Search the Community

Showing results for tags 'climate'.



More search options

  • Search By Tags

    Type tags separated by commas.
  • Search By Author

Content Type


Forums

  • Real estate projects
    • Proposals
    • Going up
    • Completed
    • Mass Transit
    • Infrastructures
    • Cultural, entertainment and sport projects
    • Cancelled projects
  • General topics
    • City planning and architecture
    • Economy discussions
    • Technology, video games and gadgets
    • Urban tech
    • General discussions
    • Entertainment, food and culture
    • Current events
    • Off Topic
  • MTLYUL Aviation
    • General discussion
    • Spotting at YUL
  • Here and abroad
    • City of Québec
    • Around the province of Québec.
    • Toronto and the rest of Canada
    • USA
    • Europe
    • Projects elsewhere in the world
  • Photography and videos
    • Urban photography
    • Other pictures
    • Old pictures

Calendars

There are no results to display.

There are no results to display.

Blogs

There are no results to display.

There are no results to display.


Find results in...

Find results that contain...


Date Created

  • Start

    End


Last Updated

  • Start

    End


Filter by number of...

Joined

  • Start

    End


Group


About Me


Biography


Location


Interests


Occupation


Type of dwelling

Found 13 results

  1. (Courtesy of Citymayors.com) 1. London 2. New York 3. Tokyo 4. Chicago 5. Hong Kong ~ 10. Los Angeles ~ 20. Atlanta 27. Montreal Complete list (Top 50)
  2. Montreal Protocol outshines Kyoto PETER HADEKEL, The Gazette Published: 6 hours ago It's been described as the most successful global environmental agreement ever negotiated. The Montreal Protocol, signed in 1987 and ratified by 191 countries, has been extraordinarily effective in phasing out the use of harmful chemicals that depleted the the ozone layer in the Earth's stratosphere. The agreement showed that the global community really could respond to a serious environmental threat. [/url] Twenty years later, environmental officials from government and industry are meeting this week, at a United Nations conference in Montreal, to assess their progress and recommend further action. And some are asking whether the Montreal Protocol could serve as a template for action on a far bigger and more complex problem - greenhouse gas emissions. Despite progress in eliminating 95 per cent of ozone-depleting chemicals, there's still more that can be done to protect the ozone layer, said Mack McFarland, a scientist at chemical giant E.I. DuPont de Nemours and global environmental manager of the company's fluorochemicals business. The phase-out for developing countries could be speeded up, he said in an interview yesterday. That's one proposal on the agenda at this week's meeting. The ozone layer acts as a filter in the Earth's stratosphere, absorbing harmful ultraviolet radiation from the sun. By the mid-1980s, gaping holes in the layer had begun to appear, linked to the world's consumption of such chemicals as halons (in fire extinguishers) and chlorofluorocarbons, or CFCs (in refrigeration, air conditioning and aerosol propellants). After scientific proof was published about the the causes of ozone depletion, industry began to acknowledge its role in the problem, McFarland said. DuPont, which had invented CFCs, began to call for their elimination a year before the Montreal Protocol was signed. Progress was rapid in eliminating use of most ozone-depleting substances, he noted. "In developed countries, halons were gone by 1995, and CFCs by 1996." As of 2005, more than 95 per cent of all the chemicals controlled by the protocol had been phased out. But healing the stratosphere will take longer, because chemical residues will be present for a while. The United Nations Environment Program estimates that the ozone layer should return to pre-1980 levels by 2050 to 2075. Health benefits will be substantial as the ozone layer is restored. It's estimated that the global community will avoid millions of cases of fatal skin cancer and save trillions of dollars in health-care costs. "At this stage, the question is: Is there more that can be done to protect the ozone layer," McFarland asked. Use of less damaging HCFCs is still being ramped down, but could be speeded up in both developed and developing countries, he said. Six groups of countries have presented proposals to accelerate that process. Industry has poured hundreds of million of dollars into research and development of safer chemical substitutes for use in such processes as refrigeration. One result, McFarland said, is that production of global warming gases has also been reduced. Between 1990, when ozone-depleting substances were at peak levels, and 2000, the elimination of those chemicals yielded a net reduction of 25 billion tonnes of global-warming gases. Can the success of the Montreal Protocol