Posts Tagged ‘Toronto Sun’

Turbines Meet Ontario Noise Guidlines

April 30, 2008

.Dust-up over wind farms

Source the Toronto Sun

Report: Noise from turbines meet guidelines

By JONATHAN JENKINS, QUEEN’S PARK BUREAU

There’s no scientific proof wind turbines make disturbing levels of noise and, although more study is needed, Ontario’s guidelines are sound, a long-awaited consultant’s report for the ministry of the environment says.

The report by Ryerson prof Dr. Ramani Ramakrishnan was finished in December 2007 but was only posted on the government’s Environmental Registry website on Monday.

It reviews the work of a Dutch scientist, Dr. G.P. Van Den Berg, who found that 98-metre tall turbines at a German wind farm near the Dutch border made more — and more annoying — noise at night than expected. The report has been heralded by groups opposing wind farm projects near their homes.

“(Van Den Berg’s) dissertation was to provide scientific evidence for increased annoyance from wind farms during evening and night time hours,” Ramakrishnan wrote. “The review showed the above was not the case.

“One of the main criticisms of the doctoral dissertation of Van Den Berg is that the conjectures of his research have not been supported by solid scientific data.”

The Dutch study should be used as a catalyst for further work, though, Ramakrishnan said.

Holland has accepted the findings of Dr. G.P. Van Den Berg.

Hiring someone to trash Dr. G.P. Van Den Berg to further the wind scourge, shows the lack of integrity of both the govt. and the wind industry.

I experienced the Dr. G.P. Van Den Berg theory personally at the Kingsbridge l wind farm. It was early Oct of last year. I returned to the home of Ernie Marshall, after attending an all candidates meeting, to pick up my car. Beautiful fall evening, no wind at ground level but the wind at hub height was still strong enough to turn the turbine blades. How loud was the noise? Throw a pair of work boots in the dryer and turn it on. Go get your pillow, curl up beside the dryer. Sleep well. That in essence is the findings of Dr. G.P. Van Den Berg. (added) RS

Mr. Marshall and his wife have since moved out of their home. Mr. Marshall says his health is getting better and he and his wife now enjoy uninterrupted sleep at night. (added) RS

His report also found Ontario’s noise guidelines for wind turbines are reasonable and strike a balance “between noise impact and the need for wind farms, based on currently available scientific data.”

What the hell does that statement mean. Noise impact! The wind industry is promoted as whisper quiet. The need for wind farms? What need? The only thing that wind farms can hope to offer the people of Ontario is an unstable, unnecessarily expensive electrical system. (added) RS

Kate Jordan, a spokesman for the ministry of environment, said the report, held back from December, was being posted on the Environmental Registry for 30 days to allow the public to comment on it. “We wanted to make sure it was the final report. We needed to know it was complete,” Jordan said of the late release.

The report has found what the industry has believed for some time, Sean Whittaker, vice-president of policy for the Canadian Wind Energy Association, said.

“The report does confirm that the findings of Van Den Berg are put into question,” Whittaker said.

“CANWEA has been confident that the noise guidelines we have here in Ontario are very good.”

Ontario has about 500 megawatts of Canada’s 1,856 megawatts of wind power. CANWEA wind projects could rise to as much as 4,600 by 2020.

Ron Mattmer, who lives a kilometre from a proposed wind development in Kincardine, says he supports wind power but is opposed to locating them so close to homes.

He said the ministry is “in denial” about Van Den Berg’s noise findings and have “jiggered” their own limits to ease development.

Source the Toronto Sun
.
Comment By Ron Stephens

“CANWEA has been confident that the noise guidelines we have here in Ontario are very good.”

They are confident because they were instrumental in the formation of those guidelines.

I remember Ford claiming the PINTO didn’t blow up. Big Pharma is always getting the FDA to pass drugs that end up hurting or killing people.

Industry policing its self, with govt. pushing the bull down the taxpayers throat. Neo-Liberalism at it’s worst. Never underestimate the power of denial, especially when govt. is on the side of industry.

Here is an email I just received the other day.

Maybe the wind industry or the govt. could comment .

