Canadian Politics Thread

[Optimist Prime]

8 minutes ago, 6of1_halfdozenofother said:

 

It's all fine and dandy when the town is small enough to be serviced by a transit system that is appropriately sized - but the way the Lower Mainland has been developed means that you're stuck with urban sprawl that the transit network is far from being able to service effectively, and where the housing situation makes it more difficult to find a place that is sufficiently close enough to work, transit, or both.  And unfortunately, because of this sprawl, the network will take a crazy amount of $$$ to resolve the issue of consistent and reliable transit service to help even 80% of the people go to where they need to go to and back without having to build in contingency travel time.  That $$$ = political suicide, for any politician who wants to address it effectively.

 

So while it's idealistic to pontify and claim that a lot of the issues would be solved if people ditched their cars and took transit instead, the bottleneck isn't with the drivers - it's with the inability to properly scale up the transit network to offer that as a truly viable alternative to drivers.

valid, however my most recent personal experience is this: I took a bus to the ferry from downtown Victoria, walked on it, got a bus from the ferry to the Skytrain, skytrain to my hotel, a very short cab ride to the Canucks game, skytrain to the River Rock Casino afterwards, then back to hotel, and reversed it the next day to get home. My total travel time was less than if i drove. I guess it depends on where you are on the transit route. Oh another time with the same travel i also took a ferry to North Van to visit a gf up there on top of all the other transit travel for my weekend getaway. 

[6of1_halfdozenofother]

1 minute ago, Optimist Prime said:

valid, however my most recent personal experience is this: I took a bus to the ferry from downtown Victoria, walked on it, got a bus from the ferry to the Skytrain, skytrain to my hotel, a very short cab ride to the Canucks game, skytrain to the River Rock Casino afterwards, then back to hotel, and reversed it the next day to get home. My total travel time was less than if i drove. I guess it depends on where you are on the transit route. Oh another time with the same travel i also took a ferry to North Van to visit a gf up there on top of all the other transit travel for my weekend getaway. 

 

It's a bit of a different mentality though when you're using it for leisure, vs. having to figure how to work the commute so that you don't have to get up at crazy:oclock AM to catch the 6:45am bus to start work at 9, and then get home at 8:30pm and try to get everything done before you go to bed early enough so that you wake up when your alarm clock goes off at crazy:oclock AM the next day to catch the 6:45am bus...

[Optimist Prime]

4 hours ago, 6of1_halfdozenofother said:

 

It's a bit of a different mentality though when you're using it for leisure, vs. having to figure how to work the commute so that you don't have to get up at crazy:oclock AM to catch the 6:45am bus to start work at 9, and then get home at 8:30pm and try to get everything done before you go to bed early enough so that you wake up when your alarm clock goes off at crazy:oclock AM the next day to catch the 6:45am bus...

I do feel for you. If it helps, I got up at 5am, ran or cycled to work, did 90 minutes of physical training, ran or cycled home to shower, dress and make sure my appearance and comportment were up to the Sgt Major's regulations, then worked anywhere from 6 to 12 hours and ran or cycled home to wash my kit, prep my dinner, make a lunch and hit the sack in time for my 5am wakey wakey, eggs n bakey, for an entire career in the armed forces. This one time, I had an integral role in a time sensitive event and when work started I was at it nonstop for 52 hours before I got 3.5 hours of sleep in the back of an armoured carrier and then back at it again until the time sensitive event was over. I got 6 hours off the following friday as compensation. 

 

I think what you are describing is the life of a working class human.

 

My wife, when we lived near Ottawa would commute 2 hours from Rockland to the Supreme Court downtown Ottawa where she clerked all day and then a 2 hour commute home, this was on the mass transit system. Sounds similar to what you are describing, if I am being honest. 

[6of1_halfdozenofother]

16 minutes ago, Optimist Prime said:

I think what you are describing is the life of a working class human.

 

Yup, sadly us working stiffs usually can't afford to live near where we work, and have to make do with what we can afford.  Sadly, the transit system here in the Lower Mainland is about half a step up from smelling like ass, and half a step down from the consistency of dogshit, so the reality of the situation on the ground for us working stiffs is: take transit and write away our free time, or drive and maybe we'll have some daylight to do stuff after work.

 

All that idealism about not needing cars - doesn't really work in the urban sprawl called "Lower Mainland, BC".

[Optimist Prime]

3 minutes ago, 6of1_halfdozenofother said:

 

Yup, sadly us working stiffs usually can't afford to live near where we work, and have to make do with what we can afford.  Sadly, the transit system here in the Lower Mainland is about half a step up from smelling like ass, and half a step down from the consistency of dogshit, so the reality of the situation on the ground for us working stiffs is: take transit and write away our free time, or drive and maybe we'll have some daylight to do stuff after work.

