Are We just Deaf To Global Warming?

In the first week of July’s record heat and the fireball that turned the Village of Lytton, which for the previous three days recorded the highest temperatures in Canada, to ash, our politicians stood mute. Oh, there were those 10 second sound bites and photo-ops of care, but the lesson did not sink in.

It seemed not one politician seemed to grasp the real meaning of Global Warming and continued to treat the subject as a talking point in photo-ops, but nothing more.

Federally, $10 a day daycare is more important to politicians and the media than BC changing climate and how to deal with it.

The provincial government seems utterly inept in handling the Global Warming crisis, with the premier actually going on a holiday in the middle of this summer’s wildfire crisis. If the NDP are inept at handling this major emergency, how can they tackle the massive global warming issue?

What is the government doing to mitigate global warming?

Not much!

Government increased the carbon tax and other user fees, but that is a bureaucratic/photo-op solution that taxes the poor but in reality does nothing. The bureaucratic/photo-op solution tries to portray that to fight global warming, the taxpayer must feel pain.

No pain, no gain!

It also gives the government more money to had out to politcal friends and insiders.

Oh, the federal, provincial, and regional governments are funding a $4.8 km extensions to the Expo and Millennium light-metro lines, but again, great for photo-ops at election time, but as a solution, not even close.

Even though over $15 billion of the taxpayer’s monies have been invested on light metro in Metro Vancouver, pre Covid, mode share for transit is dropping!

Yet, the government continues to do the same things over again, hoping for different results.

Global warming is a fact, yet government will not take the real steps needed to help mitigate the many issues associated with a warming earth. The government spends billions of dollars building bigger tunnels and bridges for cars and trucks, yet ignores any sort of rail alternative for carrying freight and passengers. The government spends billions of dollars on prestige rapid transit projects, not ignores cheaper and more viable rail solutions.

Better politically to invest $4 billion on a 16 km, photo-op ready extension of the Expo line, than spend $1.4 billion reinstating a Vancouver to Chilliwack rail service or $1 billion rehabbing the E&N railway and operate regional railway as other countries are quickly doing.

Civic, provincial and federal governments, by paving over paradise, building bigger and more expensive parking lots are also paving over our children’s future and our children know it!


3 Responses to “Are We just Deaf To Global Warming?”
  1. Logi says:

    The skytrain contributes nothing to the environment. Skytrain will reduce cars and busses from Surrey to Langley. Your proposed rail for the valley uses diesel trains that is a bigger threat. Canada line replaced many buses that used to travel on Granville street. Granville street is now clean and quiet.

    Zwei replies: As Skytrain has failed to show any modal shift, I doubt it will reduce car use. As for buses, they will be rerouted to feed the metro and for many, will increase travel times, making the car a more obvious choice for mobility.

    Yes, the canada line reduced buses on Granville St., but the $2.4 billion price tag and $110 million annual operating fees paid to SNC Lavalin/Caisse means there is not operational savings, rather the Canada Line is costing more to convey customers than the bus.

  2. zweisystem says:

    The avatar Logi, uses a address and I am assuming that either Logi is a troll or works for government.

    I have been informed (locally) there is great concern in the provincial government that there is not the funding, to complete other projects. As Premier Horgan promised Skytrain to Langley, it has been given priority, the problem is, regional mayors do not or will not fund the outstanding billions dollars to complete the line and the much needed rehab of the Expo and Millennium lines. With civic elections in 2022, increase taxes may mean political suicide for some candidates. As TransLink is held in high odor by the taxpayer, the funding may not materialize and the Langley extension may never be built.

  3. Bill Burgess says:

    I am very happy to see a contribution to this blog that views transit through the lens of climate change.

    Anyone opposed to climate wrecking should favour almost any form of public transit over the use of private cars.

    However, I don’t think the climate implications of the various transit modes are well established.

    ‘Blue’ hydrogen fuel is not a good alternative; how viable is ‘green’ hydrogen?

    Skytrain has been criticised for its concrete guideways, but has their service life been properly considered?

    The change in transit use in Vancouver overtime compares favourably with that in other cities in Canada, but how different would it be if more buses or light rail had been selected?

    How do trolley electric buses compare to buses mainly powered by batteries?

    In addition to the narrower issue of emissions to produce and operate various transit modes, their influence on urban form is also important. Which help promote compact, complete communities that reduce the travel required for everyday life, and especially dependence on private autos?

    Zwei replies: It now seems that the total pollution, including mining and manufacturing for battery powered vehicles is more than established electric vehicles.

    The only country I know of, producing clean hydrogen is Iceland because of their ample supply of thermal power.

    As for the elevated guideway, the Skytrain light metro system uses two styles; a precast beam and sectional. The Expo Line’s precast beam has a service life expectancy of around 50 years (one of the reasons why Toronto’s SRT is being shut down as the line is nearing to be “life expired., depending on location etc.

    The big problem is not if LRT is selected but when. As we have debated this issue, it has been established that the MALM system, operating on the Expo and millennium Lines has one supplier, which is now Alstom and when Alstom ceases production, which will be sooner rather than later, the costs for the light metro system will greatly increase as no other company produces or has “off the shelf” vehicles or parts for the system. This means future suppliers can charge a lot more for spare parts, based on the good old law of supply and demand.

    Translink will have to consider LRT, strictly for financial and environmental reasons. A university type told me quite candidly a few years back that he supported Skytrain in the beginning but not so today because the public just cannot afford to build with the light metro, the mileage needed to provide an alternative to the car. He agrees with my estimated that a minimum of 300 km of rail must be built within 20 years, thus using existing railway lines must be considered and the same for TramTrain or the car will continue to be the prime mover of people. Take your pick, a Vancouver to Chilliwack TramTrain for $1.3 billion or a Surrey Central to Langley SkyTrain for $4 billion+.

    The question thus becomes one of affordability, it is the empire building politicians that is keeping the proprietary light metro alive and the bureaucracy does as it is told.

Leave A Comment