Are you happy with the lower gas prices?

[Canadian Helmet]

It seems every federal election, we get to have cheaper gas for a few months. 

[GuitarStv]

No.

Cheaper gas prices come by repealing our carbon pricing.  Carbon pricing paid people money for polluting less.  It was the most powerful incentive to stop dumping carbon into our air that we've ever tried.  It gave incentive to people to use alternate methods to get around, raised the use of cycling/e-bikes/public transit.  And that appears to be the only way that we were ever going to invest in better alternatives to cars.  Now we've returned to sticking our heads in the sand and pretending that there is no problem.

It's hard to enjoy the lower gas prices when I know that they come at the cost of my child's future ability to survive on this planet.

[BrandonP]

No. Haven't owned a car in over 15 years. Even back then I didn't care when prices went up. And this was way before FIRE was on my radar.

I'm originally from the UK so prices of petrol has always seemed quite low in Canada.

It should be higher in most countries imo. Benefits outlined in GuitarStv's post.

[PharmaStache]

They've gone done about 5 cents where I live (rural MB).  I hear the city was much cheaper.  Not sure what that's all about.  Either way, the carbon cheque for $360 4 times a year I used to receive is worth more than that.

[Canadian Helmet]

They've gone done about 5 cents where I live (rural MB).  I hear the city was much cheaper.  Not sure what that's all about.  Either way, the carbon cheque for $360 4 times a year I used to receive is worth more than that.

In the last two weeks it dropped about 30 cents here in the Ottawa area.  I saw 119.9/L today.  While driving an EV.

[Freedomin5]

We’ve designed a car-light lifestyle. Don’t even own a car.

[Prairie Moustache]

Over 60% of Canadian voters voted for a tax on carbon in the 2015 election. Amazing how over a decade we managed to suddenly solve climate change by upping the price of lettuce and putting a deranged orange man in the white house.

[Canadian Helmet]

Over 60% of Canadian voters voted for a tax on carbon in the 2015 election. Amazing how over a decade we managed to suddenly solve climate change by upping the price of lettuce and putting a deranged orange man in the white house.

I voted for electoral reform in 2015.  My elderly neighbor at the time volunteered for the Liberals for the previous 35 years for one reason.  Legalization of marijuana.  We talked after the election and he honestly didn't have any other reason to volunteer for them again.  And he didn't.  The majority of the people I talked to back then said 10 years of the same government is long enough.

[Metalcat]

You sure seem to post a lot about politics.

[AJDZee]

No.

Cheaper gas prices come by repealing our carbon pricing.  Carbon pricing paid people money for polluting less.  It was the most powerful incentive to stop dumping carbon into our air that we've ever tried.  It gave incentive to people to use alternate methods to get around, raised the use of cycling/e-bikes/public transit.  And that appears to be the only way that we were ever going to invest in better alternatives to cars.  Now we've returned to sticking our heads in the sand and pretending that there is no problem.

It's hard to enjoy the lower gas prices when I know that they come at the cost of my child's future ability to survive on this planet.

Well said, I thought I was the only Canadian that actually liked the carbon tax. It's a consumption tax, what you pay is directly proportional to how much you consume. It's an efficient way to incentivize and drive behaviours. And this is coming from someone who drives a ICE car every day. I should have to pay for my pollution, and my next car will seriously consider a low carbon alternative.

That being said, if at the same time our government is giving subsidies to the oil & gas industry in AB the program seems disingenuous.

My last thought on this - purely from a climate change standpoint, I'm pretty sure the wildfires we had these last few years dwarfs the carbon output from our 40M citizens (disclaimer: I don't have a reference for this). The climate doesn't care if the CO2 came from man-made combustion or a forest fire, it has the same effect. I would like to see some innovation and resources put into preventing these fires in the first place. Simply saying 'it's out of our hands' is more head-in-the-sand mentality.

I believe Canada excludes forest fires from its carbon emissions reporting to manipulate our progress. Because of that Canada is given a failing grade from groups that monitor countries green initiative targets to the Paris Accord.