 

All that idealism about not needing cars - doesn't really work in the urban sprawl called "Lower Mainland, BC".

but you are in the perfect spot for an EV, and too bad skytrain isn't near either your destination or your home to cut that commute down to size. I wonder if any new lines are planned? I dont live in VAN so I don't pay attention to the nitty gritty of their decisions.

[6of1_halfdozenofother]

Just now, Optimist Prime said:

but you are in the perfect spot for an EV, and too bad skytrain isn't near either your destination or your home to cut that commute down to size. I wonder if any new lines are planned? I dont live in VAN so I don't pay attention to the nitty gritty of their decisions.

 

EV = $$$$$

Not everyone can afford to move "up" into one.  I understand the science behind why people are moving in that direction, but I'm not entirely convinced it's the "best" option.

 

To be honest (and maybe this belongs in the climate change thread), from an engineering and sustainability perspective, I'd be more keen if people found ways to retrofit existing vehicles with engines that used hydrogen or could swap out the engine entirely for some sort of inexpensive battery-powered motor.  Key word being inexpensive, because it's really the batteries that become the most expensive part on an EV, given their limited life from constant recharge/discharge cycles.  This would then allow existing vehicles to continue to be used, instead of sending them to scrap, which is a waste of resources and a bigger waste of energy to disassemble/recycle/whatever.  

[Boudrias]

1 hour ago, 6of1_halfdozenofother said:

 

EV = $$$$$

Not everyone can afford to move "up" into one.  I understand the science behind why people are moving in that direction, but I'm not entirely convinced it's the "best" option.

 

To be honest (and maybe this belongs in the climate change thread), from an engineering and sustainability perspective, I'd be more keen if people found ways to retrofit existing vehicles with engines that used hydrogen or could swap out the engine entirely for some sort of inexpensive battery-powered motor.  Key word being inexpensive, because it's really the batteries that become the most expensive part on an EV, given their limited life from constant recharge/discharge cycles.  This would then allow existing vehicles to continue to be used, instead of sending them to scrap, which is a waste of resources and a bigger waste of energy to disassemble/recycle/whatever.  

Sorry I cannot remember the BC company name but they are retrofitting logging trucks with electric motors. I couldn’t believe it considering the weight.

[BannedFan]

5 minutes ago, Boudrias said:

Sorry I cannot remember the BC company name but they are retrofitting logging trucks with electric motors. I couldn’t believe it considering the weight.

Maybe something most people dont know, Trains use electric motors. The Diesel they use is to power the generators for the electricity.

[MattJVD]

50 minutes ago, Boudrias said:

Sorry I cannot remember the BC company name but they are retrofitting logging trucks with electric motors. I couldn’t believe it considering the weight.

 

42 minutes ago, BannedFan said:

Maybe something most people dont know, Trains use electric motors. The Diesel they use is to power the generators for the electricity.

(Some) Ships do this too, diesel engines power the ship's electrical grid and drive electric motors that turn the propellers. (Diesel engines and gas turbines for warships that need to do 25+ knots).

 

The BC firm retrofitting logging trucks (Edison) is doing it along a similar line. They're fully electric trucks in that all the systems and the drive train gets power out of the batteries, but they also have a diesel generator. The generator is only connected to the batteries and not the drive train so it's not technically a "hybrid" (semantics, but whatever lol). The big advantage is that the diesel generator gets to sit at its most efficient rpm range the whole time it is running, making it very efficient. And they are like 250kwh batteries, so you could drive it all day without turning on the generator if you have good access to charging.

Edited March 30 by MattJVD

[BannedFan]

3 minutes ago, MattJVD said:

 

(Some) Ships do this too, diesel engines power the ship's electrical grid and drive electric motors that turn the propellers. (Diesel engines and gas turbines for warships that need to do 25+ knots).

 

The BC firm retrofitting logging trucks (Edison) is doing it along a similar line. They're fully electric trucks in that all the systems and the drive train gets power out of the batteries, but they also have a diesel generator. The generator is only connected to the batteries and not the drive train so it's not technically a "hybrid" (semantics, but whatever lol). The big advantage is that the diesel generator gets to sit at its most efficient rpm range the whole time it is running, making it very efficient. And they are like 250kwh batteries, so you could drive it all day without turning on the generator if you have good access to charging.

So... Train Engines use electric power (from Diesel generated power) and ships use electric power (from Diesel or gas) how much could we cut greenhouse gas by figuring out electricity from another source? we need that loudmouthed little girl (who i agree with but provides no solutions exept blame) to get on the advanced small modular reactor (SMR) idea

 

[MattJVD]

1 minute ago, BannedFan said:

So... Train Engines use electric power (from Diesel generated power) and ships use electric power (from Diesel or gas) how much could we cut greenhouse gas by figuring out electricity from another source? we need that loudmouthed little girl (who i agree with but provides no solutions exept blame) to get on the advanced small modular reactor (SMR) idea

 

I think ships and trains are among the lowest priorities because they're already so efficient. 

