Glenn Hubbers

I’ve just arrived home after a two week holiday in New Brunswick (what a lovely province!) and Nova Scotia, sorted through the mail pile and found the latest Conservative bulk mailing.  You know the ones, they come on a single 8.5 x 11 black and white sheet with some policy initiative or other outlined and a “Who is on the right track” question (Ignatieff, Harper, Layton or May) with an arrow pointing to Harper’s name of course.  We seem to get one every week or so.

Of course, all of this is merely a means to compile the Conservatives electoral database and that’s fine as that’s the way the game is played, though I would strongly object if they were found financing this through MP’s budgets rather than party funds. Hmmm…

This latest mailing, though, states, “The Conservative government.  Investing in airports. Investing in you.” and goes on to talk about the investments in airport security that the feds are making.

Well no one would object to being safer, of course, but I have to ask how often have you not felt safe on a flight from a Canadian airport?  We had that Air India event, but that was quite a few years ago.  And 911 not so long ago.  Of course joining with the US and going round the world pissing people off will make enemies, so I guess it’s logical that we may be at some increased threat level from what used to be.

Frankly I feel far safer using air travel that driving in a car, particularly here in the GTA where we seem to license almost anyone who can see over the wheel and many who cannot, with no consideration of testing people on manual transmissions, no consideration of the differences in winter driving, no consideration of mandated snow tires, etc.

And half of this expenditure seems to be based on making air travel more efficient to “improve the passenger and freight air service experience.”

To what end? To decrease the hassle factor and thus increase people’s interest in traveling by air?

Where is the recognition from the Conservatives that air travel will seriously decline as a means of personal transport in years to come? Serious Climate Change policy would make this necessary, so I can understand why the Cons don’t mention this as many of them still don’t believe in it, and they still view such policies as a choice.  Fair enough, even if I disagree.  But Peak Oil will make the diminishing of air travel inevitable in the not too distant future, except for the super rich (and likely the politicians spending our money) so there is really no choice involved.

If you don’t believe me, reference what Jeff Rubin has to say about air travel.  He lays out the case fairly well.

It’s astounding that the Conservative Party still manages to snow people into believing they are strong stewards of the economy, when they get so much of it wrong.  They completely failed to predict the current recession even though many of us were saying as loudly as possible that it was coming.  And they seem to be missing all the signs of economic upheaval that Peak Oil will bring.

Banking on the future of air travel is a flight of fancy.

Glenn Hubbers Book Reviews, Economics, Energy, Environmental, Peak Oil, Transportation

The Globe and Mail’s story today, “To defeat bin Laden, first you have to understand him“, could lead one to assume that the Bush government actually wants to defeat Osama bin Laden.

I would disagree, and submit that this is the last thing that they want.

Without Osama bin Laden “somewhere out there”, providing a focal point for Bush’s “war on terrorism”, the administration would have to find a new reason to sell to the American public for maintaining it’s military presence in the Middle East, which would seriously undermine the U.S. take over of the oil resources in the region which is, after all, the whole point of being there.

Linda McQuaig’s book, “War, Big Oil, and the Fight for the Planet” outlines the past 100 years history of Washington’s intervention into the workings of oil producing nations, and breaks down all of the usual counter arguments about dimantling dictatorships, promoting democracy, or saving an oppressed population. Instead, she presents a very persuasive argument that the entire endeavor is about securing oil resources and ultimately about the transfer of wealth, whether from the populations of Middle Eastern countries, or from the American people themselves, into the coffers of a select group of American corporations and their leaders. There are many books and authors (though very few mainstream media personalities, curiously) who present strong arguments that the Iraq war is entirely about oil, against the thin sheen of denial from the White House, but McQuaig’s book is the best collection of those arguments I’ve read to date.

Does anyone think Canada is immune to this? Just exactly what do you think that the NAFTA rules on energy and the ongoing reduced royalty rates from the federal and Alberta governments are doing? Our governments reduced royalties at the request of the industry, ostensibly to “encourage investment and development of the tar sands” when oil prices were below $20 per barrel, but have kept them low despite the booming economy, high oil prices, Alberta labour shortages, and a high dollar hurting the rest of the Canadian economy, all while the industry is recording record profits. Higher royalty rates would offset other sources of government incomes, or in another word, taxes. In effect, reduced royalty payments from the oil & gas industry (along with direct subisides for future projects) amounts to a transfer of wealth from ordinary Canadian taxpayers directly into the coffers of those corporations.

al-Qaeda’s attacks on the West are not based on “who we are,” but because of “what we do” in foreign lands. Mr. Sheuer is highly critical of American leaders for lying to the American people about al-Qaeda’s true motivation.

As for terrorism, there is little doubt in my mind that Canada, while we were likely not much of a terrorist target before 9/11, by participating in the Afghanistan mission have certainly become one.

The only difference between Osama bin Laden and followers vs Joe Canadian Public, is that the former seem to understand how much they are being ripped off, have been pushed to the breaking point so they feel they have no recourse left, and are attempting to do something about it while we remain blissfully ignorant.

The war on terrorism cannot be “won.” Even if Osama bin Laden is found or defeated, he is merely the symbol of the movement. And the only way to eliminate the movement is to begin to conduct that inward examination of foreign policy and an honest review of the effect of our actions, past and present.

Does this mean I advocate terrorism? No, of course not. Nothing justifies those actions. But I believe we can’t just blindly continue to ignore the reasons behind the actions just because we find the actions reprehensible.

Glenn Hubbers Book Reviews, Human Rights, Peak Oil

Walking to Union Station today I stopped in a Coles and purchased HEAT: How to Stop the Planet From Burning, by George Monbiot.

I’ll post more on this book when I’ve finished it, but so far I’ve read the first two chapters on the train, and I would recommend it already.

Glenn Hubbers Book Reviews, Climate Change

It’s been quite a gap since my last post, but in that time I have finished my work stint in Ottawa on the Light Rail Transit project, taken a vacation (the first since last August, despite the election in between) followed by a couple of weeks being generally ill. Fun. During this time I came across an excellent book which I would recommend as essential reading to everyone.

PowerDown, by Richard Heiberg begins with the premise of Peak Oil, generally summarizing the topic in Chapter 1. If you are unfamiliar wih this topic, please contact me, we have much to discuss.

In Chapters 2 t0 5, Heinberg outlines his view of the four potential choices which are available going forward. It is very clear that all of these will be bitter pills to swallow, but some choices are more palatable than others.

In the final chapter, he speculates about which of these choices will be the most likely course of action among three categories of people, the ELITES (government, big corporations, wealthy people, the “establishment”), the MOVEMENT (he groups all environmental and human rights movements together) and the REST OF US (generally, the majority of us who are not part of groups 1 and 2)

The book provides a very thought provoking insight into our near future, and is essential reading for those who would like to be prepared for it.

Glenn Hubbers Book Reviews, Energy, Peak Oil