Four Key Questions for Conference
This where we start drafting the key questions and resources we are going to address in the course of the conference on March 21. We a little over two weeks, we need to start thinking about where we are going...
24 Replies
I think a great question to ask or discuss in the conference is to what extent should the government (both provincial and federal) be involved in energy regulation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
YA
This post was edited on: 2012-03-06 at 04:20 AM by: a-almaouie
Another good question would be something to the effect of how can we make our energy more sustainable and "green" while keeping a steady economy and creating jobs (or at least not losing them)?
What is Canada's responsibility on an international scale when it comes to sustainable energy?
Something else to consider is if we do switch to "greener" ways what is that going to cost us? Will the amount of energy we waste making the change be bigger than the energy we can create of out the change?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
YA
"Something else to consider is if we do switch to "greener" ways what is that going to cost us? Will the amount of energy we waste making the change be bigger than the energy we can create of out the change?"
One thing to consider is the use of hydroelectric energy, economically, it could provide a viable solution simply due to the number of plants that are required to generate a large number of energy. For example in Ontario, we have 192 plants that can generate up to 8,445 MW of energy. If, as a nation, we wanted to continue to use water as a source of power, we could develop an "energy economy" similar to that in Quebec, which other than the export/import issue has been proven to work.
Therefore I believe that we should ask the question, "How do the youth of Canada feel about moving further towards the use of Hydro-electricity." As a side note, they must also be informed of environmental damages caused by the creation of dams if this is to be a viable power source.
Another good question that needs to be asked, or even polled, is sentiments toward nuclear energy, the plants we have now, cannot afford to be shut down, but we can control whether or not more are built.
Other questions that should be asked, are for peoples thoughts on the harmful decay and production of solar-panels. Does this greener source of energy justify a new kind of pollution? When looking at Gernamy it is clear that solar energy does have a large positive impact on the economy but is it truly our best option?
Solar energy needs to be a topic that we discuss past the point of "Is it green or not."
Other possible questions to be included are whether or not Canada needs to take a bigger intiative on the international stage. Ex: Kyoto.
We could also ask how people feel about creating an energy plan that could be individualized for each provinces/territories specific needs. Ex: in BC tidal energy may play a much larger role, whereas in Saskatchewan, wind energy may be a dominant factor.
On a side note, when creating this plan we must also keep in mind the northern territories. Even if we are not concerned with greener energy in those regions due to low population levels, we can still ponder the possibility of placing solar panels throughout the regions.
Those with questions relating to ideas on individual energy sources such as hydroelectricity and nuclear power, these ARE GOOD QUESTIONS, but the four questions themselves should not be that specific.
My own question itself is; "How can Canada further develop on its own energy sector with environmental sustainability in mind, while also keeping the Canadian economy in mind ?"
ie: How do we implement sources such as hydroelectricity, nuclear energy, wind power, etc. while maintaining this strong economy built upon oil and natural gas?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The below sentence is a lie.
The above sentence is the thruth.
I believe the first question that should be asked is:
What does Sustainable Energy mean to you?
We should clarify this before any further discussion on methods to creating greater sustainable energy.
-Is it Economically sustainable?
-Is it Environmentally sustainable?
-Is it what will last the longest?
> will it be here in 5 years? 10 years? 100 years?
What do you think?
Chelsea, I think this is a very important point. When we discuss the issue of sustainability it cannot be assumed that we are referring only to the environment. One question that is coming up over and over is how do we balance the priorities of the environment and the economy. How can we sustain both? In this case I think we need to be a little more specific.
We have just experienced a major economic recession. Given that this is in the forefront of everbody's minds it seems that the environment has taken a back seat. This is not to say that people are not currently concerned with the environment. However in terms of prioritizing concerns the economy is currently seen as a more immediately crucial concern.