I live 808m from a Enercon 82 wind turbine and within a km. of 11 other turbines at the Ripley Suncor/Acceon wind project. My health and the health of my neighbours has deteriorated over the past 5 months. We hear a constant roaring of jets 24/7 and at night when the house is quiet there is a CONSTANT HUMMING which going right through your head no matter what you try to do occurs. We have had many meetings but the humming still goes on and we are still waken 2-??? times/night. We do NOT get a deep sleep.

But of course this person must be complaining because 1- they like to complain 2- they didn’t make any money on the deal 3- they must be crazy 4- they work for or are being paid by the fossil fuel industry 5- they hate Mother Earth.

This govt. and the wind industry are so full of crap it is ridiculous. This scam is no different than the door to door reno scams. Promise a lot and never let the truth get in the way.

The wind industry and the govt., here in Ontario, claimed they could greatly reduce emissions. Lets see the peer reviewed results. Why aren’t the papers full of the results the wind industry claims? They don’t exist, not through my research. If they do, lets see them.

Bird and Bat kills too small to worry about. Then why the deal to hide the results from the public.

Noise – the turbines are whisper quiet, about as much noise as your fridge they said. Then why are people being forced from their homes.

A doctor from Kingston stated that the health problems created by wind turbines are only temporary and a persons health will return once they no longer live near the turbines. If that doesn’t sound the alarm bells what will?

This is a CRIME against the citizens of the Province of Ontario.

Explain this CanWEA and the McGuinty govt. of Shame

Reaction to the Scottish Government’s refusal to construct one of Europe’s largest onshore wind farms, 181 turbines on Lewis in the Western Isles , has exposed the myth of wind power.

In response to Scottish industry’s concerns that its lights may go out, Britain’s power industry had to admit it would not make one iota of difference as wind power is too unstable to be included in any calculations of how much power is needed to satisfy the country’s needs – whether or not the wind is blowing our power stations will still burn the same amount of fossil fuel.

A spinning turbine’s only value, for the environmentalists, is as an icon of their power over the vulnerable and as an “at least we are doing something” comfort blanket for gullible politicians, plus, of course, an exponential currency generator for the wind industry. full article here


Never forget – Enron started the wind scam. Enron is gone but the scam lives on. Google Enron, Maurice Strong and Al Gore. Maybe that will open your eyes.

The govt. should have put the scrubbers on the coal plants and built a new nuke. Cost approx. 10 billion. Cost for wind, solar, gas plants, new transmission lines and a new nuke, 60-70 billion. Think what that extra money could have done for Health Care, Education and our Farmers

Read Agenda 21. It’s about a lot more than just the wind industry.

Note: I, unlike Mr. Mattmer, do not support wind power as presented.

“Ron Mattmer, who lives a kilometer from a proposed wind development in Kincardine, says he supports wind power but is opposed to locating them so close to homes.” (found in Toronto Sun article above)

I do however, support Mr. Mattmer, and all the other people in Ontario who have worked so tirelessly to expose the truth. Please join us in the fight for truth and Democracy.

If the govt. is serious about the environment they would be putting the money into grants to retrofit homes and encourage home solar and wind. This would reduce the need for new generation and save money in the process. After all, it’s your tax dollars subsidizing the wind industry of which the only “benefit ” to you will be higher electrical costs.
The wind industry on the other hand will make a fortune.

I think it is time for an open televised debate – maybe on TVO. I, and many others, including engineers, are available, and look forward to such a debate. The govt. and the wind industry debating with citizens of Ontario. Sounds like democracy to me.

What is going on now is about as anti-democratic as it gets.

Councils are told to pass the wind farms or they will be taken to an OMB hearing at a cost of approx. $100,000. and they are told they will lose, and God forbid-they will look anti-green. Did I mention the “GREENS” are pagan based and anti-Christian. Ever wonder why Mr. McGuitny wants to remove the Lords prayer from the Legislature?

Kingsbridge l has been a source of noise, flicker and stray voltage complaints for the two years it has been operating. People and animals suffer up to a kilometer away, yet no health study. The setback for Kingsbridge ll 450 meters.

Criminal

Turn off the TV, put down the newspapers and do your own research. Get the family involved. Think often and think critically.

Democracy is not a right. When a democracy is not guarded, protected and demanded by its citizens it will be lost. That day is getting very close.

RS

Ron Stephens ran as an Independent candidate for Huron-Bruce in support of those suffering from wind turbine nuisance and he continues to fight for their rights.

