[Drysnyaty]

Originally posted by Asher
You clearly know that the transcanada trains are already operating at capacity. Right? No? Funny, all I can see is a steady decline in their use...

Where the hell do you get that? Source that, or stop lying. Source your claims and I'll source mine...

You seem to think Canada lives only in a straight horizontal line. A lot do, but not all. It does doesn't it? The US border with Canada is essentially horizontal last time I looked and given about 75% of the Canadian pop lives within a mere 150kms of the US border, well looks like I'm kinda right there...

Not sure you comprehend the meaning of "density".
Calgary: 1,252.3 people per km^2.
London: 4,761 people per km^2 Try Toronto Vs London instead. And besides, are you telling me that 1,252.3 per km^2 is not enough to have a decent public transport system?

Which is the main point I'm trying to make - most of Canada's population is sufficiently concentrated to have efficient local transport networks, but it doesn't because it's crap.

Define "half of that of the UK", and again do research as to the available infrastructure. Also, for the 3rd time, source your "UK is doing twice what Kyoto wants" stuff. 12.5% to 6%. If you're this ignorant about Canada's obligations to Kyoto, imagine how ignorant the average Canadian must be and then see why your country refuses even to attempt the modest targets it agreed to. Look it up yourself - you clearly need the education...

[tousuarshatly]

Freight in Canada is being hauled by more and more trucks every year. The reason for that is because its faster.
In todays market, poeple need their products faster and faster because companies are not into keeping big inventory. Inventory costs space and money.

We only have 2 rail frate companies in Canada, CP and CN. CP works with a trucking company named Fastfrate and CN deals with the other truck companies. Since there are only 2 train companies, transfers are limited, so it takes about 10 days for a skid to get from Montreal to BC. So companies like Sameday, Reimer and such buy trucks to do their own trailing from east to west and they do it in 5 days. Saving 5 days for 10$ more a skid on an LTL is a joke.

Thats why there is more and more trucking every year.

Spec.

[ZanazaKar]

Originally posted by MOBIUS
Funny, all I can see is a steady decline in their use...

Source your claims and I'll source mine... You "see" a steady decline in their use? Where do you see this? If you've got the figures infront of you, source them.

My source is from the president of CP Rail, who happens to be a family friend. And, you'll love this, he used to be an oil executive.

A quick google search will show you both CN Rail and CP Rail have surging revenues and profits. Seeing as these are the only two rail freight companies in Canada, it puts your claim that use is "declining" to shame.

You want to know why they're not being expanded? Because, as Spec says, trucking is what's making a lot of sense to most businesses. You want to know the big reason? Guess how much it costs to build a 5-6,000 km railway, and don't forget the mountains it has to go through.

Try Toronto Vs London instead. And besides, are you telling me that 1,252.3 per km^2 is not enough to have a decent public transport system? Correct. The vast majority of people live spread out in neighborhoods that are equivalent to suburbs in the US. This means that tons and tons of bus feeder routes need to feed them. Given the low density of the neighborhoods, bus service is infrequent (every half hour to every hour), and given the weather in Canada in the winter, it's unreliable and extremely uncomfortable to wait for the bus. FWIW, Calgary's LRT is the most heavily used in North America. Ridership has more than doubled since 1995. Still, the car is king for reasons I've outlined -- most people can't live near the trains without having to deal with the busses.

It's a different scenario compared to densely populated UK cities. Or even to cities like Toronto, which are sufficiently densely populated (which is why I actually use public transit in Toronto, and I've actually said the system is decent here). Go outside Toronto proper and the situation sucks again. There are far more cities like Calgary in terms of mass transit than Toronto in Canada, which was the whole point.