[GuitarStv]

My last thought on this - purely from a climate change standpoint, I'm pretty sure the wildfires we had these last few years dwarfs the carbon output from our 40M citizens (disclaimer: I don't have a reference for this). The climate doesn't care if the CO2 came from man-made combustion or a forest fire, it has the same effect. I would like to see some innovation and resources put into preventing these fires in the first place. Simply saying 'it's out of our hands' is more head-in-the-sand mentality.

I believe Canada excludes forest fires from its carbon emissions reporting to manipulate our progress. Because of that Canada is given a failing grade from groups that monitor countries green initiative targets to the Paris Accord.

Our bigger and bigger forest fires are being worsened by the change that we've already baked into our future by ignoring the problem for so long.  As the Earth heats up and weather patterns change, once wet forests dry out and become tinder.  To the best of my knowledge (and I have a childhood friend who is a firefighter in BC who regularly responds to forest fires), we are doing everything possible right now to mitigate those fires.  We're doing prescribed burns, we're putting firebreaks into place, and forest thinning is all happening.  From a regulatory perspective, we're changing the materials that houses are allowed to be built from.  One of the biggest hurdles is trying to get municipal, provincial, and federal government all working together . . . which is necessary for some of the changes that are needed.

[rocketpj]

I liked the carbon tax.  BC was the first jurisdiction in North America to introduced a carbon tax, and the BC Liberal Party (which was a right wing party out here) won an election on it.  Ironically, the BC NDP campaigned with the slogan 'Axe the tax', which caused them to lose my vote and my donations for several years.

As of a few days ago we have abandoned that excellent policy.  Gas companies already know what we are willing to pay, so after a few weeks they will increase the cost at the pumps up to what people were paying before.  Instead of the money going towards Canadians and Canadian policy goals, it will go towards the oil companies.

So I think axing it was a terrible idea.  I understand why it was cut, in that it exposed the complete absence of any other policy platforms in the CPC, but I still don't like it.

[Stasher]

My last thought on this - purely from a climate change standpoint, I'm pretty sure the wildfires we had these last few years dwarfs the carbon output from our 40M citizens (disclaimer: I don't have a reference for this). The climate doesn't care if the CO2 came from man-made combustion or a forest fire, it has the same effect. I would like to see some innovation and resources put into preventing these fires in the first place. Simply saying 'it's out of our hands' is more head-in-the-sand mentality.

I believe Canada excludes forest fires from its carbon emissions reporting to manipulate our progress. Because of that Canada is given a failing grade from groups that monitor countries green initiative targets to the Paris Accord.

Our bigger and bigger forest fires are being worsened by the change that we've already baked into our future by ignoring the problem for so long.  As the Earth heats up and weather patterns change, once wet forests dry out and become tinder.  To the best of my knowledge (and I have a childhood friend who is a firefighter in BC who regularly responds to forest fires), we are doing everything possible right now to mitigate those fires.  We're doing prescribed burns, we're putting firebreaks into place, and forest thinning is all happening.  From a regulatory perspective, we're changing the materials that houses are allowed to be built from.  One of the biggest hurdles is trying to get municipal, provincial, and federal government all working together . . . which is necessary for some of the changes that are needed.

Double quote ... Double Ditto ... I'm on the same page as all of this.

Bring back a carbon pricing mechanism as soon as we can, ensure the industrial emitter system and cap stays and start bringing in actual regulations that make a difference. On Vancouver Island now, almost all of our local governments have fast tracked the ban on all new buildings are not allowed to have heating systems connected to fossil fuels of any kind, this is the way.

I hope with the massive upheaval and disruption to the North American auto sector that we can break ties with US regulations and standards. Let's adopt the very fuel efficient and smaller platforms of the EU, lets continue to move away from massive trucks etc

I ride bikes the majority of time and my whole house is electric, I never noticed myself paying a carbon tax or worried about it. If and when I was paying, I felt it was my duty to do so for the change we need.