Editor:
Once again, I ask both the govt. and the wind industry to look over this blog and if you find something you can prove is not correct let me know and the appropriate corrections will be made.

Update- Fri. May 1st – 9:30 am
Someone from the govt. of Ont. and Suncor have read this post. Site Tracker stats

Advertisements

So cold it's getting hot

February 29, 2008

Editor:
Love this statement found on page 2 of the story.
General Motors chairman Bob Lutz, who recently said that he personally thought global warming was a
“total crock of shit.”

I want to take this opportunity to thank the Financial Post, National Post and the Toronto Sun for finally getting the Global Warming Fraud into the mainstream press. Please encourage them to continue to expose this farce.

So cold it’s getting hot

It may be cold, but CBC reassures us that calamity still looms

Terence Corcoran, Financial Post Published: Friday, February 29, 2008

Ah, the weather. It’s cold as hell out there. How cold is it? It’s so cold the CBC had to rush to assure all of us that global warming is still a big, big problem. With record snow falls, record cold snaps, the return of sea ice to the north, snow in the Middle East and a deep freeze in China, any sensible person might begin to wonder and even have doubts about global-warming theory and climate change. A little skepticism might begin to creep into the public sphere and threaten to undermine public belief in global warming.Fear not, says the CBC. We have nothing to worry about: climate calamity still looms. The good news is that the polar caps are still going to melt, hurricane risks are still mounting, drought conditions are more likely, forest fires are set to rage, and it’s going to get hot, hot, hot.

In response to the current global cool-down — provocatively labelled a possible New Ice Age by National Post columnist Lorne Gunter — the CBC has presented a full range of explanations and reassuring reports to calm a troubled population. At least three explanations exist:

This cold is normal According to Environment Canada’s David Phillips, the warm winters of recent years have been unusual, and what we have now across the country is just a return to the kinds of winters we used to get.

La Nina According to CBC Radio’s The Current, the cold is a function of La Nina, which is the cold sister of El Nino, the periodic weather system that makes things warmer than normal. Today’s cold is a La Nina effect.

But not so fast.

Climate change could be the problem. Under climate theory, as we know, all weather can be explained as part of the global-warming scare. Extreme weather events, such as frost on the Nile or wherever, are exactly the kind of weather developments we should expect from global warming. If it gets really cold suddenly, that’s because of global warming.

This explanation was offered up by a World Meteorological Organization official on CBC Radio. How cold is it? It’s so cold it’s getting hotter.

Above all, however, under no circumstances are we ever to begin to think that evidence of a cooler climate or colder weather (different things) are a sign that the great climate change theories of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change and Al Gore might be weak or even wrong.

As reassurance on this, on Wednesday night CBC Television’s The National brought in Andrew Weaver, of the University of Victoria and a lead author on IPCC reports, for the following exchange with reporter Kelly Crowe, introduced by host Peter Mansbridge:

Mansbridge So with all this talk of brutal cold and all those bulky snow banks, you might be wondering how an old-fashioned Canadian winter can still exist in these days of global warming. It’s a question scientists studying climate change get all the time. The CBC’s Kelly Crowe now with their answer.

Crowe It’s been such a wintery winter, Canadians can’t resist asking: Whatever happened to global warming?

Weaver Oh, it’s … it drives you nuts.

Page 2 Financial Post

It's green fever madness!

February 24, 2008

Lorrie Goldstein

It’s green fever madness!

Only a politician would try and sell you on the idea that more taxes can save the planet

There was a time that when politicians raised taxes, they called it what it was: Raising taxes.They didn’t, at least not with a straight face, make grandiose claims that raising taxes was all part of their plan to save the planet and kickstart a “social movement” into being.But that was before green fever madness gripped our politicians.

It was in the throes of that condition last week that B.C. Finance Minister Carole Taylor actually claimed, with a straight face, that her province’s imposition of Canada’s first carbon tax (a tax on fossil fuels) could be the start of a new “social movement” across the country.

For gawd’s sake, let’s hope not.
Because that “social movement” is designed to hoodwink taxpayers into believing they no longer have the right to complain about our usuriously high taxes, lest they be shamed into silence by the Suzuki Nation as global warming “deniers.”

This madness would be laughable, if it wasn’t happening right before our eyes.