12.5% to 6%. If you're this ignorant about Canada's obligations to Kyoto, imagine how ignorant the average Canadian must be and then see why your country refuses even to attempt the modest targets it agreed to. Look it up yourself - you clearly need the education... It's 12.5% to 6% below 1990 levels. In terms of today's numbers, it's 30+% for Canada to nil needed for the UK. That's what you don't seem to comprehend. For various reasons, the UK's levels were already dropping after 1990 while Canada's were rapidly increasing. I'm happy to discuss the basics of Canada's economy and demographics, but I'm not sure you'd listen anyway. The point is, the UK can preserve the status quo and meet Kyoto, and in Canada you're asking for a full one third of all greenhouse gas emissions to be completely obliterated within a few years.

To any intelligent person, that's unreasonable and absurd.

[Sxscdergh]

.

[Machater]

Originally posted by Arrian




Yeah, ok Moby.

I'll leave you to Asher, since he certainly knows more about Canada's rail & trucking situation than I (and, quite obviously, you) do.

-Arrian I'm still grinning about the Thunder Bay being the heart of Canada and all that. Yes, it's rather central, but the heart isn't exactly central either. Funny way to describe it.

Yes, it's a railway hub like many other cities. But its passenger train service was discontinued 17 years ago. The heart of Canada!

Thunder Bay will always been ingrained in my memory as the place where the cops pulled me over thinking I was smuggling drugs. Took out everything in my (packed) car that I was moving my **** with, then left it.

[masteryxisman]

The main reason behind Canada becoming the new glove puppet of the US' criminal attempts to derail any sort of tangible action on Climate Change is the rampant destruction of your hinterland for oil shales, that alone has massively boosted your carbon footprint.

Still, your country is so backward that progress for you will be being able to navigate the Northwest passage and think that that's a good thing...

[nerrttrw]

Yep, Canadian logic: Uproot a perfectly good renewable resource (not to mention carbon sink) to belch forth vast amounts of CO2 into the earth's atmosphere with one of the most energy intensive and polluting forms of hydrocarbon precisely at a time when the exact opposite needs to be done...!

[KinicsBonee]

You'll also be thrilled to know that the oil companies spend a LOT of money "reclaiming" the land after the oil is harvested.

Here's an example of what it looks like afterwards: http://picasaweb.google.com/rajan74/...28397789500946

If you knew what it looked like before (which you clearly don't), you'll see it's identical in ecology.

[ticskebasse]

Boreal Forests the size of Florida? Seriously?

How the hell can you say "Bollocks to your bullshit propaganda" while you quote **** like that RIGHT above it? Have you no shame? You even quote it from an advocacy group/hippy organization, and its wording should set off big alarms about it being propaganda.

[BeaseHoca]

Originally posted by Wezil
The immorality of China’s coal policy is breathtaking (literally) — Part I
Yes, America’s climate policy is immoral. But that doesn’t make China’s rapacious coal plant building moral. The N.Y. Times has published the sobering numbers, which bear repeating:

The country built 114,000 megawatts of fossil-fuel-based generating capacity last year alone, almost all coal-fired, and is on course to complete 95,000 megawatts more this year.

For comparison, Britain has 75,000 megawatts in operation, built over a span of decades.

China is now the main reason the world is recarbonizing — the carbon content of the average unit of energy produced has stopped its multi-decade decline, as noted. Yes, America is still responsible for a great deal more cumulative emissions, which is what drive concentrations, and China is doing Much of its dirty manufacturing for U.S. consumers (never said our hands were clean).

But China seems to have adopted a policy of build as many coal plants as is humanly possible until they are forced to stop — or, I suspect, until they get a deal that pays the country to shut them down (much as they have gamed the clean development mechanism under Kyoto).
.
.
.

Rest of article here: http://climateprogress.org/2007/10/3...erally-part-i/ China
Global cooling agents
Coal

[golfmenorca]

Originally posted by Whoha


China
Global cooling agents
Coal Whoha = Asher’s new boyfriend

[nermise]

Originally posted by MOBIUS
Whoha = Asher’s new boyfriend Canada is involved with the oil sands project and oil is a dirty global warming agent. As opposed to the clean and pure as the wind driven snow dirty coal burners.