[GuitarStv]

I wouldn't be as concerned about rolling back the carbon tax/refund plan I we had anything substantial in the works to replace it with.  My concern is that the Conservatives are still at good odds to win the next election, and PP hasn't identified ANY climate related policies.  In 2025 it is unconscionable to pretend climate change is not a concern.

[AJDZee]

My concern is that the Conservatives are still at good odds to win the next election, and PP hasn't identified ANY climate related policies.

Last I checked on CPC website, their official climate change policy was "to increase innovation."
Take that, Climate Change.

[Metalcat]

I wouldn't be as concerned about rolling back the carbon tax/refund plan I we had anything substantial in the works to replace it with.  My concern is that the Conservatives are still at good odds to win the next election, and PP hasn't identified ANY climate related policies.  In 2025 it is unconscionable to pretend climate change is not a concern.

This is what my DH works on and it's not as simple as axing the tax and just not replacing it.

Most people don't realize just how aggressive the liberals have been over the past few years at cementing policies that make not replacing the carbon tax with anything incredibly difficult.

It *can* be done, but it would require a huge amount of political capital to do so, and PP doesn't have that.

From day 1, PP has been painting himself into a corner with the "axe the tax" campaign and now Carney is in the same corner. Whoever wins will be faced with a giant mutli-departmental machine that has been aggressively working on a range of options for reducing emissions and because of the caliber of the mandates in place, a new PM can't just stop them.

They can gum up the works, but they can't unilaterally alter the mandates.

PP doesn't have the political capital even within his own party to pull that off. So whoever wins will be obliged to offset the impact of repealing the carbon tax, and they'll be stuck with a heck of a lot of options that probably won't be as beneficial to the public.

But hey, that's what happens when your public has no clue how the government works.

[Stasher]

PP doesn't have the political capital even within his own party to pull that off. So whoever wins will be obliged to offset the impact of repealing the carbon tax, and they'll be stuck with a heck of a lot of options that probably won't be as beneficial to the public.

One massive glaring opportunity is what the climate rebate cheques have show on how significant and meaningful a UBI (universal basic income) would be for so many families living below the current poverty line.  (I'm a big fan of this and will continue to push for more dentalcare, pharmacare and childcare investments)

That being said I hope we see something replacing the funding shortfall from the deeply integrated systems and policy that the carbon tax revenues supported. (especially here in BC where we had our own nearly 20 year old progressive program that lead the country)

[PoutineLover]

Doesn't affect me cause I live in Quebec but disappointed that it got axed. While I understand why Carney did it, it still sucks that people are so short sighted. Climate change is my top concern (and literally affects every other issue) and ignoring it is stupid and will make everything worse.

[Canadian Helmet]

Great posts... I put the poll up because me and an acquaintance were having a good discussion about it and I thought there would be good responses here.  The last option  was a joke because during the conversation it was argued that straws were banned because they get stuck in turtles noses and not for environmental reasons.  If we wanted to save the environment then we should ban tires instead.

[scottish]

My last thought on this - purely from a climate change standpoint, I'm pretty sure the wildfires we had these last few years dwarfs the carbon output from our 40M citizens (disclaimer: I don't have a reference for this). The climate doesn't care if the CO2 came from man-made combustion or a forest fire, it has the same effect. I would like to see some innovation and resources put into preventing these fires in the first place. Simply saying 'it's out of our hands' is more head-in-the-sand mentality.

I believe Canada excludes forest fires from its carbon emissions reporting to manipulate our progress. Because of that Canada is given a failing grade from groups that monitor countries green initiative targets to the Paris Accord.

Our bigger and bigger forest fires are being worsened by the change that we've already baked into our future by ignoring the problem for so long.  As the Earth heats up and weather patterns change, once wet forests dry out and become tinder.  To the best of my knowledge (and I have a childhood friend who is a firefighter in BC who regularly responds to forest fires), we are doing everything possible right now to mitigate those fires.  We're doing prescribed burns, we're putting firebreaks into place, and forest thinning is all happening.  From a regulatory perspective, we're changing the materials that houses are allowed to be built from.  One of the biggest hurdles is trying to get municipal, provincial, and federal government all working together . . . which is necessary for some of the changes that are needed.