* In B.C., where charging people more for gas and heat by Premier Gordon Campbell’s government, part of a tax shell game we’re assured will be “revenue neutral” (no comment), is praised by the politician doing it as courageous and revolutionary, while mesmerized media pundits, having forgotten the story about the emperor having no clothes, mindlessly repeat the mantra.

* In Ontario, where Premier Dalton McGuinty is paying outrageously high prices, using tax money, for very little solar power, instead of doing something that would help the environment — cleaning up the air pollution spewing out of the province’s coal-fired energy plants, the same ones he promised five years ago to close by last year, and now won’t close, or even clean up, for six more.

* In Quebec, where consumers are being told by their government, with a straight face, that there’s nothing it can do to stop a new “green” tax intended to target oil and gas industry profits, from being passed along to them. Gee, how about not imposing the !@$@?! tax in the first place?

* And finally in crazytown … Ottawa … where, amongst so many other absurdities on the environmental front, Liberal Leader Stephane Dion, a man who can’t control his caucus, has a plan to control the climate.

In the real world, if you understand the first thing about man-made global warming, Canada’s relatively minor contribution to it, and what a cluster muck the Kyoto Accord is, all of these things are beyond farcical.

Actually, they’re entering Twilight Zone territory.

Here’s another absurdity courtesy of our hysterical politicians, as they shamelessly don green shoes, sport green ties and name their dog “Kyoto” to convince us of their environmental “street cred.” (You can’t make this !@$# up.)

Years ago, governments used to do a thing called “capital spending.” It wasn’t glamourous, but it was important — stuff like buying garbage trucks, police cruisers, ambulances, buses and building subways, highways, hospitals, schools.

But today, whenever governments buy a garbage truck, or some new garbage bins, or a garbage dump, or some new buses, or promise us another subway to nowhere (a Toronto specialty), or raise gasoline taxes, in exactly the same way they’ve been doing it for decades, we’re supposed to believe it’s all part of their big “green” plan to save the planet from global warming. It’s utter nonsense.

Finally, have you noticed how politicians have suddenly stopped talking about the outrageously high gasoline prices we’re paying — something you couldn’t shut them up about for decades — although of course they never did anything about it?

POLS CAN’T COMPLAIN

Problem is, politicians can’t complain about high gas prices now that they’re all thinking of raising them higher, ostensibly as part of their “green” plan to prevent a 20-foot rise in sea levels from wiping out Newfoundland.

It’s as if we all went to sleep one night and woke up in the Oceania of George Orwell’s 1984, where, instead of telling us on Monday that we’ve always been at war with Eastasia and on Tuesday that we’ve always been at war with Eurasia, now on Monday its: “High gas prices bad” and on Tuesday: “High gas prices good.”

I can hardly wait for the Two-Minute Hate and the free Doublethink classes.

 



• You can e-mail Lorrie Goldstein at lorrie.goldstein@sunmedia.ca• Have a letter for the editor? E-mail it to torsun.editor@sunmedia.ca

Prepare Yourself For A Jolt

February 18, 2008
Prepare yourself for a jolt
By LINDA LEATHERDALE

Today, let me shine a light on more hydro madness.If you live in smaller communities across this province and you’re a Hydro One customer, brace yourself to be zapped by what could be a shocking increase in the cost to deliver electricity to your home.

Municipalities, universities, schools and hospitals better brace themselves, too. Higher hydro bills are on the way, effective April 1, when Dalton McGuinty’s Liberals force the MUSH sector to start paying the fluctuating hourly market price for electricity, instead of the flat-rate regulated price that most households and small businesses now pay.

Sadly, this is no April Fool’s Day joke.

Hospitals and schools that are already struggling and cash-strapped cities, like Toronto, will pay peak day-time hydro prices for water, subways and social housing.

fctAdTag(“bigbox”,MyGenericTagVar,1);

Ontario’s Independent Electricity System Operator suggests municipalities shift consumption to the night-time, when the cost is cheaper at 3.8c a kilowatt hour.

That may work for water filtration and sewage plants, but does that mean our kids go to school at night? And hospitals, arenas and fire stations shut down during the day?

Municipalities can also lock into contracts with electricity retailers, but one hydro expert warns that as in many U.S. States that deregulated electricity, hydro prices are heading higher.