 

Ships are about 5x more efficient and trains about 4x more efficient than trucks. In terms of 'Freight Tonne Efficiency' (amount of fuel require to move 1 tonne of cargo 1 mile).

[6of1_halfdozenofother]

1 hour ago, Boudrias said:

Sorry I cannot remember the BC company name but they are retrofitting logging trucks with electric motors. I couldn’t believe it considering the weight.

 

19 minutes ago, MattJVD said:

 

(Some) Ships do this too, diesel engines power the ship's electrical grid and drive electric motors that turn the propellers. (Diesel engines and gas turbines for warships that need to do 25+ knots).

 

The BC firm retrofitting logging trucks (Edison) is doing it along a similar line. They're fully electric trucks in that all the systems and the drive train gets power out of the batteries, but they also have a diesel generator. The generator is only connected to the batteries and not the drive train so it's not technically a "hybrid" (semantics, but whatever lol). The big advantage is that the diesel generator gets to sit at its most efficient rpm range the whole time it is running, making it very efficient. And they are like 250kwh batteries, so you could drive it all day without turning on the generator if you have good access to charging.

 

Thanks for this info.  I think ultimately though in order to get mass acceptance by drivers of retrofitting existing vehicles powered by ICEs or diesel engines with a lower-carbon-emission alternative is to have the cost be at least comparable (if not more economical) than outright buying a replacement vehicle (EV or not).  Otherwise, there's no advantage to going the retrofit route, and then we're back at square one where the older vehicles end up most likely in the scrap heap, which is neither sustainable nor a good use of resources.

 

Anyway, enough of this climate change related engineering discussion here.    Back to politics of a Canadian flavour!

[Kanagan]

On 10/6/2023 at 12:45 PM, LaBamba said:

It doesn’t matter. Bitcoin over the next 10,20,30 years will continue to grow. Look at the overall trend. It has completely Recovered. Backing our CAD with crypto is a great idea. It diversifies our treasury. 
I seriously can’t even comprehend why you would pull up a dip that’s recovered. It makes absolutely no sense. If Canada would’ve backed their currency with bitcoin during this dip. Our currency would be stronger today which would directly impact inflation.

 

Please guys. Just walk away from this one. I’m willing to just forget this happened and move on. I already made you and @King Heffy look silly enough on this subject. I’m completely satisfied. Just stop. 

At $95,000 now. Dam.

[Bob Long]

11 hours ago, 6of1_halfdozenofother said:

 

EV = $$$$$

Not everyone can afford to move "up" into one.  I understand the science behind why people are moving in that direction, but I'm not entirely convinced it's the "best" option.

 

To be honest (and maybe this belongs in the climate change thread), from an engineering and sustainability perspective, I'd be more keen if people found ways to retrofit existing vehicles with engines that used hydrogen or could swap out the engine entirely for some sort of inexpensive battery-powered motor.  Key word being inexpensive, because it's really the batteries that become the most expensive part on an EV, given their limited life from constant recharge/discharge cycles.  This would then allow existing vehicles to continue to be used, instead of sending them to scrap, which is a waste of resources and a bigger waste of energy to disassemble/recycle/whatever.  

 

What do you consider expensive to be for a car? 

[Optimist Prime]

11 hours ago, MattJVD said:

 

(Some) Ships do this too, diesel engines power the ship's electrical grid and drive electric motors that turn the propellers. (Diesel engines and gas turbines for warships that need to do 25+ knots).

Yup. My brother was on the Canadian Submarine's for a decade in the navy. They have to surface every so often to run the diesel engines long enough to recharge the batteries, but then can slip under water for a few days at a time. He was off the coast of Libya 30 years ago'ish as one of our Subs was positioned to capture data while the Yankees bombed Ghadaffi's capital. He was allergic to diesel so the story sticks out in my mind, he was in a rash for a decade before transferring off to a stone frigate in Halifax. (a navy dry land office). Here is a funny bit to the end of that operation: they stopped in Lisbon on the way home and someone on the sub got crabs while on a day pass in port. He said everyone on the ship had crabs a couple days later and nothing on board to fix the problem so the crew slathered petroleum jelly all over their junk 'to slow em down' hahahaaaahahahaha. 

[6of1_halfdozenofother]

2 hours ago, Bob Long said:

 

What do you consider expensive to be for a car? 

 

My valuation of expensive is subjective and beside the point.  The key issue is that it represents an unnecessary cost to someone who has a vehicle that burns hydrocarbons but is otherwise fully functional.  

[Bob Long]

1 minute ago, 6of1_halfdozenofother said:

 

My valuation of expensive is subjective and beside the point.  The key issue is that it represents an unnecessary cost to someone who has a vehicle that burns hydrocarbons but is otherwise fully functional.  