serve as a model for tackling climate change? In one respect, it can, McFarland said, because a science-based approach was followed and countries, while agreeing to respect targets, were to free to implement the Montreal Protocol as they chose. Also, realizing that science and technology were not static, there were provisions to revise the Montreal Protocol at least every four years. Of course, a critical difference is that developing countries were on board from the start. That's not the case with the Kyoto Protocol on climate change. "The climate change issue is many orders of magnitude more challenging," McFarland said. "We're dealing with the very fabric of our society - the way we produce and use energy. "You've got to make sure that the goals you set under these international agreements are achievable." [email protected]
  3. Canadian smog costs $1 billion, 2,700 lives: CMA Canwest News Service Published: Wednesday, August 13, 2008 The Canadian Medical Association estimates that by 2031, more than 4,900 Canadians, mostly seniors, will die prematurely each year from the effects of polluted air.Dean Bicknell/Canwest News ServiceThe Canadian Medical Association estimates that by 2031, more than 4,900 Canadians, mostly seniors, will die prematurely each year from the effects of polluted air. OTTAWA -- Smog this year will contribute to the premature deaths of 2,700 Canadians and put 11,000 in hospitals, costing the economy and health-care system $1 billion, Canada's doctors say. A report by the Canadian Medical Association calculates that deaths linked to air pollution will rise over the next two decades, claiming nearly twice as many lives each year and costing $1.3 billion annually in health care and lost productivity. The study estimates that by 2031, more than 4,900 Canadians, mostly seniors, will die prematurely each year from the effects of polluted air. Ontario and Quebec will bear the brunt, with smog-related deaths soaring among aging baby-boomers and the chronically ill. In Ontario, the number of premature deaths could double, to 2,200, from 1,200 per year, while hospital admissions over the same period could jump by as much as 70%. The annual health-care and economic costs could rise by as much as 30%, to $740 million, from $570 million. Quebec's mortality rate could rise by 70%, from 700 a year to 1,200, while hospital admissions could spike by 50% annually, costing the province 10% more, or up to $290 million a year. While smog can trigger lung problems, accounting for up to 40% of hospital visits, heart attack and stroke are the real problems, responsible for more than 60% of all air-pollution-related hospital admissions, the study found. Pollutants such as nitrous oxide damage the heart by harming blood vessels, leading to atherosclerosis, a disease that makes people susceptible to heart attack and stroke. Besides the direct costs to the economy and the health system, the study tries to put a price on the poor quality of life and loss of life caused by smog-related deaths. With those estimated costs included, this year's total bill -- in addition to the $1 billion estimate for economic and health-care costs - would amount to more than $10 billion. That figure would rise to $18 billion a year by 2031, with nearly $16 billion of that the price the doctors' association puts on lost lives. But Gordon McBean, a renowned climatologist at the University of Western Ontario, questioned the accuracy of such estimates. While he praised the report and called most of its data sound, he said the attempt to put a price tag on lost life is problematic. "Health-care costs you can do a reasonably good job quantifying, but quality of life and the actual value of life is a bit difficult," said Mr. McBean, co-author of a recently published Health Canada report on the impact of climate change on human health. As a Canadian representative to the Nobel Prize-winning Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, Mr. McBean said the world's top experts have tried unsuccessfully to come up with similar estimates for the human cost of climate change. "That became very controversial because the people who did it said, 'Well, a North American is worth so many thousand dollars and an African is worth a small fraction of that.' And people like me didn't think that was acceptable," he said. Given that climate change likely will lead to more smoggy days, the report does not exaggerate the level of anticipated deaths caused by air pollution, said Mr. McBean. "They're not overstating the problem. If anything, these are lowball estimates."
