I'm always amused when you take agreement on completely obvious points nobody would ever deny and recast those as you "getting me there" and "take that victory". I've been completely clear throughout that other global countries are likely to increase their energy usage. My claim has never been that by reducing Canadian consumption via higher prices is going to magically offset global demand. Your "victory" is utterly empty.

This is basically what happened with the tar sands. If you care, as you suggest, about using up the lowest GHG/barrel reserves as a way to reduce emissions, then the tar sands aren't the spot on the planet you should maximally use. Check the far right bars here for instance. It is because of price increases that much of the Canadian oil sands became economically viable place to drill. Not all tar sands and not all Shale is the same, but broadly speaking there isn't some massive global benefit by shifting the composition of the words oil consumption to be more Canadian. This is sort of a secondary effect at best. And with wide investment, likely to continue in Shale already, the idea that we are inducing efficiencies in the sometimes-better-sometimes-worse Shale for the future is a tertiary effect at best.

The primary effect if Canada, say, doubled or tripled its output over the next 20 years is going to be increased pressure on prices which puts a downward relative pressure on consumption. If we open the taps wide up, it is nonsense to think that the effect on consumption is either zero or actually increases consumption because of the types of tertiary effects you mention. And as I've said (but don't think you have internalized) I'm not even necessarily against more Canadian exports via pipelines, despite these effects, I just think that this should not be our primary and first plan to combat global warming. We should be ****ing ferocious and global leaders if we are going to pour a glut of oil on the world in the middle of a global crisis from burning too much oil.

I have an actual question for lozen as a builder, but it also loosely connects into the conversation here so others might be interest. The Liberals have been work shopping an idea. Basically, the idea is to require an energy audit of some type when you sell your house. Basically a building inspection, but focused on how green your house is. So when you go to MLS you see the price and the square footage etc but are required by law to also show the energy score. That's it. So the type of effect this might have is that people will be interested in buying houses that have a better score and this is now front of mind as opposed to maybe something that comes up if the buyer chooses to do an inspection. Consequently, new builders or retrofitters might want to put more effort into the types of things that give a better score. Now there is no detailed text of this plan just yet, its all still vague, but it is interesting for sure. There is an obvious bureaucratic cost to this as seller (or maybe the government?) has to pay for all these audits, but maybe it encourages more green behaviour. But I'm not a builder, so what do you think?

New polling showing Poilievre still the massive front runner, 41% to Charest's 10 and McKay's 9. WAAF.

I have enough trees on my property that they offset.

You should stop always trying connect Justin flaws to conservatism failure .
It won’t solve anything .
Put your house in order first cause clearly extreme conservatism (anti tax , anti science , anti media , pro religion ,anti compromise , etc) will never succeed.
That is why it’s called extreme , they are far away from being a majority .

Fwiw
Maybe Justin isn’t isn’t full 100% pro climate but is certainly more so than hard conservatism , and that is why conservatism have big problems .
Justin try to compromise , being pragmatic , so is not 100% against oil , as he should be .

Funny trudeau gets criticized tho for not being hardcore anti oil by conservatism .
Again a proof that Justin will never be accepted as being ok if he just do not abide to extreme conservatism by being 100% full oil adept .
(Btw some leftist are as bad as the right on this issue trying to ban oil at 100%, fortunately they are kept under control ) .
It probably shows Justin isn’t doing such a bad job when he gets criticized by both sides .
Especially when both sides are led by idiots (truck convoy or 100% anti oil movement ) .

Again pure conservatism think people do not understand them while claiming liberty at every turn .
Not realizing liberty is to be different too and have to accept different views by compromising and making the best of both world …..
Result ? -> keep trying to find a leader at every election failure I suppose,
instead of seeing the big picture and stop blaming others leaders with inconsequential arguments .
Maybe conservatism will find a Sith Lord to subjugate people one day for success??

The Center getting weaker and weaker because idiots extremist on both sides have too loud a voice and aren’t ashamed anymore to pass for utterly idiots in public space .
They wear it as a badge of honour.
Hopefully the return of cooler heads will prevail eventually.

It could be done as easily with a blower test that runs about $500. This measures the Air Changes Per Hour. The last bunch of houses my number was about 2.5 . The average is 4 . I am not sure if your familiar with the term Passive House. They have to be under .6

I have two builds that I am going top do with a goal of under 1.0

It really is a good idea .

The overall problem is for me to get from 2.5 to under 1 I am spending $5000 extra. I recently sold a home to a younger couple and I was impressed with how much research they had done on Energy Efficiency. The average buyer only cares about nice hardwood and a gorgeous kitchen and ensuite

So you two can continue to re-hash the same argument, in longer and longer diatribes, or you can just put a pin in the discussion and move onto something else. He's never going to drop the subject if you keep responding, so it's all up to you Uke.

Reality is Mckay probably is the best candidate so they will not select him. The Conservatives have no chance with Pierre so he will probably be the pick

It's a good idea, but not if it's mandated: instead it should be advertised not as "how green your house is", but rather "How much money will you save by living here".

The government should never pay for the audits, shouldn't even subsidize them: programs like this are perfect for corruption - they're implemented with the best intentions and never have the proper oversight in place. The fact that you'd be adjacent to the construction industry means there's plenty of bad actors out there who'd gladly rob the taxpayer blind. Instead, make it something that Real Estate agencies can advertise as offering: make them earn that commission.

