Study dumps on Canada's environmental record

[SevenSeasJim]

Study dumps on Canada's environmental record

Last Updated Tue, 18 Oct 2005 15:19:06 EDT

CBC News

Canada is one of the worst environmental performers in the industrialized world and has shown no improvement over the past decade, a new study says.

The report, researched at Simon Fraser University and released by the David Suzuki Foundation, ranked Canada 28th out of 30 member countries of the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development.

The ranking was based on what the study described as 29 key environmental indicators.

For example, Canada placed 28th in energy consumption, 26th in greenhouse gas emissions, 29th in water consumption, 27th in sulphur oxides pollution, and 30th in nuclear waste and carbon monoxide.

"Our research found Canada's environmental performance to be surprisingly low," said Thomas Gunton, who headed the research team. "Canada lags behind in almost every performance indicator."

European countries such as Switzerland, Denmark and Germany ranked at the top of the environmental list, while Belgium and the United States joined Canada at the bottom.

Canada's greenhouse gas emissions are two times higher than the average for other industrialized countries. Major smog-causing air pollutants are two-to-three times higher.

The study found Canada has shown no improvement over the past decade. Canada's rank today is the same as it was in 1992.

There were a couple of brighter notes. Canada ranked ninth in recycling and eighth in pesticide use.

"The Canada we see in this report does not reflect the one we hold in our hearts," Suzuki said. "Canadians expect more and they expect better. We should be outraged that we are among the worst in the industrialized world."

Suzuki wants the federal government to pass a National Sustainability Act, which would require Canada to set out targets and timelines to improve the country's environmental performance.

[bouche]

These reports are confusing me. One day Canada is rated the top place to live, another day there is a report that suggests canada is environmentally green, eventually another study will claim the exact opposite.

Canada : unhealthy and violent

Canada is corrupt

Phrases like "Study's show..." or "Scientists say..." are used way too much.

[Blane]

a major reason for this is our reliance on primary industry and conversion of raw materials. Mineral extraction, logging and paper industry, etc. are extremely high emission industries. We need to look at ways to "grow up" our industry or at least force our old industries to be cutting edge in their environmental management technologies. However, when you've got 1/2 of alberta dug up for tar sands, and 1/2 of BC chopped down for a chopstick factory it seems unlikely to happen any time soon.

edit: it seems the chopstick factory is now closed. good riddance.

Edited October 18, 2005 by Guest

[arcane]

These reports are confusing me. One day Canada is rated the top place to live, another day there is a report that suggests canada is environmentally green, eventually another study will claim the exact opposite.

It doesn't confuse me at all. (tossing on the biochemical engineering hat) On the whole, the things that give us such a high standard of living are the same as the things that currently lay waste to the environment. Plastics and other petroleum products, computer chips, electricity, fast food, a meat-rich diet, big houses ...

As for the hypocrisy, that's an easy one to explain: There are many factors affecting a system that we barely understand. Part of the problem is in data collection, part of it is in understanding what's going on, part of it comes from ongoing changes to the system, part of it comes from long-term effects that we can't see right away, and part it comes from the fact that sometimes we just plain get it wrong and need to revise our opinions. Remember back in the '80s when nobody wanted to eat eggs because of the cholesterol? Now we have "good cholesterol" and "bad cholesterol" and cholesterol-reducing medication, and eggs are back on the menu again. Of course, the problem might just have been that people did and still do eat too much junk, but heaven forbid that the public accept that argument when they can have a scapegoat and a quick fix.

And sometimes--I'd say most of the time--people hear only what they want to hear, and that affects how news gets around.