  4. UN Blowback: More Than 650 International Scientists Dissent Over Man-Made Global Warming Claims POZNAN, Poland - The UN global warming conference currently underway in Poland is about to face a serious challenge from over 650 dissenting scientists from around the globe who are criticizing the climate claims made by the UN IPCC and former Vice President Al Gore. Set for release this week, a newly updated U.S. Senate Minority Report features the dissenting voices of over 650 international scientists, many current and former UN IPCC scientists, who have now turned against the UN. The report has added about 250 scientists (and growing) in 2008 to the over 400 scientists who spoke out in 2007. The over 650 dissenting scientists are more than 12 times the number of UN scientists (52) who authored the media hyped IPCC 2007 Summary for Policymakers. The U.S. Senate report is the latest evidence of the growing groundswell of scientific opposition rising to challenge the UN and Gore. Scientific meetings are now being dominated by a growing number of skeptical scientists. The prestigious International Geological Congress, dubbed the geologists' equivalent of the Olympic Games, was held in Norway in August 2008 and prominently featured the voices and views of scientists skeptical of man-made global warming fears. [see Full report Here: & See: Skeptical scientists overwhelm conference: '2/3 of presenters and question-askers were hostile to, even dismissive of, the UN IPCC' ] A hint of what the upcoming report contains: “I am a skeptic…Global warming has become a new religion.” - Nobel Prize Winner for Physics, Ivar Giaever. “Since I am no longer affiliated with any organization nor receiving any funding, I can speak quite frankly….As a scientist I remain skeptical.” - Atmospheric Scientist Dr. Joanne Simpson, the first woman in the world to receive a PhD in meteorology and formerly of NASA who has authored more than 190 studies and has been called “among the most preeminent scientists of the last 100 years.” Warming fears are the “worst scientific scandal in the history…When people come to know what the truth is, they will feel deceived by science and scientists.” - UN IPCC Japanese Scientist Dr. Kiminori Itoh, an award-winning PhD environmental physical chemist. “The IPCC has actually become a closed circuit; it doesn’t listen to others. It doesn’t have open minds… I am really amazed that the Nobel Peace Prize has been given on scientifically incorrect conclusions by people who are not geologists,” - Indian geologist Dr. Arun D. Ahluwalia at Punjab University and a board member of the UN-supported International Year of the Planet. “The models and forecasts of the UN IPCC "are incorrect because they only are based on mathematical models and presented results at scenarios that do not include, for example, solar activity.” - Victor Manuel Velasco Herrera, a researcher at the Institute of Geophysics of the National Autonomous University of Mexico “It is a blatant lie put forth in the media that makes it seem there is only a fringe of scientists who don’t buy into anthropogenic global warming.” - U.S Government Atmospheric Scientist Stanley B. Goldenberg of the Hurricane Research Division of NOAA. “Even doubling or tripling the amount of carbon dioxide will virtually have little impact, as water vapour and water condensed on particles as clouds dominate the worldwide scene and always will.” – . Geoffrey G. Duffy, a professor in the Department of Chemical and Materials Engineering of the University of Auckland, NZ. “After reading [uN IPCC chairman] Pachauri's asinine comment [comparing skeptics to] Flat Earthers, it's hard to remain quiet.” - Climate statistician Dr. William M. Briggs, who specializes in the statistics of forecast evaluation, serves on the American Meteorological Society's Probability and Statistics Committee and is an Associate Editor of Monthly Weather Review. “For how many years must the planet cool before we begin to understand that the planet is not warming? For how many years must cooling go on?" - Geologist Dr. David Gee the chairman of the science committee of the 2008 International Geological Congress who has authored 130 plus peer reviewed papers, and is currently at Uppsala University in Sweden. “Gore prompted me to start delving into the science again and I quickly found myself solidly in the skeptic camp…Climate models can at best be useful for explaining climate changes after the fact.” - Meteorologist Hajo Smit of Holland, who reversed his belief in man-made warming to become a skeptic, is a former member of the Dutch UN IPCC committee. “Many [scientists] are now searching for a way to back out quietly (from promoting warming fears), without having their professional careers ruined.” - Atmospheric physicist James A. Peden, formerly of the Space Research and Coordination Center in Pittsburgh. “Creating an ideology pegged to carbon dioxide is a dangerous nonsense…The present alarm on climate change is an instrument of social control, a pretext for major businesses and political battle. It became an ideology, which is concerning.” - Environmental Scientist Professor Delgado Domingos of Portugal, the founder of the Numerical Weather Forecast group, has more