The United Nations Conference on Climate Change is happening in Cancun, from November 29 to December 10. There seems to be little hope in the global community that any real progress will be achieved in agreements to fight climate change at this conference. However, the number and severity of extreme and record breaking weather events all over the world this past year, makes real progress much more urgent. There seams to be a belief that fighting global warming will risk our economic recovery. Yet all over the world, especially this year, severe economic costs have resulted due to the environmental disasters due to weather. In addition if we place any significant value on the accompanying human suffering then surly it costs us more to continue on our present course.
I am not saying that if we start tomorrow to reduce greenhouse gases that these catastrophic weather events will stop. It will take decades for changes made today to significantly affect the climate. In fact even more extreme weather events can be expected in the near future. This only strengthens the need to make changes now.
As more and more countries are investing in the green economy, their industries are becoming more efficient and better able to compete in the global economy. Countries that do not change will have to play catch-up and their economies will suffer. Many changes that we can make that have already been tested and proven in other countries, will help both our economy and the environment.
If Canada continues to resist real action on climate it will become isolated in the global community. We can expect significant criticism and possibly boycotts of our exports due to their carbon footprint. This type of economic sanctions are happening now for products that involve child labor, unfair trade practices, and perceived animal cruelty. As the consequences of climate change become more severe the likely hood of this kind of economic sanction will increase especially if economies in other countries fail to recover.
I have the good fortune to be able to attend this conference as an observer. By talking with as many other observers as possible I hope to learn a lot and demonstrate to them that many Canadians are well aware of environmental problems and are working hard to do their part to correct them. Although I have talked to as many people as opportunity has allowed in forming my opinions, I would like to here more from others. If you have any ideas that you would like to share please join me at our open house on Nov. 16, 6:30pm at 176 Larch in the Rethink Green Sudbury meeting room #101. Notes will be taken and I will bring these with me to show that Canadians are engaged in finding solutions. If you cannot attend and would like to share your thoughts send me an e-mail at twilleygreen@persona.ca and I will bring your e-mails with me.
Fred Twilley
Nominated Green Party of Canada Candidate,
Sudbury Riding
Thursday, November 11, 2010
Sunday, February 7, 2010
CAP AND TRADE, THE CHOICE OF BIG BUSINESS
The trend internationally to reduce Greenhouse Gases (GHG’s) is through the Cap and Trade approach. Before this method can take effect, the amount of GHG’s that every enterprise will be allowed to emit will have to be determined. This will require enormous amounts money, people, and time. Inevitably there will be a lot of dispute as to these assessments, which will lead to more money, people and time before this system can be implemented. This system also requires the setting up of a trading system to market GHG credits earned by some enterprises to be sold to others. This structure has the potential to make a great deal of money for the corporate elite in management fees and commissions and require a lot of other expenses to operate. Also this system will discourage new businesses from starting or other companies from expanding. In addition to the normal expenses of starting or expanding, carbon credits will have to be purchased.
The enormous costs of this approach to protecting our environment will not in any way directly reduce GHG’s. . It will have the desired effect of reducing carbon emissions, but at a hefty price to all of us because all of these costs will have to be recovered with price increases of fossil fuels etc. In addition, this method requires a lot of monitoring, hence more costs. Experience in Europe has found that this method has also provided a large opportunity for fraud with billions stolen from the system.
So what is the alternative? Direct carbon pricing through taxes in conjunction with tax reductions on the income side is the answer. This will encourage reducing of GHG’s because of increased costs at the same time as providing some tax relief to either help pay for the increased costs and stimulate investments in energy efficiency. Such investments would themselves create jobs. The tax relief on wages would in effect reduce the cost of labor and with corporate income tax reductions our industries would be more competitive thus saving jobs. The shifting of costs from labor to machinery could save jobs by reducing the incentive to mechanize to replace employees. Tax shifting is not a cure all, but a good first step. Many are concerned that the tax relief will be a lot less than the tax increases on carbon emissions, but with Cap and Trade there is zero relief. Secondly, taxes collected by our government are still our money, generally used for the benefit of citizens. Taxes are often not well spent, but that is a separate issue.
