Landmark court ruling a stark rebuke of Canadian position on climate change
The ICJ finding is a watershed moment in the fight against climate change that should send shivers down the spine of the fossil fuel industry, while threatening to upend the legality of Prime Minister Mark Carney's major projects agenda.
You're viewing a single thread.
Major historic polluters like Canada
Huh? Even the article states Canada's contribution to GHG's is 2% which is already inflated. Most sources state its 1.3%. How does 98.7% of emissions coming from other countries, with China and the US making up more than half of that, make Canada a "major" polluter? We're obviously and empirically very MINOR polluters, we're actually within the margin of error since the calculations are all based on computer models.
And Im well aware of Canada's higher per capita rate but the environment does not measure GHG's by "per capita" rate.
One of the main lawyers represented in this court case was there to represent Tuvalu, which is a tiny string of islands in the mid Pacific. Its a tiny nation of 10,000 people on 9 miniature islands (totalling only 10 square miles) with the highest point only being 15 feet above sea level. But these people feel that a tiny and incredibly slow rise in sea level due to "climate change" is their biggest danger? How about typhoons or just a plain old sea squall? The island MAY be underwater in 100 years. Maybe.
Here's an idea - since this is "emergency" is going to take a hundred years, which is five generations from now, you Tuvaluans start packing your bags and moving say in 20 or 30 years, instead of hand wringing what MIGHT happen in five generations? Heck, take your time, and dont move for three more generations, your kids, your grandkids and your great grandkids will be fine.
Good lord, like none of us have ever moved because we no longer felt good about where we lived or it was no longer a 'safe neighborhood' Happens every day in the rest of the world, why should Tuvalu get 'compensated' five generations down the road when they could easily make EXTREMELY SLOW plans to leave in a 20, 40, 60 years from now?
Thats like watching a car come at you at walking speed from 100 miles away and screaming that you are going to want compensation when it hits your great great great grandchildren who all refuse to move from the same spot. Make it make sense. Its not an emergency when it happens at a snails pace, its just a change.
The only people truly excited about this ruling are the lawyers rubbing their greedy hands in glee at the prospect of their fees for suing the big bad oil companies for billions.
A generation is 60 years. It’s more like 1.3 generations into the future. This comment is very dismissive and coming from a place of privilege, you do not understand their situation better than they do. It’s better to save your home if you can, the people have inhabited those islands for thousands of years of course they want to keep them around.
A new generation starts when kids are born. Thats about 20 years if you average it across the world. Maybe 30 years in North America. Not 60 years.
I understand their situation very well. I used to have a home that was destroyed by a catastrophic natural event and I cant live there anymore because my home, cars and property are gone. Stuff happens. Im not looking for a scapegoat, you deal with it and move on, ESPECIALLY if its going to take 100 years to happen.
"I moved neighbourhoods once, with an insurance payout. Why don't these other people abandon their country?"
Truly, you are an icon of empathy and understanding.
You sure jump to conclusions. I didnt move neighborhoods. I lost a property in another country with two houses on it with ZERO insurance payout because the loss was due to a lava eruption. Total loss of property and my vehicles.
I dont need empathy for a "disaster" thats going to take 100 years to take place. Thats ridiculous. I had no warning, they have 100 years to make a move.