Ontario is committing suicide.

[Busta]

The Ontario government will spend more than $7-billion over four years on a sweeping climate change plan that will affect every aspect of life – from what people drive to how they heat their homes and workplaces – in a bid to slash the province’s carbon footprint.

Ontario will begin phasing out natural gas for heating, provide incentives to retrofit buildings and give rebates to drivers who buy electric vehicles. It will also require that gasoline sold in the province contain less carbon, bring in building code rules requiring all new homes by 2030 to be heated with electricity or geothermal systems, and set a target for 12 per cent of all new vehicle sales to be electric by 2025.



Yep, the world's most indebted non-sovereign jurisdiction is to commit suicide trying to fight the biggest non-problem in the history of the world.

As Canada's largest province this will also drag the entire country down with it.

Anybody who has the means and opportunity to move out of Ontario and possibly even Canada would do well to do so. I am seriously looking into it.

Are the MarkPrince types of the world happy now?

Way to go lunatics. Way to go.

Why oh why did I vote for her :don'twantto-see:/

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/new...sweeping-climate-change-plan/article30029081/

 

[DannyDeVito]

Here is another.


BUT WHY ?

 

[Only_if]

That is why having a majority government should be outlawed plus the Liberals been on for too long.

 

[cristycurves]

Sure climate change is a non-problem :no: just look at fort mac.

 

[papasmerf]

Sure climate change is a non-problem :no: just look at fort mac.

Cristy

If a forested area has trees that are hundreds of years old............Ask yourself why they are not thousands of years old.

 

[dragonrider99]

This lesbian creature has no kids and will never do. So she doesn't care what the future of this province is.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Bo Jackson]

I had the same thought but not political correct to say it out loud. You have more cojones than I do.

 

[cristycurves]

Cristy

If a forested area has trees that are hundreds of years old............Ask yourself why they are not thousands of years old.

Papa I've met enough scientists and other people who are specialists in fields that pertain to energy, who have enlightened me to much and I have faith in their knowledge. I've no doubt mankind has and is causing our planet to change and change at a rate that is killing it. Our ignoring this will leave little left for future generations. So we address it now or continue to enjoy all mother nature's rebellion.

Concerning trees, Papa there are some that are thousands of years old, but many things factor into why forests cannot sustain long history, namely human intervention and

• The availability of water
• Sun
• Temperature
• The presence or absence of wind
• Fires
• Pests
• Diseases & disorders

https://www.mnn.com/earth-matters/w...s-10-oldest-living-trees/taking-the-long-view

 

[Prim0]

The warming may exist. It may be partially man-made. But have your scientist friends explain this...."What is the correct temperature for the Earth?" There have been much warmer periods on earth and there was more life at that time. Perhaps by trying to hold down the temps, you are actually preventing more life from existing. Good temps for humans don't always bean the best temps for other living things.



Besides that....increasing electric cars isn't going to lower the CO2 footprint as much as people think. Where does most of the electricity to charge a car come from? How many more miles do you get from burning gasoline vs burning fossil fuels to charge and run an electric car? How much damage is done to the environment to collect all of the hazardous materials used to make batteries for cars? How far around the world do those toxic materials have to travel to be assembled into batteries and how much fuel does that burn?




There will be a day when we'll have cars that can completely charge their batteries from solar cells on their roofs. We'll have methods to replace fossil fuels efficiently and without much pollution. But one thing people don't seem to realize is that trying to force the issue before the technological breakthroughs occur may actually retard the development. Cheap energy has pulled many people and countries out of poverty and created wealth. Wealth (the extra that comes from finding better/cheaper ways to produce materials) is what is available to invest in research. Cut the profits/wealth creation and where is all of the research money going to come from.....the government? They only have money if somebody else makes it in the first place. Reduce wealth and profits, slow down research....delay real solutions to energy problems.




I know scientists too. They are working on solutions but they can't do it without resources. Bringing the economy down around them isn't going to help them either.

 

[Prim0]

As for large forest fires. Often it is man's intervention that leads to them. In a completely natural system, there will be fires. But humans step in and put out many of the small fires allowing fuel to build up in the forests. Then along come the right conditions and instead of several small somewhat damaging fires, you end up with a conflagration that burns and burns and burns.


I appreciate people's good intentions....but more often than not, things work out the opposite of what was intended. Ask the Bison calf about it.