Some method of compelling us to reduce our carbon footprint is inevitable and with every change there are winners and losers. We have a choice. With Cap and Trade the corporate sector will be the winners and the rest of us the losers. With taxing of pollution and tax relief on income, some of us will win and some of us will loose but much less than with Cap and Trade. I am not against businesses making money, but there are many ways to make money providing goods and services that are of value to us. Also, Cap and Trade will hurt the bottom line of all businesses possibly stifling the recovery. With tax shifting and the increased investment in the green economy that it will encourage, our economy will be strengthened.
Fred Twilley
The enormous costs of this approach to protecting our environment will not in any way directly reduce GHG’s. . It will have the desired effect of reducing carbon emissions, but at a hefty price to all of us because all of these costs will have to be recovered with price increases of fossil fuels etc. In addition, this method requires a lot of monitoring, hence more costs. Experience in Europe has found that this method has also provided a large opportunity for fraud with billions stolen from the system.
So what is the alternative? Direct carbon pricing through taxes in conjunction with tax reductions on the income side is the answer. This will encourage reducing of GHG’s because of increased costs at the same time as providing some tax relief to either help pay for the increased costs and stimulate investments in energy efficiency. Such investments would themselves create jobs. The tax relief on wages would in effect reduce the cost of labor and with corporate income tax reductions our industries would be more competitive thus saving jobs. The shifting of costs from labor to machinery could save jobs by reducing the incentive to mechanize to replace employees. Tax shifting is not a cure all, but a good first step. Many are concerned that the tax relief will be a lot less than the tax increases on carbon emissions, but with Cap and Trade there is zero relief. Secondly, taxes collected by our government are still our money, generally used for the benefit of citizens. Taxes are often not well spent, but that is a separate issue.
Some method of compelling us to reduce our carbon footprint is inevitable and with every change there are winners and losers. We have a choice. With Cap and Trade the corporate sector will be the winners and the rest of us the losers. With taxing of pollution and tax relief on income, some of us will win and some of us will loose but much less than with Cap and Trade. I am not against businesses making money, but there are many ways to make money providing goods and services that are of value to us. Also, Cap and Trade will hurt the bottom line of all businesses possibly stifling the recovery. With tax shifting and the increased investment in the green economy that it will encourage, our economy will be strengthened.
Fred Twilley
PROROGATION OF PARLIAMENT
I would like to thank the organizers of this rally for the opportunity to speak. It is encouraging to see how many people have come out to support this protest. This is an important activity in a democracy for citizens to speak to government between elections. Recent poles suggest many Canadians are as upset by prorogation as we are.
The government needs to know that the disapproval of prorogation comes from a broad representation of the Canadian public and political parties. The reasons that we are here today is that prorogation is wrong for Canada at this time and it is in effect contempt of Parliament We must set aside what we believe are the motives for this political tactic and focus on why it is bad for all Canadians. It is the act of prorogation more than the reasons behind it that is doing the harm. This move delays action on many issues critical to Canadians including the economy, the environment, justice, and how we behave internationally i.e. the detainee issue. We must move expediently on economic, environmental and justice issues. We have to address the detainee issue, acknowledge our mistakes and take measures to prevent reoccurrences and hopefully regain the respect of the world community.
As the world’s economies continue to expand and as populations continue to grow, it is becoming clearer that we are reaching the capacity of the planet. Many believe that we are already exceeding the planets ability to absorb the impact of mankind. Consequently the urgency for the world’s governments to act carefully but with expedience is increasing. Prorogation will only delay action. Each and every one of us must be vigilante and speak out as forcefully as we can when things are so clearly wrong, as we are doing today in this rally.