than 150 published articles. “CO2 emissions make absolutely no difference one way or another….Every scientist knows this, but it doesn’t pay to say so…Global warming, as a political vehicle, keeps Europeans in the driver’s seat and developing nations walking barefoot.” - Dr. Takeda Kunihiko, vice-chancellor of the Institute of Science and Technology Research at Chubu University in Japan. “The [global warming] scaremongering has its justification in the fact that it is something that generates funds.” - Award-winning Paleontologist Dr. Eduardo Tonni, of the Committee for Scientific Research in Buenos Aires and head of the Paleontology Department at the University of La Plata. # # In addition, the report will feature new peer-reviewed scientific studies and analyses refuting man-made warming fears and a heavy dose of inconvenient climate developments. (See Below: Study: Half of warming due to Sun! –Sea Levels Fail to Rise? - Warming Fears in 'Dustbin of History') http://epw.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=Files.View&FileStore_id=37283205-c4eb-4523-b1d3-c6e8faf14e84
  5. Et oui, quel meilleur jour que le Le jour de la Terre pour remettre les pendules à l'heure sur l'alarmisme relié au réchauffement planétaire. L'alarmisme sur le réchauffement planétaire est la plus grande arnaque de l'histoire et il distrait des vrais problèmes. Si on pouvait donner l'argent dépenser sur les études sur le réchauffement de la planète aux malades en Afrique, on aurait beaucoup moins de problèmes... Vu que ça fait quoi 10 ans maintenant que la témpérature moyenne est en baisse, plusieurs catastrophistes ont changé l'appelation du réchauffement planétaire pour changement climatique. Comme ça, en disant changement climatique, ils peuvent blâmer à peu près n'importe quoi sur ça tandis qu'ils étaient limité avant avec le terme réchauffement planétaire. Donc pour amuser les catastrophistes/environmentatistes qui nous en passent une bonne, voici quelques citations et liens utiles. SVP argumentez intélligement. Dire des choses comme 'Flat-earthers', payé par Bush, etc, sont insultante et abaissent le niveau de la conversation. Aussi, dire que le débat est terminé est complètement ridicule car il n'a jamais même commencé. Dire que tout les scientifiques sont en accord est aussi un méthode totalitaire qui ne sert à rien pour avance la discussion. “I am a skeptic…Global warming has become a new religion.” - Nobel Prize Winner for Physics, Ivar Giaever. “Since I am no longer affiliated with any organization nor receiving any funding, I can speak quite frankly….As a scientist I remain skeptical.” - Atmospheric Scientist Dr. Joanne Simpson, the first woman in the world to receive a PhD in meteorology and formerly of NASA who has authored more than 190 studies and has been called “among the most preeminent scientists of the last 100 years.” Warming fears are the “worst scientific scandal in the history…When people come to know what the truth is, they will feel deceived by science and scientists.” - UN IPCC Japanese Scientist Dr. Kiminori Itoh, an award-winning PhD environmental physical chemist. “The IPCC has actually become a closed circuit; it doesn’t listen to others. It doesn’t have open minds… I am really amazed that the Nobel Peace Prize has been given on scientifically incorrect conclusions by people who are not geologists,” - Indian geologist Dr. Arun D. Ahluwalia at Punjab University and a board member of the UN-supported International Year of the Planet. “The models and forecasts of the UN IPCC "are incorrect because they only are based on mathematical models and presented results at scenarios that do not include, for example, solar activity.” - Victor Manuel Velasco Herrera, a researcher at the Institute of Geophysics of the National Autonomous University of Mexico “It is a blatant lie put forth in the media that makes it seem there is only a fringe of scientists who don’t buy into anthropogenic global warming.” - U.S Government Atmospheric Scientist Stanley B. Goldenberg of the Hurricane Research Division of NOAA. “Even doubling or tripling the amount of carbon dioxide will virtually have little impact, as water vapour and water condensed on particles as clouds dominate the worldwide scene and always will.” – . Geoffrey G. Duffy, a professor in the Department of Chemical and Materials Engineering of the University of Auckland, NZ. “After reading [uN IPCC chairman] Pachauri's asinine comment [comparing skeptics to] Flat Earthers, it's hard to remain quiet.” - Climate statistician Dr. William M. Briggs, who specializes in the statistics of forecast evaluation, serves on the American Meteorological Society's Probability and Statistics Committee and is an Associate Editor of Monthly Weather Review. “For how many years must the planet cool before we begin to understand that the planet is not warming? For how many years must cooling go on?" - Geologist