Aug
18
Canada’s new emission assessment procedure
Posted by: Christina Kaiser | August 18, 2016 | Leave a Comment
Meetings of the Trans Mountain Expansion (TMX) Ministerial Panel, took place on Aug 10, 2016 in Burnaby, and on Aug 16 and 17 in Vancouver. On Aug 16, representatives from the Canadian Chamber of Commerce and Greater Vancouver Board of Trade gave presentations and responded to questions about upstream/downstream emissions associated with the TMX Project, offering comments like:
If we don’t provide the fossil fuels, someone else will…
The developing world is not going to do anything to reduce emissions, so our government’s decision on this pipeline will not affect climate change…
What a cynical rationale for harmful action. Yet, as pointed out by D. Gooderham on Aug 17, such a cynical perspective is in keeping with the federal Liberal’s recently published emissions assessment procedure, Estimating upstream GHG emissions [1], which states
In considering the impacts on global upstream GHGs, the primary factor will be the difference in upstream emissions intensity between Canadian and non-Canadian crude oil sources.
This assessment policy was applied to the Line 3 replacement project. Here’s an excerpt from the Canadian Association of Petroleum Producer’s response to that assessment [2]:
With respect to the conclusions made by ECCC in the assessment, we agree … Line 3 is unlikely to impact global GHG emissions due to it having no impact on global oil production, in that what is not produced will be produced elsewhere, and that competing foreign heavy crude oils are similar in GHG intensity to Canadian oil sands…
I can’t believe what I’m reading! Imagine teaching children to reason this way:
There’s no harm in stealing something that someone else will steal, if you don’t steal it first.
[1] Estimating upstream GHG emissions, Canadian Gazette, March 19, 2013 http://www.gazette.gc.ca/rp-pr/p1/2016/2016-03-19/html/notice-avis-eng.php
[2] Letter from Kristen Phillips, Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers (CAPP) to Mark Cauchi, Environment and Climate Change Canada (ECCC), May 25, 2016 http://www.ceaa.gc.ca/050/documents/p80091/114612E.pdf
Dec
8
The myth of I’m bad at math
Posted by: Christina Kaiser | December 8, 2013 | Leave a Comment
“The myth of I’m bad at math”
http://www.theatlantic.com/education/archive/2013/10/the-myth-of-im-bad-at-math/280914/
If people can do math – people DO do math…. and dogs too?
http://abcnews.go.com/Technology/story?id=97628
Sep
11
David Orr
Posted by: Christina Kaiser | September 11, 2013 | 1 Comment
In the nearly 25 years since David Orr wrote “What is Education For” we ‘ve become keenly aware that our natural environment is in need of restorative care. Ultimately, Orr is pointing to the practical necessity of scientific knowledge for responsible citizenship.
Teachers are very fortunate to pursue a profession where the best you can do for tomorrow is to put all your effort in the very thing that you are doing today.
[1] David Orr, “What Is Education For? Six myths about the foundations of modern education,and six new principles to replace them.” http://www.context.org/iclib/ic27/orr/