In some senses this prioritization may seem problematic. The implication is that we are not going to create energy policy that is concerned with environmental stewardship as a main priority unless we have a stable economy. As soon as the economy weakens, other concerns drop down to secondary or tertiary concern and so on.
To sum all of this up, perhaps we need to be asking, "How can we create a long term energy solution that gives both fair accord to present economic and environmental realities but also seriously considers the impact of current policy 10, 20 and 30 years into the future?"
To build on my previous point, I think it might also be important to begin asking how we might begin to challenge the politics that guide policy-making decisions. To be more specific, I am thinking here of the short-term thinking that often guides party policy creation. Because parties are elected for four years at a time, it is often difficult create lasting policy. So in this case, a question might be, how do we create a sustainable energy policy with a lasting legacy that survives party politicking?
Because parties are elected for four years at a time, it is often difficult create lasting policy. So in this case, a question might be, how do we create a sustainable energy policy with a lasting legacy that survives party politicking?
I think, the way to address this issue is to present it openly and bluntly in our presentation to the senate. Somewhere in there we must discuss that the changes we would like to put into place will:
A) take some time if we want to keep a stable economy while doing this, and the only way to keep up a stable economy would be to build the plants that require the most workers first. In that manner we would create construction jobs and follow it up with plant jobs helping to replace the money spent when building the plant.
B) Need to be done over the span of numerous governmental terms. If Canada really does want to do this, it will not be a four year thing, but rather our deadline must be before 2030. We need to incorporate our changes within the next fifteen years if we hope to lead this global environmental revolution.
C) Finally, we need to make clear that this is something that we truly care about and that the youth of Canada are taking this seriously. This is part of the presentation that should not be watered-down.
Some ideas for key questions are:
1. To what extent does the environment control what we do? When are we willing sacrifice greener energy for the economy.
2. If it is called for, are we willing, and capable, of handling the government paying a very large sum of money at one time, in order to kick start the project.
3. To what extent do the current governmental energy laws work? Do these need to be changed? (For example: the relationship between provincial and federal and the power, or lack thereof that the federal government has?)
4. When do these changes take affect and what are the punishments for disobeying these laws?
Is it possible that one of the question could be 'Do what extent does the youth actually care about the environment?'. It is easy for the youth to say that they do but do they actually do anything to help decrease emission from different fossil fuels? Just a thought...
What are we as youth doing to help sustain energy and what should we be doing?
YamiNoChu wrote:
Is it possible that one of the question could be 'Do what extent does the youth actually care about the environment?'. It is easy for the youth to say that they do but do they actually do anything to help decrease emission from different fossil fuels? Just a thought...
Hi Emily,
I see what you're getting at here. Rather than ask whether or not youth care, perhaps you might want to ask "why should youth care?" It is important to understand what the youth of today have at stake in the energy future of this country.
I think that a good question for the conference would be:
"What is more important: regulating the production and consumption of non-renewable energy sources (by imposing carbon taxes, creating stricter environmental regulations for the oil sands, etc.) or promoting and subsidising renewable energy sources?" Or are they of equal importance?
Also, I think we should ask ourselves what we can do to ensure that the people support, and continue to support, this energy policy. If we want to create an energy policy that will remain, we have to make sure it has the continued support of the people. Otherwise, the government will no longer wish to implement it.
Another thing I think we should ask is: "When we're talking about environmental sustainability, are we referring to sustainability on a national or on a global level?" In other words, do we want to preserve our Canadian resources for future generations of Canadians, or do we want to do what's best for our global environment? I think that this is important to establish when discussing issues such as the import/export of energy (oil and gas, energy from hydro, coal, etc.) Should we try to create more trade between the different regions of Canada and thus decrease our dependence on the States as a market for our energy? Or is it better to continue exporting to the closest market? (The latter would be more environmentally friendly; less emissions released during transport, less energy used, less chances of pipeline leaks, less infrastructure required, etc.)
The ideas are looking good so far. If we keep on addressing what we think the critical concerns are, pretty soon we’ll be able to summarize them into four quality statements. On that note, there are two topics I’d like to address.