I think the mountain pine beetles might have had a bit of an impact as well...     the freakin' forest fires put more greenhouse gases into the air than the whole economy.

[scottish]

I wouldn't be as concerned about rolling back the carbon tax/refund plan I we had anything substantial in the works to replace it with.  My concern is that the Conservatives are still at good odds to win the next election, and PP hasn't identified ANY climate related policies.  In 2025 it is unconscionable to pretend climate change is not a concern.

This is what my DH works on and it's not as simple as axing the tax and just not replacing it.

Most people don't realize just how aggressive the liberals have been over the past few years at cementing policies that make not replacing the carbon tax with anything incredibly difficult.

It *can* be done, but it would require a huge amount of political capital to do so, and PP doesn't have that.

From day 1, PP has been painting himself into a corner with the "axe the tax" campaign and now Carney is in the same corner. Whoever wins will be faced with a giant mutli-departmental machine that has been aggressively working on a range of options for reducing emissions and because of the caliber of the mandates in place, a new PM can't just stop them.

They can gum up the works, but they can't unilaterally alter the mandates.

PP doesn't have the political capital even within his own party to pull that off. So whoever wins will be obliged to offset the impact of repealing the carbon tax, and they'll be stuck with a heck of a lot of options that probably won't be as beneficial to the public.

But hey, that's what happens when your public has no clue how the government works.

Too bad they didn't have a plan that included things like increasing electrical generation and distribution, improving availability of heat pumps and just generally providing lower carbon alternatives.    Or did they?

[Metalcat]

I wouldn't be as concerned about rolling back the carbon tax/refund plan I we had anything substantial in the works to replace it with.  My concern is that the Conservatives are still at good odds to win the next election, and PP hasn't identified ANY climate related policies.  In 2025 it is unconscionable to pretend climate change is not a concern.

This is what my DH works on and it's not as simple as axing the tax and just not replacing it.

Most people don't realize just how aggressive the liberals have been over the past few years at cementing policies that make not replacing the carbon tax with anything incredibly difficult.

It *can* be done, but it would require a huge amount of political capital to do so, and PP doesn't have that.

From day 1, PP has been painting himself into a corner with the "axe the tax" campaign and now Carney is in the same corner. Whoever wins will be faced with a giant mutli-departmental machine that has been aggressively working on a range of options for reducing emissions and because of the caliber of the mandates in place, a new PM can't just stop them.

They can gum up the works, but they can't unilaterally alter the mandates.

PP doesn't have the political capital even within his own party to pull that off. So whoever wins will be obliged to offset the impact of repealing the carbon tax, and they'll be stuck with a heck of a lot of options that probably won't be as beneficial to the public.

But hey, that's what happens when your public has no clue how the government works.

Too bad they didn't have a plan that included things like increasing electrical generation and distribution, improving availability of heat pumps and just generally providing lower carbon alternatives.    Or did they?

A lot of this is what they're developing, plus it requires cooperation of the provinces for a lot of these things. Electrical generation and distribution is a massive part of what DH consults on.

Remember, most federal policies are just money movement, actual things being done are largely provincial. This is huge, multi department, multi-levels of government policy.

The mandates need to be rock solid for anything to actually happen.

[rocketpj]

I wouldn't be as concerned about rolling back the carbon tax/refund plan I we had anything substantial in the works to replace it with.  My concern is that the Conservatives are still at good odds to win the next election, and PP hasn't identified ANY climate related policies.  In 2025 it is unconscionable to pretend climate change is not a concern.

This is what my DH works on and it's not as simple as axing the tax and just not replacing it.

Most people don't realize just how aggressive the liberals have been over the past few years at cementing policies that make not replacing the carbon tax with anything incredibly difficult.

It *can* be done, but it would require a huge amount of political capital to do so, and PP doesn't have that.

