Oct 5, 2018 - Free public transit could combat both economic inequality and climate disturbances. And, if paid for by fees on automobility, fare-less transit could be part of a serious challenge to private, car-centred transit and urban planning.
One week ago, the price American refineries will pay for a barrel of Alberta bitumen fell to just below US$30. A seismic jolt raced through the tar sands/oil sands industry, because that price would barely allow even the biggest, most profitable operators to recover operating costs.
[Editor: And on the theme of what could be done with $4.5 billion and counting!]
The United Nations definition of genocide includes "deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part" and "causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group."
In explaining Canada's decision to nationalise the controversial Trans Mountain pipeline for $4.5bn, Bill Morneau went hard on the economic argument. “Make no mistake,” the finance minister said. “This is an investment in Canada’s future.”
In fact, since 1999, more than $200bn has been invested into the Alberta oil sands for that future. But what if that cash had gone into wind energy instead?
To be honest, today I’m terrified. The world’s most authoritative voice on climate science, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), just released their report on what it will take to limit global climate change to 1.5°C. The bottomline: any hope for a safe climate hinges on ceasing fossil fuel expansion, immediately.