In response to ColtonP’s “3. To what extent do the current governmental energy laws work? Do these need to be changed? (For example: the relationship between provincial and federal and the power, or lack thereof that the federal government has?”
I think we need to make this question more specific. Clearly, policy making has been difficult because of the debate between the provincial & federal governments. One of our questions could be aimed at amending this-or creating a mutual understanding that certain guidelines must be followed when a provincial-federal debate occurs on energy. The lack of clarity has been where issues have existed.
A second critical concern that I don’t think has been addressed is alternate energy sources. It has been brought up that each “better” form of energy has its own drawback: radiation, flooding, decay over time, hydrocarbons, dead birds. If we are going to recommend a move away from the oil sands as our primary energy in Alberta, then what do we move to? It’s hard to suggest a program, if we are uncertain as to what sources we deem least dangerous to switch over to (and it seems like whenever this topic has been mentioned, it hasn’t lasted).
1. What are we as a country willing to sacrafice economically to become a greener society?
2. How can we use our existing non-renewable resources to develop greener energy?
Hi Francie,
I think you have brought up some brilliant questions!
Particularly, "What is more important: regulating the production and consumption of non-renewable energy sources (by imposing carbon taxes, creating stricter environmental regulations for the oil sands, etc.) or promoting and subsidising renewable energy sources?" Or are they of equal importance?"
These both point towards strategies that may be crucial to promoting environmental and resource sustainability for the future so this is a tremendous point. This question has my vote for sure.
One of the main questions that we need do discuss is to what measure do we begin to research renewable sources of energy? when do we decide how much time and money do we invest in these new sources before we find out that we are almost completely dependant on oil,gas and other sources of non-renewable energy? We do need to start removing the focus from the oil and gas industry and start looking towards sources of renewable energy.
Another question we need to consider is how much money are the PROVINCIAL and FEDERAL GOVERNMENTS willing to invest into research and development in the renewable energy sector, and how will they implement it? Will the federal government increase taxes? will provincial governments increase their taxes, or in Alberta's case create one?
Either way, if we want to start investing in these renewable energy sources, we need to either cut our spending in one sector or the government needs to increase its income (by increasing taxes).
I want to know what economically viable alternative there is to oil and gas as of now there isnt that i have seen its all costs to much so what can we do
How can we become an environmentally sustainable country, without damaging our economy, while keeping the public satisfied?
KSorge wrote:
One of the main questions that we need do discuss is to what measure do we begin to research renewable sources of energy? when do we decide how much time and money do we invest in these new sources before we find out that we are almost completely dependant on oil,gas and other sources of non-renewable energy? We do need to start removing the focus from the oil and gas industry and start looking towards sources of renewable energy.
Another question we need to consider is how much money are the PROVINCIAL and FEDERAL GOVERNMENTS willing to invest into research and development in the renewable energy sector, and how will they implement it? Will the federal government increase taxes? will provincial governments increase their taxes, or in Alberta's case create one?
Either way, if we want to start investing in these renewable energy sources, we need to either cut our spending in one sector or the government needs to increase its income (by increasing taxes).
These are interesting and important questions. Your question about investments in R&D of sustainable energy is one that I think should be included in the four questions, particularly because it brings up a significant point about the way that that the future is being planned for. Specifically, we need to ask how we balance the pressures of present financial realities and trade relationships with an understanding of the medium to long-term understanding of the implications of continuing to privilege the economy over the environment. The science might be complex, but the general implication of our current governmental paradigm should not be.
Caitlyn-S wrote:
How can we become an environmentally sustainable country, without damaging our economy, while keeping the public satisfied?
That really is the million-dollar question, isn't it. Do you believe that all of this is actually possible, or will compromises (financial, environmental or otherwise) need to be made?
Abraham Almaouie
Mar 6, 2012 at 4:20 AM