Many times we have heard Trudeau mouth off to Canadians about the do's and don'ts when it comes to climate change control. The reality is Trudeau never practices what he preaches. One day he gives Canadians a speech about the use of paper plates and plastic forks and the next day at his Liberal tea party he is photographed using them. If Trudeau had to take out his own trash to the recycling bin he would be clueless as to what to do with it. I am sure we can find many instances pointing to the fact that he is Canada's worst hypocrite when it comes to being environmentally friendly. But today, we are just going to focus how how Trudeau produced more carbon emissions than any other Canadian could in their lifetime, while he traveled with his campaign parade in the 2019 federal election, and he spent tax payers dollars to do it. Trudeau, of course with the help of liberal funded media, thinks he is justified because the liberals bought carbon offsets that are in fact at this time useless in reducing greenhouse gas.
One plane for Trudeau and his biased media and a 2nd plane for his costumes and canoe. The 2nd plane used as the liberal cargo plane is a boeing 737-200 which is considered as one of the least efficient and worst polluting airliners in current service. The aircraft built in 1975 was purchased in 2017 by Nolinor Aviation based in Montreal Quebec. The company currently operates the largest fleet of Boeing 737 aircraft in the world. Only 58 of these gas guzzling aircraft remain in service today mostly by charter companies and airlines in developing nations such as Zimbabwe, Democratic Republic of the Congo and Central African Republic as they’re the only airliner still capable of taking off and landing on gravel airstrips.
We have to ask a few questions here. If Trudeau considers himself to be conscious of climate change what is the liberal government doing chartering a airplane that is considered one of the least efficient and worst polluting airliners in current service. No where on the Nolinor Aviation website do they mention anything about being environmental friendly and the efficiency of their aircraft. Why is a Canadian based airline allowed to operate of the largest fleets of Boeing 737-200 aircraft in the world that is considered out-of date, and the most inefficient? How did this gas guzzling airplane help Trudeau to phase out fossil fuel production in Canada and clean up our environment? Trudeau certainly did not give any thought to the environment while transporting his campaign parade around at the expense of the tax payers? He will clearly continue to put his personal needs first regardless of the situation and once again proves that he is a incompetent zero knowledge prime minister elected just because of his last name.
In 1949 Canada had the aviation technology to built the best jetliners in the world that would have been far superior to any Boeing aircraft built today. The Canadian Built Avro jetliner C102 was a jetliner was just one jet plane program that was well ahead of its time. If this jet liner program was allowed to continue in 1951 it undoubtedly would have produced some of the best fuel efficient jetliners in the world as it employed the best aviation engineers of the time. It is no surprise to learn this program was killed by the liberal minister C D Howe in favor of producing Canadian built Fighter jets, the CF-100 Canuck, for the Korean war. A few years after the Korean war, Avro Canada also produced the world's most advanced fighter jet, the Avro Arrow CF-105. Meanwhile taxpayers become involuntarily investors to companies like Bombardier
In his defense, Trudeau said his party purchased carbon offsets for both planes and the Liberal buses to mitigate the environmental damage of his party’s campaign travel. The Liberals refused to say how much they paid for the carbon offsets. The president of Bullfrog Power Sean Drygas, the company that the Liberal Party purchased those carbon offsets from said that the offset mechanism is “not the ultimate solution” to the problem of carbon emissions. “The ideal is not to emit carbon in the first place.”
Carbon offsets should not be relied upon as a loophole to justify carbon emissions, say environmental experts.
“The real danger with carbon offsetting is, it allows us to say we are doing things we are not actually doing,” said Kate Ervine, a professor of international development studies at Saint Mary’s University in Nova Scotia. “For instance, with flying — you aren’t lowering emissions overall just because you purchase carbon offsets.” Carbon offsetting is not intended to reduce emissions. It’s not as simple as, ‘I can continue doing what I want as long as I offset’,” said Ervine, the Nova Scotia professor and author of Carbon, a book that looks at the problems of carbon pollution.
An false example of carbon offsetting is planting trees — if a flight from Toronto to Vancouver generated 0.5 metric tones of carbon dioxide, carbon offsetting in this case would mean planting enough trees to remove 0.5 metric tones of carbon dioxide from the atmosphere. Tree planting financed through offset markets would guarantee the polluter could continue emitting carbon, but the market couldn’t guarantee removals to match those emissions. Trees might be planted and subsequently lost to wildfire or logging, or never planted at all. New studies have shown the some older forests now emit more Co2 than they absorb when they are dead or rotting.
Achieving the goal to cut greenhouse-gas emissions will require more scientific action than Canada’s current policies are expected to achieve. Is Trudeau is going to continue producing excessive green house gas has like he has been doing and than buy carbon credits to give himself a non-guilty concussion? Trudeau has positioned the fight against climate change as the core issue of the campaign and repeatedly criticized others for being a laggard. Grants (taxpayers money) need to go to organizations that are actually reducing greenhouse gas and not go to corporations with outstretched hands that take the money and doing nothing effective with it other than fill their pockets.
Carbon is likely to become a ‘big business’ in its own right if the governments of the world support false programs. World wide governments should not be introducing false programs and should not be taxing citizens with carbon taxes. Governments should consider more programs and research that will find the correct solution to decrease Co2 emissions in the atmosphere. Converting power plants to natural gas from coal will reduce their Co2 emissions by almost 50%. This can be easily done and should be done, until technology makes solar power and green energy more effective, efficient, and affordable for everyone. Elon Musk's electric Tesla vehicles are becoming more efficient and affordable and these are the type of programs that should be researched. Planting trees to justify carbon emissions is not the solution to the problem, the solution is to not make more co2, or support worthy technology to drastically reduce it.