Canadian PM Harper repackaging Bush's carbon intensity spin

authordefault
on

Stephen Harper’s lack of real leadership in the climate change crisis means that Canada’s opportunity to lead the world in meaningful and significant environmental policy is traveling further further away fromย reality.

His hard push toward intensity targets over hard caps begs the question – just how stupid does he think Canadiansย are?

(Apparently as stupid as Bush findย Americans).

Intensity targets are a sexy way of saying lots and doing nothing. A nice accounting trick more thanย anything.

Carbon intensity is usually defined as the ratio of carbon emissions to economic activity. Put simply, if carbon emissions go up at a rate close to economic growth, the overall carbon intensity would beย nil.

It’s been convenient spin for the United States which pledges to cut greenhouse gas intensity by 18% by 2012, but so far between 1990 to 2000 the carbon intensity of the U.S. economy declined by 17 percent yet total emissions increased by 14ย percent.

So just how far are Canadians going to be spun before the wheels fall off of Harper and Bush’s intensityย bandwagon?

Related Posts

Analysis
on

What the country craves is fewer selfies and more action to confront the emergency.

What the country craves is fewer selfies and more action to confront the emergency.
on

A look back at the yearโ€™s manipulative messaging.

A look back at the yearโ€™s manipulative messaging.
on

Policymakers and industry say the Midwest Hydrogen Hub will create green jobs and slash emissions, but environmentalists see a ploy to keep fossil fuels in use.

Policymakers and industry say the Midwest Hydrogen Hub will create green jobs and slash emissions, but environmentalists see a ploy to keep fossil fuels in use.
on

Is the Gulf of Mexico the "single best opportunity" to store climate-warming gas โ€” or an existential threat to wildlife and people?

Is the Gulf of Mexico the "single best opportunity" to store climate-warming gas โ€” or an existential threat to wildlife and people?