Today must be a beginning for this cause. We all must keep this protest alive in the public’s awareness. All us must make this part of our daily communication, in letters to editors, in e-mails to members of parliament, etc.. We must remember this at the next election. Thank you all for your participation.
Fred Twilley
The government needs to know that the disapproval of prorogation comes from a broad representation of the Canadian public and political parties. The reasons that we are here today is that prorogation is wrong for Canada at this time and it is in effect contempt of Parliament We must set aside what we believe are the motives for this political tactic and focus on why it is bad for all Canadians. It is the act of prorogation more than the reasons behind it that is doing the harm. This move delays action on many issues critical to Canadians including the economy, the environment, justice, and how we behave internationally i.e. the detainee issue. We must move expediently on economic, environmental and justice issues. We have to address the detainee issue, acknowledge our mistakes and take measures to prevent reoccurrences and hopefully regain the respect of the world community.
As the world’s economies continue to expand and as populations continue to grow, it is becoming clearer that we are reaching the capacity of the planet. Many believe that we are already exceeding the planets ability to absorb the impact of mankind. Consequently the urgency for the world’s governments to act carefully but with expedience is increasing. Prorogation will only delay action. Each and every one of us must be vigilante and speak out as forcefully as we can when things are so clearly wrong, as we are doing today in this rally.
Today must be a beginning for this cause. We all must keep this protest alive in the public’s awareness. All us must make this part of our daily communication, in letters to editors, in e-mails to members of parliament, etc.. We must remember this at the next election. Thank you all for your participation.
Fred Twilley
Sunday, September 13, 2009
Living in the “Post Expansion Age”
Man’s ability to predict outcomes, especially for the economy, the weather or environmental change, has been seriously brought into question. Studies predicting one effect are often followed by other studies predicting almost the opposite. We have to step back and look at the source of studies for potential bias, the quality of them, the numbers on each side of the issue, the evolution of opinions, and use our own minds. Climate change is now accepted by most researchers, the only question is how fast is it happening and how far it will go. Successive studies generally suggest faster rates of change. Greenhouse gasses are almost universally accepted as to contributing to climate change, only the extent of their effect is disputed. The activities on mankind are a major contributor to greenhouse gases. The world population is growing fast and will continue to without a major natural disaster, war or lethal pandemic. The planet is not growing! Simple logic tells us that at some point we will reach the limits of our earth and the “Post Expansion Age” will begin.
There is some dispute as to when this age will start. Some say we are already there, some say it will not happen this century, but it most certainly will happen. Our planet has gone through many temperature cycles. At first, temperatures were too hot for water to exist as a liquid. At one time, all land was covered by ice. Since then their have been many swings back and forth, trending over time to be less severe. Presently we are in the warming phase of the cycle. Mankind is giving this swing a strong push, driving this cycle far further and much faster than it would have gone. We are now getting a taste of what is to come in our recent severe and unpredictable weather conditions. Changes are too fast for many life forms to adapt or migrate to suitable climates.
However the dominant issue on peoples’ minds is the economy. Prevailing opinion is that we cannot have a healthy economy without growth or expansion. Our monetary system demands it. Simple logic tells us that eventually we will have to find a way. Continuously increasing consumption of resources can only lead to exceeding the planet’s environmental capacity. If we go too far before we realize it, we may have to quickly change to a shrinking economy. Where this tipping point occurs is hotly debated. Some opinions are that we have already past it.
Regardless where this limit is there are some measures we can take to give us more time to learn how to solve our problems. Obviously reduce, reuse, recycle, and restore is a start. The “green economy” which actually reduces resource consumption will buy us some time. We may have to focus on our needs more than or wants. Adjusting to activities that do not consume a lot of resources for enjoyment and fulfillment may eventually be necessary. Eventually we will have to find a way to deal with the growth of our population.
Solving these problems may seam insurmountable, but I have faith in mankind’s ingenuity to accomplish this. The sooner we get started the easier it will be and the less human suffering will result. We will have to find a way to do the impossible so that we do not have to consider the unthinkable.
