Hi Rod,

I printed the report and have read 45 of its 55 pages and I must say that it causes me concern.

I can't, personally, call that thing a "plan". To me it is at best a feasibility proposal and would need some verification before being considered to be accurate and feasible.
For instance, it looks to me like there are likely some reductions that are being counted twice and someone needs to prove otherwise before the numbers can be accepted.
There is also mention of a CO2 'pipeline and storage' facility. Frankly, this sounds preposterous to me yet significant hinges on its delivery.
The "Carbon Credits trading" also really really bothers me!!! First, the whole concept represents just another layer of complexity that is totally unneeded. Secondly, they are clearly aimed at making money for brokerage houses at least as much as they are aimed at helping towards a solution. Thirdly, they are ill-defined in the document - are they an annual cost (or benefit) or a one-time cost?...who administers/controls them? Fourthly, the report itself says that Canada wouldn't buy such credits UNLESS the money paid for them was guaranteed to go into CO2 reduction in the selling country/business. What says such a condition can be attached and tracked?...what if the seller breaks the deal?...what other kinds of conditions would other entities (or us, as they develop) try to impose and how eould these be enforced?

All in all, while I still feel that dealing with the problem WITHIN KYOTO is the way to go, I don't feel that this "plan" helps the cause at all!

Thanks for the reference. I now know much more details on the topic than I knew before.

cheers


>Hi Jim,
>
> I was reading this thread a couple of days ago, and saw an ad in today's paper here pointing to a new (2002/11/26) Gov. of Canada publication - don't know if you saw it. The published Web report is short on details, but the "Plan for Canada" page has a link to the full report in PDF format. I haven't read the full report (68 pages) carefully through yet, but it seems to be fairly detailed.
>
>full pdf report at:
>http://www.climatechange.gc.ca/plan_for_canada/plan/pdf/full_version.pdf
>
>web (summary) report at:
>http://www.climatechange.gc.ca/plan_for_canada/index.html
>
>
>>Yea, I heard about the Premiers.
>>
>>But I do have to wonder how much of this is also to gain leverage on other issues like medicare funding and getting their hands on the HUGE surpluses generated by the GST (which I think are much much bigger than is ever publicized). I know that if I was a Premier that's exactly what I would do.
>>
>>At least we all agree that something needs to be done. Personally, I see value in using Kyoto as the vehicle, if only to be able to say accurately that in international affairs we mean what we say and we do what we mean. Of course the Premiers, and other entities too, need to be part of the solution process.
>>
>>I've looke through our TV listings for a show regarding the costs of Kyoto but came up dry. My only hope is that it may be on CBC National some night and that I'll see it if some other show doesn't get my viewing.
>>