“Over the next two decades the government plans to allow private corporations to provide most of the new electricity we require. It also plans to allow these corporations to charge uncapped prices. This means over time electricity costs will rise as electricity prices include more and more unregulated corporate profit,” said John Wilson, an energy consultant and former Hydro One board member.

Wilson warns municipalities will have no other choice but to cut services or hike taxes.

“For a Liberal government that lists education, health and municipalities among its top priorities this is strange behaviour,” said Wilson, pointing out Premier McGuinty broke an election promise and hit Ontarians with a new health tax to help struggling hospitals.

Meanwhile, city leaders in my hometown of Orillia are fighting back.

In a resolution that passed Feb. 4, councillors in Stephen Leacock’s Mariposa town, who complain electricity is already one of its biggest costs, are demanding McGuinty suspend his plans to deregulate the price the MUSH sector pays.

Now, here’s why Hydro One customers face higher distribution rates.

As it promised in a prospectus, before a Tory plan to sell off the publicly owned utility through an IPO was blocked by the courts, Hydro One is pushing ahead with harmonizing rural rates after it swallowed up 88 smaller utilities in 2001 and 2002.

In its application to the Ontario Energy Board (OEB), Hydro One is seeking approval to generate $1,067,000,000 in revenue and to consolidate delivery rates through a four-year phase-in plan.

The OEB notice says if the application is approved, Hydro One “indicates an average customer would experience an increase of less than 1% on the total electricity bill.” Delivery costs, which have already been heading higher, are one of four items on an electricity bill, including the hated debt retirement tax.

If approved, families in rural areas are going to see their delivery charges jump as high as 35% over the next four years, depending on where they live.

For example, the folks who live in Avonmore will see their delivery charges rise by 8% this year, and a whopping 34.9% in four years, according to a chart on Hydro One’s web site (www.hydroonenetworks.com). In Owen Sound, the rate will jump by 6.4% this year, and by 30% in four years; Rockland Town 8.5% and 33.5%; and Wardsville 8.8% and 29.6%. Other areas, like Springfield Village don’t get his as hard with a 4.1% hike this year and 10.5% in the next four years.

A Hydro One spokesman explained a harmonized rate structure means “all of our customers with similar energy needs and requirements, no matter where they live or do business” would pay the same rate.

Bottom line is many families and small businesses are already struggling with skyrocketing electricity bills, since Ontario started going down the dark road of hydro deregulation. Seniors on fixed incomes have been hit particularly hard.

“Many of my clients are having a tough time making ends meet and this is another nail in the coffin,” said Burke Chamberlin, owner of Whitfield Plumbing, Heating & Air Conditioning in Bancroft, where distribution rates would rise by 8.7% this year and 21.2% in four years.

Chamberlin is circulating an e-mail to try to encourage Ontarians to fight back.

“It’s time for all Ontarians, and in this case especially the rural population to stand up and be heard and let the province’s regulators know enough is enough.”

The Hydro One spokesperson said people can take part in public hearings.

“Public participation helps ensure the OEB makes an informed decision on our rates,” she said.

To have your say, go to the OEB’s website at http://www.oeb.gov.on.ca or call the consumer relations centre at 1-877-632-2727.

Angry taxpayers keep asking when will we ever see an end to the debt retirement tax, which is paying down the old stranded Ontario Hydro debt of $20.9 billion.

According to the Electricity Act, the debt should be paid off between 2012 and 2020. But while you and I go broke paying our skyrocketing bills, here’s more hydro madness, after they busted up Ontario Hydro into five pieces and sold off many valuable assets paid by taxpayers.

Hydro One has had a revolving door of highly paid CEOs, with Tom Parkinson walking away with a $5 million parachute, on top of a $1.7-million salary.

The heads at Ontario Power Generation and the Independent Electricity System Operator get fat-cat pay of $1.5 million and $1.2 million respectively.

There’s been a 24% hike in civil servant pay packages of $100,000 a year, most of them at hydro. McGuinty and his crew at Queen’s Park got a 25% pay hike.

And Toronto Hydro sought a 6.3% hike in electricity prices to make up for lost revenue, because too many of us are starting to conserve energy.

Don’t get me going on the smart meters McGuinty is forcing into every home by 2010 that will have us getting up at 4 a.m. to cook meals and do laundry.

That’s another column.


• You can call Linda Leatherdale at (416) 947-2332 or e-mail at linda.leatherdale@sunmedia.caJoin Linda in telling Mayor Miller: No more taxes!