Fred Twilley
There is some dispute as to when this age will start. Some say we are already there, some say it will not happen this century, but it most certainly will happen. Our planet has gone through many temperature cycles. At first, temperatures were too hot for water to exist as a liquid. At one time, all land was covered by ice. Since then their have been many swings back and forth, trending over time to be less severe. Presently we are in the warming phase of the cycle. Mankind is giving this swing a strong push, driving this cycle far further and much faster than it would have gone. We are now getting a taste of what is to come in our recent severe and unpredictable weather conditions. Changes are too fast for many life forms to adapt or migrate to suitable climates.
However the dominant issue on peoples’ minds is the economy. Prevailing opinion is that we cannot have a healthy economy without growth or expansion. Our monetary system demands it. Simple logic tells us that eventually we will have to find a way. Continuously increasing consumption of resources can only lead to exceeding the planet’s environmental capacity. If we go too far before we realize it, we may have to quickly change to a shrinking economy. Where this tipping point occurs is hotly debated. Some opinions are that we have already past it.
Regardless where this limit is there are some measures we can take to give us more time to learn how to solve our problems. Obviously reduce, reuse, recycle, and restore is a start. The “green economy” which actually reduces resource consumption will buy us some time. We may have to focus on our needs more than or wants. Adjusting to activities that do not consume a lot of resources for enjoyment and fulfillment may eventually be necessary. Eventually we will have to find a way to deal with the growth of our population.
Solving these problems may seam insurmountable, but I have faith in mankind’s ingenuity to accomplish this. The sooner we get started the easier it will be and the less human suffering will result. We will have to find a way to do the impossible so that we do not have to consider the unthinkable.
Fred Twilley
Friday, August 21, 2009
What Should We Learn From The Ontario Blackout of 2003.
The electricity blackout of 2003 was a reminder of how dependent we are on technology and how vulnerable we are to serious consequences of technology failures. Although advancements in technology have positive effects on our lives, we must include their possible failure in our emergency planning as we do for floods, fires, pandemics et cetera.
How do we mitigate the consequences of power failures? Making sure that we have battery operated lighting and other equipment, independent generators, and water and food supplies not requiring power to access or prepare, are obvious examples.
Although conservation efforts may not prevent an outage they would reduce the probability of one in part by reducing the load on transmission lines. More efficient appliances would also lessen demands on limited generators and fuel supplies during a blackout.
By building green generation capacity locally and linking it to essential services so that they could function off-grid would reduce the impact of a power failure. The added insurance of local power generation, especially during emergency situations, would make these electrical plants more economically attractive. More sources of power generation may help improve the operation of the electrical grid and reduce the risk of a system failure.
These factors provide us with additional reasons for developing green energy projects in addition to;
-They can stimulate the economy and reduce our carbon footprint.
-They would give back savings to mitigate the debt loads associated with stimulus spending.
-By helping to control utility costs they would contribute to keeping our local businesses competitive.-They would be one step in learning to live in the “Post Expansion Age”.
Fred Twilley
How do we mitigate the consequences of power failures? Making sure that we have battery operated lighting and other equipment, independent generators, and water and food supplies not requiring power to access or prepare, are obvious examples.
Although conservation efforts may not prevent an outage they would reduce the probability of one in part by reducing the load on transmission lines. More efficient appliances would also lessen demands on limited generators and fuel supplies during a blackout.
By building green generation capacity locally and linking it to essential services so that they could function off-grid would reduce the impact of a power failure. The added insurance of local power generation, especially during emergency situations, would make these electrical plants more economically attractive. More sources of power generation may help improve the operation of the electrical grid and reduce the risk of a system failure.
These factors provide us with additional reasons for developing green energy projects in addition to;
-They can stimulate the economy and reduce our carbon footprint.
-They would give back savings to mitigate the debt loads associated with stimulus spending.
-By helping to control utility costs they would contribute to keeping our local businesses competitive.-They would be one step in learning to live in the “Post Expansion Age”.
