05 pm »
Still nothing to indicate that most environmentalists don’t do anything.
You are missing the point. The issue is not whether environmentalists "believe" they are doing something (because they obviously do). The issue is whether what they are willing to do anything that represents a serious sacrifice. Buying local/organic food when you have money is not a sacrifice. Buying carbon indulgences so you can fly to Mexico is not a sacrifice. Riding a bike to work when work is close enough and one has no physical limitations is not a sacrifice. Can you give me one example of a real sacrifice you have made. i.e. something that left you significantly poorer or worse off (i.e. something equivalent to the unemployment and forced relocation that you wish to impose on oil field workers).
« Last Edit: March 11, 2018, 01:51:18 pm by TimG »