From day 1, PP has been painting himself into a corner with the "axe the tax" campaign and now Carney is in the same corner. Whoever wins will be faced with a giant mutli-departmental machine that has been aggressively working on a range of options for reducing emissions and because of the caliber of the mandates in place, a new PM can't just stop them.

They can gum up the works, but they can't unilaterally alter the mandates.

PP doesn't have the political capital even within his own party to pull that off. So whoever wins will be obliged to offset the impact of repealing the carbon tax, and they'll be stuck with a heck of a lot of options that probably won't be as beneficial to the public.

But hey, that's what happens when your public has no clue how the government works.

Too bad they didn't have a plan that included things like increasing electrical generation and distribution, improving availability of heat pumps and just generally providing lower carbon alternatives.    Or did they?

They did.  I spent some time over the last year looking at/evaluating all the various grants for solar power/battery backups for our house and other property.  The grants were incredible (here in BC), I just ran into 'first replace the roof' as an issue, so had to put it off.

There are still significant grants to install heat pumps, no idea if they will survive the election.  I certainly hope so.

[Mighty Eyebrows]

I think the mountain pine beetles might have had a bit of an impact as well...     the freakin' forest fires put more greenhouse gases into the air than the whole economy.

Not quite sure what your point is here. I lived and worked in central BC, surrounded by dying pine-forests during the height of the beetle epidemic. And, yes, I was part of the forest industry at the time.

The reason we had a pine beetle epidemic was due to climate change. Our winters don't get cold enough to kill them any more. BC has been feeling the effects climate change for quite a while. Fires are just the next stage. More to come. Entire eco-regions will drastically change over the next 50 years.

Maybe you know this already, but I wanted to spell it out explicitly.

[scottish]

I think the mountain pine beetles might have had a bit of an impact as well...     the freakin' forest fires put more greenhouse gases into the air than the whole economy.

Not quite sure what your point is here. I lived and worked in central BC, surrounded by dying pine-forests during the height of the beetle epidemic. And, yes, I was part of the forest industry at the time.

The reason we had a pine beetle epidemic was due to climate change. Our winters don't get cold enough to kill them any more. BC has been feeling the effects climate change for quite a while. Fires are just the next stage. More to come. Entire eco-regions will drastically change over the next 50 years.

Maybe you know this already, but I wanted to spell it out explicitly.

I'm unsure that climate change was the only factor in the pine beetle epidemic.

What's your opinion?   Was the mountain pine beetle outbreak affected by other things besides the warm winters 15 years ago - such as reduced diversity due to replanting policies?    Or was it really the warm winters that did it?

[Mighty Eyebrows]

I'm unsure that climate change was the only factor in the pine beetle epidemic.

What's your opinion?   Was the mountain pine beetle outbreak affected by other things besides the warm winters 15 years ago - such as reduced diversity due to replanting policies?    Or was it really the warm winters that did it?

Definitely the warm winters. Growing up, we would regularly have over a week of -40C. My coldest memory is -50C. Now, that is unheard of through most of the southern half of the province.

Most of the forests that were killed predate replanting. Also, interior lodgepole pine is generally not replanted, it regrows actively in the logging blocks if the ground is disturbed at all. It is a pioneer species and quickly grows even-aged stands.

Suppression of forest fires has had some impact, too, where fire would have made more of a patchwork landscape of ages and species. But the pine beetle only grows out of control if the cold doesn't keep them in check.

[Canadian Helmet]

I think the mountain pine beetles might have had a bit of an impact as well...     the freakin' forest fires put more greenhouse gases into the air than the whole economy.

Not quite sure what your point is here. I lived and worked in central BC, surrounded by dying pine-forests during the height of the beetle epidemic. And, yes, I was part of the forest industry at the time.

The reason we had a pine beetle epidemic was due to climate change. Our winters don't get cold enough to kill them any more. BC has been feeling the effects climate change for quite a while. Fires are just the next stage. More to come. Entire eco-regions will drastically change over the next 50 years.

