Environment committee  Thank you very much, sir.

Environment committee  Sure, I'm happy to respond. First of all, I don't disagree that there was a lack of leadership on the kind of portfolio for years. There's no doubt about that. I still think we're in the realm of talking. I'm really hoping we're going to see something. You mentioned that the bu

Environment committee  If you will allow me, I could add one thing. I think if you appeal to the Bali declaration of scientists, which was presented in Bali and had 250 signatories from around the world, I think it captured well the kind of consensus feeling in it. Many of the things you see here in t

Environment committee  I'm not an economist. I have read a lot, but I'm loath to give testimony on a carbon tax level required to meet the bill because that would be out of my area of expertise, although I'm quite familiar with the method and tools available to the government.

Environment committee  And I support the carbon tax wholeheartedly.

Environment committee  If Canada were to actually put such targets into law and have policies to meet such targets, 20% and 60% to 70% by 2050 are consistent with the type of level of cuts you need. But the problem is that they cannot be aspirational targets; they must be real targets, where you have r

Environment committee  I think Bill C-377 is consistent with the moves that are being made internationally. I think what is interesting is that it sets, specifically, the two-degree target in the policy; it sets a framework to get there. I'm not going to argue for the 80% versus 70% versus 90% because,

Environment committee  I can deal with that. First of all, number one, Bill C-377 isn't all that much different from what you started off your speech by saying: the Government of Canada is committed to a 20% reduction by 2020 and 60% to 70% by 2050. Has the Government of Canada costed them? I also do

Environment committee  May I add something?

Environment committee  I think it's important to add that Canada is a leader in CANDU reactor technology, and I think it's something that really needs to be put on the portfolio of things being discussed. Canada has a strategic advantage in nuclear technology, which is zero-emission. There's also geoth

Environment committee  I could answer that.

Environment committee  Dr. Stone talked about temperatures, and about how temperatures amplify warming in the high latitudes in the Arctic. Another key issue, of course, is water. There's quite a solid understanding as to what will happen in terms of projected changes in precipitation. For Canada, it

Environment committee  May I add something?

Environment committee  I would like to clarify that it's 40% to 95% of emissions. It doesn't mean you can't use oil; it means that if you're going to burn oil, the emissions must be captured and sequestered or stored. There's a very important difference between the two: one is no fossil fuels and one i

Environment committee  Let me address that. I actually know Anna very well. We were graduate students together back in the 1980s. If you look at the assessments as to what will happen to corals, there are two effects. One is bleaching through temperature and the other is through their inability to gr