Comments on: The British Columbia Effect: Premier Clark Renews BC’s Commitment to Leadership on Climate Action http://greenpolicyprof.org/wordpress/?p=615 George Hoberg -- Seeking insights into governance for sustainability Sat, 20 Aug 2016 14:35:43 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.1 By: Cody Sharpe http://greenpolicyprof.org/wordpress/?p=615&cpage=1#comment-1993 Cody Sharpe Mon, 23 May 2011 00:22:26 +0000 http://greenpolicyprof.org/wordpress/?p=615#comment-1993 George, the Pembina Institute recently posted a blog entry praising this very letter from the Premier, as well as comments made by her by-election opponent David Eby, and this is what I pointed out to them: <cite>The one paragraph of Clark's press release which explicitly discusses the WCI doesn't contain a commitment to achieve the 2012 start date; all it offers are some vague comments on leadership and stakeholder consultation, lukewarm language which is entirely in keeping with statements Clark made during the Liberal leadership race. For example, see this video from one of the all-candidate discussion panels: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lDaOFuaaWLQ Second, Eby’s thoughts on the WCI are of less import than those of the NDP’s new leader, Adrian Dix, and he’s expressed even less enthusiasm for the WCI than Clark. For example, see his answer to question two from this survey put together by Organizing for Change, a group Pembina helps run: http://organizingforchange.org/adrian-dix. To me, the line “I am committed to a regulatory approach for industrial sources” is the most important one of his entire response. A hard-path regulatory approach is about as far away from a market-based mechanism as one can get. Neither of these potential premiers has said they’ll do away with the WCI if elected, but if I were you I’d be preparing to put their feet to the fire just in case.</cite> George, the Pembina Institute recently posted a blog entry praising this very letter from the Premier, as well as comments made by her by-election opponent David Eby, and this is what I pointed out to them:

The one paragraph of Clark’s press release which explicitly discusses the WCI doesn’t contain a commitment to achieve the 2012 start date; all it offers are some vague comments on leadership and stakeholder consultation, lukewarm language which is entirely in keeping with statements Clark made during the Liberal leadership race. For example, see this video from one of the all-candidate discussion panels: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lDaOFuaaWLQ

Second, Eby’s thoughts on the WCI are of less import than those of the NDP’s new leader, Adrian Dix, and he’s expressed even less enthusiasm for the WCI than Clark. For example, see his answer to question two from this survey put together by Organizing for Change, a group Pembina helps run: http://organizingforchange.org/adrian-dix. To me, the line “I am committed to a regulatory approach for industrial sources” is the most important one of his entire response. A hard-path regulatory approach is about as far away from a market-based mechanism as one can get.

Neither of these potential premiers has said they’ll do away with the WCI if elected, but if I were you I’d be preparing to put their feet to the fire just in case.

]]> By: Stephen Rees http://greenpolicyprof.org/wordpress/?p=615&cpage=1#comment-1979 Stephen Rees Mon, 09 May 2011 01:00:17 +0000 http://greenpolicyprof.org/wordpress/?p=615#comment-1979 I have a hard time reconciling this statement with what has been - and is - happening in BC. There is the rapid expansion of fossil fuel extraction - oil, gas and coal. Somehow we do not count the vast quantities of coal extracted in BC for steel making in Asia towards our contribution to greenhouse gas emissions. But we sure enjoy those revenues. And we spend them on projects like the expansion of Highway #1 and the South Fraser Perimeter Road - projects that lock most of Greater Vancouver into automobile dependence and urban sprawl for the foreseeable future. We have seen much activity in the so called run of the river hydro production - but that it for export, and only in the spring runoff season, and is not even regarded as "green" by its intended customer, California. Meanwhile hydro rates are being increased to fund massive expansion of generating capacity. And politicians from both the BC Liberals and the NDP are still trumpeting the need for continued economic growth. Neither understands the urgent need to change directions to at least a steady state economy and a dramatic reduction in energy consumption. I have a hard time reconciling this statement with what has been – and is – happening in BC. There is the rapid expansion of fossil fuel extraction – oil, gas and coal. Somehow we do not count the vast quantities of coal extracted in BC for steel making in Asia towards our contribution to greenhouse gas emissions. But we sure enjoy those revenues. And we spend them on projects like the expansion of Highway #1 and the South Fraser Perimeter Road – projects that lock most of Greater Vancouver into automobile dependence and urban sprawl for the foreseeable future. We have seen much activity in the so called run of the river hydro production – but that it for export, and only in the spring runoff season, and is not even regarded as “green” by its intended customer, California. Meanwhile hydro rates are being increased to fund massive expansion of generating capacity. And politicians from both the BC Liberals and the NDP are still trumpeting the need for continued economic growth. Neither understands the urgent need to change directions to at least a steady state economy and a dramatic reduction in energy consumption.

]]> By: diane Wallrich http://greenpolicyprof.org/wordpress/?p=615&cpage=1#comment-1976 diane Wallrich Sat, 07 May 2011 22:23:36 +0000 http://greenpolicyprof.org/wordpress/?p=615#comment-1976 Good news....how about oil tankers, and Enbridge pipeline, the BIG items?!!! Good news….how about oil tankers, and Enbridge pipeline, the BIG items?!!!

]]>