Maybe you know this already, but I wanted to spell it out explicitly.

I'm unsure that climate change was the only factor in the pine beetle epidemic.

What's your opinion?   Was the mountain pine beetle outbreak affected by other things besides the warm winters 15 years ago - such as reduced diversity due to replanting policies?    Or was it really the warm winters that did it?

The pine beetle has been an issue for at least 25 to 30 years now.  Back in my tree planting days in the early 2000's that was an issue the industry had plans to combat.   I remember being very skeptical of their success.  Even back then they were attributing it to the warmer winters, although they also believed if we don't stop producing Co2 by 2015 we will hit at Co2 tipping point and Florida will be under water.

[GuitarStv]

I don't know specifics as they relate to the pine beetle.  Climate change as it relates to bugs is really significant though, and not subtle.  Maybe it's just because I worked in pest control for a while, but I keep hearing stories about how things have changed and are changing.  Three off the top of my head:

Warmer winters have made a crazy change here in Ontario regarding the spread of ticks.  10 - 15 years ago I would regularly go for walks in the woods with my dog and we would never see ticks on either of us.  Winter got cold enough for long enough to kill off the little bastards.  But today, every single time that I go for a walk with my dog on exactly the same paths as I used to I now find ticks crawling on my dog and me.  We need to keep the dog on anti-tick medication year round.  Provincially, lyme disease and other tick-borne illnesses that were never an issue in the past are on the rise.  This is occurring further and further north as well.

Another very visible one here is the box tree moth.  Boxwood shrubs have been grown in Ontario commercially and extensively used in landscaping for 100 years.  Now the box tree moth has been wiping out boxwood all through southern Ontario.  People are being advised just not to plant boxwood any more, as there doesn't seem to be a good way of controlling this pest now that colder winters aren't capable of killing it off.

Termites are now a serious problem in Toronto.  30 years ago termites were pretty rare and an infestation would maybe impact a single house on a street.  Now, calls that cover whole neighbourhoods are common.  There has been a steady uptick, year over year as the weather has gradually warmed and become wetter.

[Canadian Helmet]

I just had a forester at my place on the weekend, to get a property tax break.  He was informing me to not even bother letting ash trees grow and that i should cut them down when they are young so they don't take away opportunities for other trees that wont attract the ash borer.  Sounds like they have just given up at this point.

[SunnyDays]

I just had a forester at my place on the weekend, to get a property tax break.  He was informing me to not even bother letting ash trees grow and that i should cut them down when they are young so they don't take away opportunities for other trees that wont attract the ash borer.  Sounds like they have just given up at this point.

Great.  I just planted two Manchurian Ashes last year.

[Canadian Helmet]

I just had a forester at my place on the weekend, to get a property tax break.  He was informing me to not even bother letting ash trees grow and that i should cut them down when they are young so they don't take away opportunities for other trees that wont attract the ash borer.  Sounds like they have just given up at this point.

Great.  I just planted two Manchurian Ashes last year.

Those might be good..  I am no tree expert. The Ash he was pointing out to me were the ones to cut down.  We later found Black Ash and he told me they were on the endangered list and to not cut them down.  And if I were to find Butternut, also on the endangered list, that even to cut down a dead one, I would need to get governmental approval. 

[Mighty Eyebrows]

The pine beetle has been an issue for at least 25 to 30 years now.  Back in my tree planting days in the early 2000's that was an issue the industry had plans to combat.   I remember being very skeptical of their success.

I was in the industry in the early 2000s and I don't remember anyone having any kind of coherent "plans to combat" the beetle epidemic. Folks tried experimenting where they could but every winter we would just hope for cold.

I remember back to the time where people would be hired to fall and burn small patches of beetle pine while the larva were still dormant (like putting out a spot-fire) thinking that it could be kept at bay. Then the massive waves started. I shudder every time I see a Lodgepole pine now. So many memories of running a chainsaw through endless dry dead trees.

they also believed if we don't stop producing Co2 by 2015 we will hit at Co2 tipping point and Florida will be under water.