• Have a letter for the editor? E-mail it to torsun.editor@sunmedia.ca

Suzuki's foundation should lose status

February 15, 2008

Editor:
Once you understand what Suzuki is up to, you might ask for his Order of Canada back. Ask David why China and India are exempt from Kyoto. Those two countries have close to half the worlds population. Ask David about CIDA, set up by his mentor Maurice Strong. From there Canadian tax dollars were used, under the guise of environment, to influence politics in Brazil and other countries. David is just doing what he has always done. This time he is doing it Canada. David if you want to be in politics then it’s time you threw your hat in the ring.

When the fraud of global warming is finally exposed, will you claim ignorance or will you move to China with Maurice Strong.

Before you donate to any environmental fund read the Cloak of Green by Elaine DeWar. You will never look at the environmental movement the same again.

Thanks again to Lorrie for doing his best to get the story out. You won’t get the story from the CBC.

Suzuki’s foundation should lose status

By LORRIE GOLDSTEIN

fctAdTag(“bigbox”,MyGenericTagVar,1);

Is there anyone who doesn’t think, based on his own words, that David Suzuki wants voters to throw out Conservative Prime Minister Stephen Harper and Conservative Alberta Premier Ed Stelmach in their upcoming elections?

If so, why hasn’t the Canada Revenue Agency revoked the charitable status of the David Suzuki Foundation?

CRA’s website says charities are “prohibited” from participating in “partisan political activity,” meaning anything that “involves direct or indirect support of, or opposition to (my emphasis) any political party or candidate for public office.”

Recently, in a speech at McGill University, Suzuki basically suggested Harper and Stelmach should be jailed for indifference to climate change, although a Suzuki spokesman later said he wasn’t speaking literally.

According to the National Post, Suzuki said: “What I would challenge you to do is to put a lot of effort into trying to see whether there’s a legal way of throwing our so-called leaders into jail, because what they’re doing is a criminal act.” Sounds literal to me.

Sarah Babbage of the McGill Daily reported: “(Suzuki) gave a scathing critique of Prime Minister Stephen Harper and Alberta Premier Ed Stelmach, chastising them for neglecting the environment in favour of economic growth and development of the tar sands, (adding) It is an intergenerational crime that … they keep dithering as they are.’ ”

Vincii Tsui of the McGill Tribune reported on Suzuki, “singling out (Harper and Stelmach) for prioritizing the economy over the environment.”

The Post reported Suzuki said: “We can no longer tolerate what’s going on in Ottawa and Edmonton.”

I’m guessing he wasn’t talking about the Liberals.

Last year, the Calgary Sun reported on Suzuki attacking Harper before an audience of elementary school children as he accepted $835 they collected for his foundation.

“The only thing he cares about is getting re-elected with a majority government,” Suzuki said. “I don’t believe there is a green bone in Harper’s body — he has never, ever indicated he cares about the environment …” That’s non-partisan?

In June, in Toronto, Suzuki claimed the Harper Conservative government was harassing him by repeatedly auditing his foundation. According to the Globe and Mail, he said: “I am being hounded by the current government because I have a foundation that has my name and so they’re trying to take away my charitable (status),” adding he now had to preface remarks with: “Everything I say is my personal opinion, has nothing to do with my foundation.”

Really? Quick — name another member of the Suzuki Foundation aside from Suzuki.

Visit the foundation’s website, davidsuzuki.org. You’ll see a picture of Suzuki at the top beside “David Suzuki Foundation.” Both are to the left and slightly above the “DONATE Now!” icon.

Click on the first featured article, (Feb. 6): “Who will pay for our failure to act on global warming?” where Suzuki criticizes Harper and Stelmach.

How can anyone distinguish the views of David Suzuki from the David Suzuki Foundation?

In June, a government spokesman denied Suzuki’s allegations, saying politicians don’t launch CRA audits. Stephen Hazell, executive director of the Sierra Club, told the Post the CRA had dramatically increased audits on environmental groups in recent years but: “This is something I would not blame the Conservative government for …”

Charities can spend 10% of their budgets for non-partisan political activities to influence public opinion, policy and relevant laws, including organizing conferences, lectures, rallies, letter-writing campaigns etc.