But the government subsidized everyone changing their lightbulbs to LED. Which meant we removed all the compacts that contained mercury and regular bulbs. The contract went to a Ontario company for all of Canada . When the best solution was to just allow a rebate on the purchase of the bulbs or fixtures


As well I forgot to mention all these builders that build 250 houses a year will be against it.


All I know My utility bill was the highest ever and filling up my truck is wow. Some gas stations used to have $100 max pre authorization they now have $200.

My goodness, if Trump was Poilievre, we would be all hearing about how low energy Charest is. But come on: https://twitter.com/JeanCharest_/sta...yRnzZgJiiPYDHA

This is the guy who is supposed to save the conservatives from the excess of the populist right? Glad he decided to uh start a social media account and record his first ever video. So compelling. #builttowin

You seem to be so focused on the leadership run of the Conservatives. Yes he is not as high energy as Trump. Ill give Trudeau credit he is an exceptional speaker a true snake oil salesman.

Ill give Charest a chance I have never voted for a leader or been a member of a party so no vote on who the leader is. I am not sure how he is seen in Quebec

Reality is and I have said this over and over the conservatives can not win with Pierre and I know very little about Lillian Lewis . I saw Patrick Brown is running and it looks like he may due for a large payout from CTV news on a story they admitted was false.

So the conservatives cant win with Pierre and to stupid to realize it and the Liberals will never win a majority with Trudeau .

I usually follow the leadership elections fairly closely and have voted in several for multiple parties. It is fairly helpful to understand the kinds of divisions that exist within a party, and in some ways are more relevant than actually the big national elections where everything gets sort of homogenized in the goal to win the federal election.

Interesting column on giving JT advice . Opinion Piece of course

https://www.msn.com/en-ca/news/canad...?ocid=msedgntp

minority government ? Great !
Can’t ask for better -> assure compromise and ruling of a nation for everyone and not just a fringe of its electorate ….

Charest :
Terrible handle of student crisis in 2012 ( reminiscent of jt reaction to the trucker convoy)
After many years , his government capitulate for a commision about political corruption and it did a lot of good , he got lucky it did not go much further personally and many investigation got close for delaying too much and he had years to clean his « political house ».
But innocent till prove guilty so, but it was very fishy .

There is so many bad stuff I just can’t enumerated them all ,
just to say by a vast majority of Quebecker his. Inside red the worst prime minister since Duplessis in 1940-50.

Now what’s good for Québec always been perceive bad for Canada and vice versa .
So maybe his a good fit for the ROC , shrug .

Weak chin - he has no chance.

I am just curious why you chose to compare Canada to Germany and not another country?

I asked a simple question, you replied smuggly and were wrong.



The energy shortage was happening before the Ukraine crises started it just expedited it and showed how fragile energy markets currently are. Whether it's because of the current crises or not doesn't matter, they still want to increase production and you don't. Why?






Lol! So nothing that's 100% can be called reliable? What happened in Texas was preventable and we know this because fossil fuels handle weather and temperatures much worse all the time so don't blame fossil fuels.

Hawaii and Arizona still get most of there energy from fossil fuels


Yes, thank you for making my point for me. It's perfectly acceptable to call green energy unreliables and fossil fuels reliables.

Because YOU ****ing asked me to compare Canada to Germany. You brought it up. I said nothing about Germany until you did.

Well since, unsurprisingly but disappointingly, Shifty isn't interesting in any real discussion, I'll just respond to this:

Wrong about what?

Also, you might want to look up smug and sarcastic in the dictionary, for future reference.

What? I posted a link about Germany's economy minister saying they need Russian fossil fuels and a ban would effect social cohesion.

You replied:

I'm just not sure why replying to an article about high energy prices effecting social cohesion you would say that. Out of all the European countries why pick Germany to compare to Canada?

Not surprising. This is typically what happens when green zealots run out of talking points.

Comparing us to many European countries is kind of crazy. Canada is bigger than Europe itself let alone one country. Its easier to focus on trains and bikes in these countries.

I just do not see charging stations littering the Yukon and NWT .

Bottom line were trying to cut off Energy exports to destroy Russia's economy. Isn't that the strategy of Some provinces towards Alberta and Saskatchewan. I keep hearing about green jobs but good luck finding any

Right. YOU started talking about Germany. Specifically you said this rather stupid point about them: "Maybe they should just downsize their homes and drive less, like Canadians are doing". So I responded to YOU bringing up Germany by correctly pointing out that Europeans broadly are better than Canadians on these metrics.

You then bring up Germany again:
And again:
I literally haven't even said the word Germany yet. I only spoke broadly about Europeans from YOUR prompts about Germany.

But hilariously, you got so ****ing confused about your spamming of Germany everywhere that somehow you twisted yourself into believe that it was me, not YOU, who was bring up Germany.
My goodness.

Canada is indeed large and sparse, but most of its population still lives in cities. Nobody is realistically talking about charging stations littering the NWT, but there is a LOT of slack to be able to reduce our emissions where most of the population lives. So focus on cutting emissions in Calgary, not Yellowknife.