Citation Needed for the 2015 part

[Canadian Helmet]

It's hard to find that.. or any older predictions.  I think it might just be a case of alarmists moving goal posts.  I do remember it and joking about buying land up north as future beach front property.  This would have been around 2005 or 2006.  What I am seeing while trying to find this is that many people were misrepresenting Al Gores statements back then.

[scottish]

I don't know specifics as they relate to the pine beetle.  Climate change as it relates to bugs is really significant though, and not subtle.  Maybe it's just because I worked in pest control for a while, but I keep hearing stories about how things have changed and are changing.  Three off the top of my head:

Warmer winters have made a crazy change here in Ontario regarding the spread of ticks.  10 - 15 years ago I would regularly go for walks in the woods with my dog and we would never see ticks on either of us.  Winter got cold enough for long enough to kill off the little bastards.  But today, every single time that I go for a walk with my dog on exactly the same paths as I used to I now find ticks crawling on my dog and me.  We need to keep the dog on anti-tick medication year round.  Provincially, lyme disease and other tick-borne illnesses that were never an issue in the past are on the rise.  This is occurring further and further north as well.

Another very visible one here is the box tree moth.  Boxwood shrubs have been grown in Ontario commercially and extensively used in landscaping for 100 years.  Now the box tree moth has been wiping out boxwood all through southern Ontario.  People are being advised just not to plant boxwood any more, as there doesn't seem to be a good way of controlling this pest now that colder winters aren't capable of killing it off.

Termites are now a serious problem in Toronto.  30 years ago termites were pretty rare and an infestation would maybe impact a single house on a street.  Now, calls that cover whole neighbourhoods are common.  There has been a steady uptick, year over year as the weather has gradually warmed and become wetter.

I was hoping this year's colder winter would attrit the tick population a bit.    But no, I found my first tick last week.    Blaming insect population changes on climate change is totally credible in my mind.

[Canadian Helmet]

Its going to be a bad tick year here in the Ottawa region.

[rocketpj]

I think the mountain pine beetles might have had a bit of an impact as well...     the freakin' forest fires put more greenhouse gases into the air than the whole economy.

Not quite sure what your point is here. I lived and worked in central BC, surrounded by dying pine-forests during the height of the beetle epidemic. And, yes, I was part of the forest industry at the time.

The reason we had a pine beetle epidemic was due to climate change. Our winters don't get cold enough to kill them any more. BC has been feeling the effects climate change for quite a while. Fires are just the next stage. More to come. Entire eco-regions will drastically change over the next 50 years.

Maybe you know this already, but I wanted to spell it out explicitly.

I'm unsure that climate change was the only factor in the pine beetle epidemic.

What's your opinion?   Was the mountain pine beetle outbreak affected by other things besides the warm winters 15 years ago - such as reduced diversity due to replanting policies?    Or was it really the warm winters that did it?

The pine beetle has been an issue for at least 25 to 30 years now.  Back in my tree planting days in the early 2000's that was an issue the industry had plans to combat.   I remember being very skeptical of their success.  Even back then they were attributing it to the warmer winters, although they also believed if we don't stop producing Co2 by 2015 we will hit at Co2 tipping point and Florida will be under water.

In my treeplanting days they used to cut massive areas of trees to 'stop' a pine beetle infestation (this was late 80s and early 90s).  There was a truly massive cutblock near the Bowron Lakes that was the result of a 'pine beetle cull'.  Needless to say, it didn't work because the winters got warmer and then it would have required cutting the whole province down.

Cold kept them in check. Failing that, fire and burning away their habitat, which is what has been happening. 

As an aside - the models for climate change have been constantly improving as the science and computing capacity have improved.  Pointing to an inaccuracy in predictions from 25 years ago as proof that it was all a big mistake is a silly thing.  All realms of science have improved and refined their understanding in the last 30 years, including climate science.  The fact of that refinement is not evidence of error.  The evidence all points to worsening climate impacts over time.