But what Suzuki’s doing? C’mon. This isn’t about free speech — he can say whatever he likes.

But if partisan political activity is “prohibited,” why does his foundation have charitable status, meaning it doesn’t have to pay income taxes on its $6 million in annual revenues (2006) and can issue tax receipts to donors? If you agree, call the CRA’s charity directorate at 1-800-267-2384 and complain.

Source

The new CEO of Sharia Green

January 24, 2008

 Editor:
Life is strange. I never cared for the Toronto Sun or Stephen Harper, but they seem to be the only ones trying to inform Canadians about some very important realities. Harper is blocking Kyoto because he knows what it’s about. It’s about giving up the sovereignty of Canada to the UN. I’m not sure why Harper is working behind closed doors to integrate Canada the USA and Mexico. To save us from the UN takeover? The result will be the same, the lost of Canada’s Sovereignty.
Send Lorrie an email or a letter to the paper and encourage him to continue to inform his readers about the reality of “GREEN” 

Lorrie Goldstein

Thu, January 24, 2008
The new CEO of Sharia Green
By LORRIE GOLDSTEIN

Ladies and gentlemen, this is Lorrie Goldstein reporting live for Sun TV. Today it’s my pleasure to introduce you to a global warming expert who’s taking the world by storm — Osama bin Kyoto, founder and CEO of the environmental organization, Sharia Green.

“Mr. Osama bin Kyoto, welcome to our show.”

“Thank you, infidel.”

“May I call you Mr. Kyoto?”

“Of course, infidel.”

fctAdTag(“bigbox”,MyGenericTagVar,1);

“Thank you. Mr. Kyoto, what is your reaction to the latest roller coaster ride of the world’s stock markets and hysterical media reports of impending global economic collapse?”

“This is wonderful news, infidel. We applaud global economic collapse because it’s the only conceivable way major industrialized nations can achieve their greenhouse gas reduction targets under the Kyoto accord. How do you think Russia and all those other former Soviet satellites got to be world leaders in reducing GHG emissions and now have billions of dollars of hot air credits to sell to suckers … uh, I mean to countries like yours? Energy-efficient light bulbs? Wind farms? Solar panels? Stop, you’re killing me! No, they achieved it through total economic meltdown. Why do you think we chose 1990 as the base year for reducing greenhouse gas emissions, just as the Soviet Union was imploding?”

“Uh … to screw the United States?”

“Exactly!”

“But Mr. Kyoto, surely you’re not suggesting global economic collapse and the resulting human carnage, social deprivation and widespread suffering that would result would be a good thing?”

“Of course it would be good, infidel! Economic collapse means you will have less money to buy stuff and the less stuff you buy, the fewer greenhouse gas emissions there will be. Our computer models show that for every 2,000-point drop in the Dow, not only will your retirement date be pushed back five years, but 56.7 polar bears in the Arctic will be saved from drowning.”

“But Mr. bin Kyoto, you folks can’t even agree on whether last year was the second, fifth or seventh warmest in the past century or so. How can you have a computer model that relates drops in the Dow to my retirement date and polar bear drownings?”

“It’s the same one that allows us to predict the precise impact of a carbon tax on the cost of living 50 years from now. Next question.”

“Mr. bin Kyoto, suppose China stops using coal to power energy plants. Suppose the developing world abandons the use and development of fossil fuels. Won’t millions of people in the poorest countries die as a result? Why do you only talk about shortened life spans people might suffer due to climate change, never about the certain deaths we know will occur if the developing world never … uh … develops.”

“Why, infidel? Because that’s complex thinking and we prefer mindless simplicity. So what if a few billion people die? People are a major source of man-made global warming — except for me, of course.”

“But Mr. bin Kyoto, your position is just knee-jerk anti-growth, anti-development, anti-capitalist, anti-Western and especially anti-American. It shuns complex thinking in favour of simplistic and false moral imperatives its adherents accept on blind faith and which ultimately hold human life to be cheap. Mr. bin Kyoto, you and Sharia Green sound a lot like Osama bin Laden and al-Qaida.”

“Your point, infidel?”


• You can e-mail Lorrie Goldstein at lorrie.goldstein@sunmedia.ca

• Have a letter for the editor? E-mail it to

Kyoto snow job by Lorrie Goldstein

January 7, 2008

Editor:
I would like to thank Mr. Goldstein for bringing this to the attention of his readers. Write or call him and encourage him to continue to enlighten his readership with news that matters.
Health care,Education,Energy and Agriculture, all vital to our economy and well being,  and all badly under reported.