Fred Twilley
Friday, August 14, 2009
About Your Green Party Candidate
On June 11, 2009 I was chosen to be the Green Party candidate for the Sudbury riding. This is a privilege and a responsibility that I will work hard to fulfill. In this introduction I hope to illustrate why I am a good choice for this important job.
I was born in 1945, raised and educated in Toronto. After a Bachelor of Applied Science degree in Geology, I earned a Masters of Business Administration from the University of Toronto became a Professional engineer in 1972. After moving to Sudbury in 1970, I worked for Falconbridge Ltd (now Xstrata Ltd) until 1999 and have since done contract work for Falconbridge and First Nickel. Geology has taught me a lot about our planet’s long term environmental evolution and the potential consequences of humanity’s influence on its finite biosphere. Business education has equipped me with enough understanding to state with conviction that we can have a healthy economy and live within the environmental capacity of the earth.
Having been raised by parents that survived the depression, I have always been thrifty and practiced reduce, reuse, restore and recycle when that option became available.
In my home life and career in geology my adherence to these principles often put me at odds whith others. In every decision of significance every day I try to think of the true costs of my choices and how to minimize them. It is part of my inner nature. I often try to convey my thinking to others, and occasionally learn that it is not appreciated.
As a young person I readily communicated with friends and strangers in almost all social environments. Over many years I learned to speak in front of large groups of people and communicate and listen effectively. In debates and with media I can handle tough questions. This is largely due to the comprehensive well thought out policies and information available from the Green Party. Through my volunteering for the Red Cross, Restorative Justice, and Victims Crisis Assistance and Referral Service, I have gained an invaluable appreciation for the numbers of people in need and some understanding of their needs.
The problems we face will require combined knowledge and intellect of many people. Although I am very proud of my education and experience, I recognize that I am only one member of a like minded group that needs to work together as a team to bring about the necessary changes. There is certainly a wide range of opinion of when and how much change is needed. There is very little dispute that big changes will eventually be necessary. The sooner we start these changes the less detrimental the consequences will be. I invite you all to join the team.
Yours sincerely,
Fred Twilley.
I was born in 1945, raised and educated in Toronto. After a Bachelor of Applied Science degree in Geology, I earned a Masters of Business Administration from the University of Toronto became a Professional engineer in 1972. After moving to Sudbury in 1970, I worked for Falconbridge Ltd (now Xstrata Ltd) until 1999 and have since done contract work for Falconbridge and First Nickel. Geology has taught me a lot about our planet’s long term environmental evolution and the potential consequences of humanity’s influence on its finite biosphere. Business education has equipped me with enough understanding to state with conviction that we can have a healthy economy and live within the environmental capacity of the earth.
Having been raised by parents that survived the depression, I have always been thrifty and practiced reduce, reuse, restore and recycle when that option became available.
In my home life and career in geology my adherence to these principles often put me at odds whith others. In every decision of significance every day I try to think of the true costs of my choices and how to minimize them. It is part of my inner nature. I often try to convey my thinking to others, and occasionally learn that it is not appreciated.
As a young person I readily communicated with friends and strangers in almost all social environments. Over many years I learned to speak in front of large groups of people and communicate and listen effectively. In debates and with media I can handle tough questions. This is largely due to the comprehensive well thought out policies and information available from the Green Party. Through my volunteering for the Red Cross, Restorative Justice, and Victims Crisis Assistance and Referral Service, I have gained an invaluable appreciation for the numbers of people in need and some understanding of their needs.
The problems we face will require combined knowledge and intellect of many people. Although I am very proud of my education and experience, I recognize that I am only one member of a like minded group that needs to work together as a team to bring about the necessary changes. There is certainly a wide range of opinion of when and how much change is needed. There is very little dispute that big changes will eventually be necessary. The sooner we start these changes the less detrimental the consequences will be. I invite you all to join the team.
Yours sincerely,
Fred Twilley.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