 

cost is always the point. How can you say something is a "key issue" without quantifying it?

[6of1_halfdozenofother]

9 minutes ago, Bob Long said:

 

cost is always the point. How can you say something is a "key issue" without quantifying it?

 

Maybe let me draw a comparable for you: it's like browbeating people to replace a perfectly good and still adequately functioning phone just because a newer model doesn't require charging as much, thus it's better for the environment.  Of course, disregarding the fact that the older phone now needs to be disposed of, which brings its own environmental issues.

 

I'm not saying don't shift to EVs, if that becomes the standard in the future.  I'm saying forcing people to the new standard represents an unnecessary cost to the consumer (because the consumer is always the one that pays) and can - and often will - have unintended conseqeuences.  

[RupertKBD]

12 hours ago, BannedFan said:

So... Train Engines use electric power (from Diesel generated power) and ships use electric power (from Diesel or gas) how much could we cut greenhouse gas by figuring out electricity from another source? we need that loudmouthed little girl (who i agree with but provides no solutions exept blame) to get on the advanced small modular reactor (SMR) idea

 

She's 21 years old and she's not a scientist. Overall, I'd say she's done more for the climate than almost anyone:

 

Quote

 

In response to her outspoken stance, various politicians have also acknowledged the need to focus on climate change. Britain's secretary for the environment, Michael Gove, said, "When I listened to you, I felt great admiration, but also responsibility and guilt. I am of your parents' generation, and I recognise that we haven't done nearly enough to address climate change and the broader environmental crisis that we helped to create." Labour politician Ed Miliband, who was responsible for introducing the Climate Change Act 2008, said, "You have woken us up. Thank you. All the young people who have gone on strike have held up a mirror to our society ... you have taught us all a really important lesson. You have stood out from the crowd."^[

 

In February 2019, Thunberg shared a stage with the then President of the European Commission, Jean-Claude Juncker, where he outlined: "In the next financial period from 2021 to 2027, every fourth euro spent within the EU budget will go towards action to mitigate climate change."^[216] Climate issues also played a significant role in European Parliament election in May 2019,^[217] as Green parties recorded their best ever results,^[218] boosting their MEP seat numbers from 52 to 72.^[219] Many of the gains came from northern European countries where young people have taken to the streets inspired by Thunberg.

 

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greta_Thunberg

 

BTW, "loudmouthed little girl"? Really?

[Gurn]

Today's biggest traffic jam in Powell River is at the pumps of the local Chevron station.

They are currently selling regular gas for 15 cents a liter cheaper than the other guys; whose price went up rather mysteriously.

[Bob Long]

2 hours ago, 6of1_halfdozenofother said:

 

Maybe let me draw a comparable for you: it's like browbeating people to replace a perfectly good and still adequately functioning phone just because a newer model doesn't require charging as much, thus it's better for the environment.  Of course, disregarding the fact that the older phone now needs to be disposed of, which brings its own environmental issues.

 

well, not everyone has to be beaten into a new one. I like to get one every two years, I give the old one to my daughter and she uses that for two more. Thats pretty good for the environment too. 

 

2 hours ago, 6of1_halfdozenofother said:

I'm not saying don't shift to EVs, if that becomes the standard in the future.  I'm saying forcing people to the new standard represents an unnecessary cost to the consumer (because the consumer is always the one that pays) and can - and often will - have unintended conseqeuences.  

 

Again you are calling it "unnecessary" but thats your value judgement on it. A lot of people don't want to support oil and gas companies, and like to choose an EV. 

 

It also can make a lot of economic sense if you are a home owner and can install your own charger. If you can trade in an ICE vehicle for 10-15k on a 55-60k EV lease, your cost of operating can be a lot better, particularly if you're a commuter.

 

Sure you can stick with your old ICE vehicle, but the longer you own it the better chance of a major repair issue as well. Cars are depreciating assets, they are simply a cost out no matter what you drive.

 

[Bob Long]

3 hours ago, RupertKBD said:

 

She's 21 years old and she's not a scientist. Overall, I'd say she's done more for the climate than almost anyone:

 

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greta_Thunberg

 

BTW, "loudmouthed little girl"? Really?

 

tbh I can see her owning that comparison and running with it 

[Warhippy]

13 hours ago, Kanagan said:

At $95,000 now. Dam.

Welcome back (insert former posters name)

[Warhippy]

1 hour ago, Gurn said:

Today's biggest traffic jam in Powell River is at the pumps of the local Chevron station.

They are currently selling regular gas for 15 cents a liter cheaper than the other guys; whose price went up rather mysteriously.

It's not mysterious at all.

 

They can jack it up now and again on Monday and they'll blame the government and know the people will too.  Even though the increase is only like 3 cents a litre 

[The Arrogant Worms]