Isn’t the only hope for the planet that the
industrialized civilizations collapse?Isn’t it our responsibility to bring that about?”
Maurice Strong, former Secretary General of UNEP

more quotes
Lorrie Goldstein

Sun, January 6, 2008
 
Skip the Kyoto snow job

Canadians will back a realistic green plan — we just haven’t seen it yet

By LORRIE GOLDSTEIN, TORONTO SUN

Let’s examine what the Kyoto treaty on man-made or “anthropogenic” global warming (AGW) is and isn’t.

First, it’s an example of globalization, despite the fact many of its advocates claim to oppose globalization.

But it is not, primarily, an environmental treaty.

If it was, it would require the developing world to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, as it does for a relative handful of industrialized nations, including Canada.

The lack of targets for the developing world reveals Kyoto as primarily a mechanism for redistributing wealth from the First World to the Third, unsurprising given its origins in the United Nations.

fctAdTag(“bigbox”,MyGenericTagVar,1);

Then there’s Kyoto’s accounting tricks.

Russia is in compliance with Kyoto and has billions of dollars of “hot air” credits to sell to countries like Canada — not because of its environmental policies, but because the base year for Kyoto was deliberately set at 1990, just as the economy of the former Soviet Union was imploding, causing the shutdown of many GHG-producing industries. Similarly, Germany and the European Union benefit from the collapse of the East German economy.

Kyoto envisions the First World paying billions of dollars to the Third in the faint hope the latter will use that money to reduce its rapidly-growing GHG emissions.

Kyoto’s successor will be even more controversial.

To be environmentally credible, it must compel developing nations like China (the world’s largest or second largest GHG emitter in tandem with the U.S., depending on whose calculations you believe) to cut its emissions.

But forcing the Third World to do so will be an example of the First World imposing its priorities on the Third, the very thing critics argue is immoral about globalization.

Besides, does anyone seriously believe totalitarian countries like China, given their low public health, environmental and manufacturing standards, will comply with GHG cuts, even if they agree to them?

That said, we must ignore simplistic environmental rhetoric that portrays nations which meet (or try to meet) their Kyoto targets as “good” while those that don’t as “bad.” In reality, all countries act in their own perceived best interests.

China rejects GHG cuts (as has the U.S. through both the Clinton and Bush administrations) not because it favours global climate catastrophe several decades from now if Al Gore’s apocalyptic rhetoric is correct, which is unlikely.

It does so because it has more pressing problems, such as feeding its 1.3 billion people today.

It’s pointless to condemn China for acting in its own interests, just as it’s silly to portray Canada as an energy glutton, a favourite guilt-inducing tactic of environmentalists.

In fact, Canadians have shown a serious commitment to environmentalism, when they are provided with realistic ways to do so.

But we are also a big, cold, sparsely-populated, northern country, which has logically used our fossil fuel resources to improve our quality of life, exactly what China and the developing world aspire to today.

If we’re telling them, post-Kyoto, they cannot even attempt what we did through industrialization powered by fossil fuels such as oil, coal and natural gas, we had best offer them better reasons than Gore’s doomsday hysteria.

Why do you think the Liberals, for all their pro-Kyoto rhetoric, let Canada’s GHG emissions skyrocket during their 12-year reign, despite promising in their 1993 Red Book to cut them well beyond what later became the Kyoto standard?

They (like the present Conservative government) knew accomplishing this would demand enormous sacrifices Canadians might well reject, if the choices were put to them clearly and honestly.

INCREASE POVERTY

For us to comply with Kyoto now would see huge spikes in the price of everything sensitive to the cost of fossil fuels, meaning gasoline, electricity, heat and water as well as transportation, most manufactured goods and food, all of which are directly or indirectly sensitive to the price of fossil fuels.

This would dramatically lower our standard of living and just as dramatically increase poverty.

Despite what Kyoto propagandists and opportunistic politicians pretend, this isn’t about making an easy choice between “good” and “bad.”

It’s about making intelligent choices from the options we have, all of which have positive and negative consequences.


• You can e-mail Lorrie Goldstein at lorrie.goldstein@sunmedia.ca