Dr. David Gee the chairman of the science committee of the 2008 International Geological Congress who has authored 130 plus peer reviewed papers, and is currently at Uppsala University in Sweden. “Gore prompted me to start delving into the science again and I quickly found myself solidly in the skeptic camp…Climate models can at best be useful for explaining climate changes after the fact.” - Meteorologist Hajo Smit of Holland, who reversed his belief in man-made warming to become a skeptic, is a former member of the Dutch UN IPCC committee. “Many [scientists] are now searching for a way to back out quietly (from promoting warming fears), without having their professional careers ruined.” - Atmospheric physicist James A. Peden, formerly of the Space Research and Coordination Center in Pittsburgh. “Creating an ideology pegged to carbon dioxide is a dangerous nonsense…The present alarm on climate change is an instrument of social control, a pretext for major businesses and political battle. It became an ideology, which is concerning.” - Environmental Scientist Professor Delgado Domingos of Portugal, the founder of the Numerical Weather Forecast group, has more than 150 published articles. “CO2 emissions make absolutely no difference one way or another….Every scientist knows this, but it doesn’t pay to say so…Global warming, as a political vehicle, keeps Europeans in the driver’s seat and developing nations walking barefoot.” - Dr. Takeda Kunihiko, vice-chancellor of the Institute of Science and Technology Research at Chubu University in Japan. “The [global warming] scaremongering has its justification in the fact that it is something that generates funds.” - Award-winning Paleontologist Dr. Eduardo Tonni, of the Committee for Scientific Research in Buenos Aires and head of the Paleontology Department at the University of La Plata. # # In addition, the report will feature new peer-reviewed scientific studies and analyses refuting man-made warming fears and a heavy dose of inconvenient climate developments. (See Below: Study: Half of warming due to Sun! –Sea Levels Fail to Rise? - Warming Fears in 'Dustbin of History') (source: http://epw.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=Minority.Blogs&ContentRecord_id=2158072E-802A-23AD-45F0-274616DB87E6) Aussi, quelques vidéos: http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-3309910462407994295&ei=8pnvScacC5GErQKX98jnCA&q=global+warming+swindle http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=7222900952011147196&ei=8pnvScacC5GErQKX98jnCA&q=global+warming+swindle Citations du fondateur de 'The Weather Channel': ‘Greatest Scam in History’ (http://icecap.us/index.php/go/joes-blog/comments_about_global_warming/) Il y en as-tu assez? Maintenant on comprends pourquoi Al Gore refuse systématiquement de participer à un débat sur le sujet.
  6. Battle lines drawn on environment at premiers rendezvous in Quebec City LEE GREENBERG and MARIANNE WHITE, Canwest News Service Published: 5 hours ago Alberta Premier Ed Stelmach issued a stern warning against a national cap-and-trade program yesterday, underscoring divisions among Canada's 13 premiers and territorial leaders at the outset of a three-day meeting featuring discussions on climate change strategy. Stelmach and Saskatchewan Premier Brad Wall scuttled any hope of a unified cap-and-trade program, making it clear they consider the policy a thinly disguised attempt to share in the billions generated by western oil and gas. "There's only one inter-regional transfer of wealth in this country and it's called equalization," Stelmach said. Sam the man and the premiers: An actor portraying Samuel de Champlain mingles with provincial premiers and territorial leaders attending the Council of the Federation in Quebec City yesterday. "There won't be another one from the province of Alberta. And that's as straight an answer as I can give." "We will fight aggressively against any initiative that would redistribute not just wealth, but opportunity, and threaten our 'have' status," Wall added. "Because (our prosperity) is good for the country." The two Prairie premiers placed themselves squarely against Ontario and Quebec, which recently announced their intention to begin a cap-and- trade program in 2010, as well as B.C. and Manitoba, which have both signed on to cap-and-trade programs under the aegis of the Western Climate Initiatives. The group also includes Quebec and seven U.S. states. Cap-and-trade would require companies exceeding emissions caps to trade for credits from greener firms. Both Wall and Stelmach cast aspersions on the viability of cap and trade, touting instead carbon capture and storage (CCS) technology. Alberta last week announced a $2-billion investment in CCS, also known as sequestration, a process that aims to store carbon emissions by injecting them into deep geological formations. Most provinces have at least something in common