[Kmp2]

As an aside - the models for climate change have been constantly improving as the science and computing capacity have improved.  Pointing to an inaccuracy in predictions from 25 years ago as proof that it was all a big mistake is a silly thing.  All realms of science have improved and refined their understanding in the last 30 years, including climate science.  The fact of that refinement is not evidence of error.  The evidence all points to worsening climate impacts over time.

This!

Also, we've mitigated a lot of emissions since 2005. That's not say emissions didn't grow significantly, it's that they could've grown a whole heck of a lot more than they did.
There's also a lag time built into climate modelling. If we stop emitting today, it would still take some years (I've seen around a decade stated) until we reached a new steady state climate - and there would be room for feed back loops that would delay that further (non human emissions caused by heating - forest fires? Plant die off? etc.).

[Dicey]

I live in CA and our gas prices haven't changed. If yours have dropped, perhaps it's a miniscule post-US presidential election benefit. (Not that we had anything to do with dropping gas prices - I am not attempting to take credit where it is not due, unlike a certain orange person.)

Is it okay to apologize for someone you abhor and didn't vote for? I never thought I'd see the day where I was embarrassed to be an American. I am so, so sorry and angry for the BS he is raining down on our friends and allies.

[Kmp2]

I live in CA and our gas prices haven't changed. If yours have dropped, perhaps it's a miniscule post-US presidential election benefit. (Not that we had anything to do with dropping gas prices - I am not attempting to take credit where it is not due, unlike a certain orange person.)

Is it okay to apologize for someone you abhor and didn't vote for? I never thought I'd see the day where I was embarrassed to be an American. I am so, so sorry and angry for the BS he is raining down on our friends and allies.

@Dicey

The carbon tax on our gasoline was removed by our new Prime Minister. It was 17c/l (or 60c/gallon if my math brain is working today), so that's about how much gas prices should've gone down when this happened. The price of oil locally (I'm in Alberta) is also dropping so we've likely seen prices drop more than that - barring capitalism!

But I rarely drive, so it's moot to me.

[Dicey]

I live in CA and our gas prices haven't changed. If yours have dropped, perhaps it's a miniscule post-US presidential election benefit. (Not that we had anything to do with dropping gas prices - I am not attempting to take credit where it is not due, unlike a certain orange person.)

Is it okay to apologize for someone you abhor and didn't vote for? I never thought I'd see the day where I was embarrassed to be an American. I am so, so sorry and angry for the BS he is raining down on our friends and allies.

@Dicey

The carbon tax on our gasoline was removed by our new Prime Minister. It was 17c/l (or 60c/gallon if my math brain is working today), so that's about how much gas prices should've gone down when this happened. The price of oil locally (I'm in Alberta) is also dropping so we've likely seen prices drop more than that - barring capitalism!

But I rarely drive, so it's moot to me.

Thanks for that explanation. I still hate what is happening at the hands of the current US President.

[Kmp2]

I live in CA and our gas prices haven't changed. If yours have dropped, perhaps it's a miniscule post-US presidential election benefit. (Not that we had anything to do with dropping gas prices - I am not attempting to take credit where it is not due, unlike a certain orange person.)

Is it okay to apologize for someone you abhor and didn't vote for? I never thought I'd see the day where I was embarrassed to be an American. I am so, so sorry and angry for the BS he is raining down on our friends and allies.

@Dicey

The carbon tax on our gasoline was removed by our new Prime Minister. It was 17c/l (or 60c/gallon if my math brain is working today), so that's about how much gas prices should've gone down when this happened. The price of oil locally (I'm in Alberta) is also dropping so we've likely seen prices drop more than that - barring capitalism!

But I rarely drive, so it's moot to me.

Thanks for that explanation. I still hate what is happening at the hands of the current US President.

Oh, don't worry, we don't like what's going on down there either! I think we also recognize that your government's actions don't reflect the will of many.
However, we are also trending towards Trump like politicians up here to. One of our potential PMs just threatened to end funding for 'woke' research... and my premier is probably more on team USA than on team Canada right now, sigh.