when it comes to climate change - they have better plans to tackle it than Ottawa, according to the report released yesterday by the David Suzuki Foundation. As the premiers gathered for the Council of the Federation, the conservation group noted that almost all provinces are stepping up with strong targets and policies in the absence of federal leadership. The report card shows that British Columbia is leading the pack with its carbon tax. The Suzuki Foundation gives a good rating to Quebec and Ontario for their policies to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and their proposed cap-and-trade system. Manitoba also gets the thumbs-up. Not surprisingly, Alberta rated the worst, with Saskatchewan not far from the bottom. "For Alberta to be moving backward is incomprehensible," said Dale Marshall, climate-change policy analyst with the Suzuki Foundation.
  7. Allé sur le site et télécharge la musique (gratuit) pour supporter la campagne: climate justice, elle est très bonne. La musique est génial et parlé en a vos amis est familles. Invité vos amis sur facebook a devenir membres http://www.timeforclimatejustice.org/
  8. Allé sur le site et télécharge la musique (gratuit) pour supporter la campagne: climate justice, elle est très bonne. La musique est génial et parlé en a vos amis est familles. Invité vos amis sur facebook a devenir membres http://www.timeforclimatejustice.org/
  9. tres tres triste. Je gage de voir 3 ou 4 personnes commencer a insulter Villeneuve Former Formula 1 champion Jacques Villeneuve said he left Quebec because of the province’s language laws, business climate and the general “morose ambiance.” In an exclusive interview with QMI Agency, Villeneuve, who works as an F1 analyst on French and Italian television, said he “no longer felt at home” in Quebec. He recently sold his luxurious home in one of Montreal’s wealthiest neighbourhoods and is now living in Andorra, a microstate that is known as a tax haven, located in the Pyreneese mountains between France and Spain. “My leaving had nothing to do with taxes,” Villeneuve said. Rather, he said he didn’t appreciate Quebec’s “evolution,” which he said reminded him of France. “Everything bad about France was transferred to Quebec,” he said. “The social ills, the student protests ... The climate is such that people hesitate before investing in Quebec.” He blamed government regulations for scaring off investors, and said he didn’t want his three children to live in the “morose ambiance” in Quebec that “blocks its future.” In particular, Villeneuve targeted the province’s language laws, which legislate the use of the French language. He said it’s up to parents to teach their children how to speak French. The former F-1 driver will be in Montreal in two weeks for the Canadian Grand Prix where he’ll likely draw criticism for his recent remarks on Quebec. Villeneuve also received the wrath from student movement leaders last spring when he invited striking students to “stop protesting and go back to school.”
  10. Harper is on the second day of a three-day tour of Europe, with environmental issues at the centre of the agenda. Most European countries are wary of Canada's mixed record on the Kyoto Protocol for greenhouse gas emissions, with far more political and public support for reductions in Europe than is generally found in this country. Before he left, some environmentalists criticized the prime minister's trip for its own greenhouse gas emissions. They say the air travel involved in taking Harper's retinue to several European cities in three days will generate more than 400 tonnes of carbon dioxide emissions, as much as 100 cars produce in a year. But Harper and his officials say expressing Canada's position on climate change is crucial, as well as discussing this country's booming trade with Europe, worth some $110 billion in the past year. Speaking to UN delegates in Bonn, Harper said Canada was the first industrialized country to ratify a biodiversity treaty in 1992, and that this country took a varied approach to environment protection, involving all sectors of society, and not just government. "Canada has gone to great lengths to protect and preserve our rich and diverse environment," Harper said in Bonn. "In our country, this is not just a government enterprise. We are partnered with many private individuals, corporations and non-governmental organizations dedicated to environmental philanthropy." CBC's chief political correspondent, Keith Boag, travelling with the prime minister, said there was little about the address that was new in policy terms. "The speech was really just a once-over-lightly about how beautiful Canada is," Boag said. "How many lakes and rivers and streams and mountains and forests and fields and so on [the country] has." The Bernier resignation is still very much on the mind of the prime minister and officials and journalists travelling with him, Boag said. Canada could do more: environmentalists Environmental groups at the Bonn meeting say there is sometimes more words than substance to Canada's positions on biodiversity and other environmental issues. William Jackson with the International Union for the Conservation of Nature said Canada can be proud of its domestic achievements in environmental protection, but its international role in holding up agreements on issues like climate change has raised eyebrows. "I have not seen Canada blocking things to the point [that] decisions are not being made," Jackson says, "but I've seen them expressing their views strongly." Federal Environment Minister John Baird, who is with Harper, dismissed accusations Wednesday that Canada isn't doing enough to curb greenhouse gas emissions. Baird said the Canadian government actions include regulating big polluters, a hydrogen initiative in B.C., encouragement of carbon capture and storage efforts, an electricity grid between Ontario and Manitoba and support for tidal power generation in the Maritimes. Harper was hoping to convince European leaders that his plan for fighting greenhouse gases is a good one, despite criticism from environmentalists. Unlike most of Europe, Canada and the U.S. oppose any new climate change pact that would exclude major polluters, such as China or India. Harper is using this trip to lay the groundwork for the upcoming G8 meeting this summer in Japan, which will focus on climate change. On Wednesday in Bonn, Harper is also meeting German Chancellor Angela Merkel. The two leaders pledged last year to increase co-operation between their two countries on a range of issues, including environmental policy and trade. Harper's next stop will be Rome for meetings with Italian Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi before travelling to London where he has meetings scheduled with the Queen and his British counterpart, Gordon Brown, as well as a speech to business leaders at the Canada-United Kingdom Chamber of Commerce. With files from the Canadian Press http://news.sympatico.msn.cbc.ca/abc/world/contentposting.aspx?isfa=1&newsitemid=harper-bonn&feedname=CBC-WORLD-V3&showbyline=True
  11. http://motherboard.vice.com/read/the-nations-most-likely-to-survive-climate-change-mapped?utm_source=clfb The Nations Most Likely to Survive Climate Change, Mapped WRITTEN BY BRIAN MERCHANT January 12, 2015 // 02:10 PM EST See the map images here: http:// http://motherboard-images.vice.com/content-images/contentimage/18229/1421089665711198.jpg Last year, researchers at Notre Dame attempted to determine ​which nations were best equipped to survive climate change—to endure the higher tides, warmer temps, and declining crop yields—and which were poised to falter. Their Global Adaptation Index (GAIN) pegged Norway as the nation most likely to survive, and Chad as the least likely to prosper. The data was compelling, and helped enable a worthy exercise; imagining the welfare of the world's societies under the yoke of planetary warming. Now, web designer Jon Whitling, has visualized that data—inspired by ​my piece, he says (infographic-makers of the world take note! the key to any internet journalists' heart is appealing to their sizable egos)—and the results are worth peeking at. As I noted previously, "the US, Canada, and Australia are big and resource rich—and, importantly, have enough fertile cropland in northern regions to adapt to rising temperatures. For a time, anyway. The worst off are, as usual, the poor countries whose crop yields will fall, water access will decline, and who lack the technology, political economy, and resources to buffer the incoming bouts of extreme weather-filled years." The map makes that clear on a more visceral level. These are the nations most likely to survive climate change, mapped: ​ I don't usually share infographics—in fact, I'm a little surprised folks are still making them, as I thought the ​internet's infographic-for-linkback boom was dead—but this one really does offer a useful context for the GAIN data. It's useful to have a map that, at a glance, helps contextualize which regions are headed for trouble. Not that it's complicated—richer, pole-proximal countries are going to fare better, while poor, equator-adjacent nations will suffer. "We produced this map to highlight that while climate change is caused primarily by rich, technologically advanced countries, it will be the poorest countries that will be hardest hit," Jon Whitling, the map's creator and an employee at the UK-based Eco Experts, told me. "We hope this raises awareness of Africa’s and Asia’s high vulnerability and low readiness for climate change. Ultimately, we want world leaders to act now to limit the impact climate change will have.” TOPICS: climate change, maps, Earth, planet, global warming, carbon, Africa, europe, united states, Norway, chad, poverty, inequality sent via Tapatalk