Wednesday, December 7, 2016

From: Date: Wed, Dec 7, 2016 at 12:12 PM Subject: RE: Fatality reports, adverse events and tracking recommendations and post adverse event reporting (AC425296) To: **********This is an automatically generated email, please do not reply to this email. ********** Thank you for asking a question or sharing your thoughts with the Government of Alberta. We try to respond to all questions within 3 working days. If you need to visit us again, please visit Alberta.ca Stay in touch Sign up for Alberta News Participate in a public consultation This site is frequently updated to provide you with important information about Alberta programs and services. It's also an opportunity for you to provide your government with feedback on the issues that concern you. Please visit our site again soon to read an article, or send a comment. Internet: Alberta.ca (AC425296) Your message was -- Fatality reports, adverse events and tracking recommendations and post adverse event reporting In a recent response from Alberta Justice I was told that individual GOA departments are responsible for implementation of fatality report recommendations. Please refer to this e-mail: ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Ministry of Justice Date: Tue, Nov 8, 2016 at 10:42 AM Subject: Re: Fatality Reports To:> Cc: Office of the Premier PCU 94078 Dear Ms. Ali: The Honourable Rachel Notley, Premier of Alberta, has forwarded me a copy of your follow-up to Ms. Jennifer Fuchinsky’s email response to you regarding removal of fatality reports from the government website. Premier Rachel Notley has reviewed your correspondence and has asked that I respond on her behalf in my role as Minister of Alberta Justice and Solicitor General. In an email from Jennifer Fuchinsky’s dated October 5, 2016, you were advised that in order to keep the Justice and Solicitor General website up-to-date and to provide an optimum user experience, we review the site’s information for how recent it is. Due to the volume of fatality inquiry reports, we only keep those from the last two years on our website. You were also advised that there was a project in the works to eventually place all fatality inquiry reports online. I am pleased to inform you that this project is now underway and reports pre-dating those on the Justice and Solicitor General website will be uploaded to the Open Government website on an ongoing basis. You can access these reports at the following web address:http://open.alberta.ca/dataset? tags=public+fatality+inquiries&sort=createdate+asc Fatality inquiry reports are distributed to the parties involved in the inquiry and to those who may be impacted by recommendations. The Government of Alberta does not follow up on recommendations as it is these parties who have the authority and responsibility to determine whether recommendations are appropriate to be implemented. When recommendations are directed at a ministry of the Government of Alberta it is the sole responsibility of that ministry to review and determine how or whether it is feasible to implement recommendations in whole, or in part. Thank you for writing to share your concerns with our government and I hope that this information is helpful. Sincerely, Kathleen Ganley Minister of Justice and Solicitor General cc: Honourable Rachel Notley Premier of Alberta This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you have received this email in error please notify the system manager. This message contains confidential information and is intended only for the individual named. If you are not the named addressee you should not disseminate, distribute or copy this e-mail. My questions are as follows: 1) Is there a specific section of GOA departments such as Alberta Health and Human Services that review the recommendations of fatality reports? 2) Is there a job order assigned to each recommendation for tracking? 3) Is there longitudinal follow up of each recommendation by each department? 4) When repeated fatality reports issue the same recommendation who is penalized for failures of the GOA departments to successfully implement recommendations? 5) Does anyone in any GOA department ever receive disciplinary action for failures in child welfare or in continuing care? 6) Is there any GOA department other than Alberta Justice reviewing these fatality reports? I assume here that Alberta Justice staff are reviewing these reports. Please correct me if I am wrong. 7) Is it not ultimately the responsibility of the Premier's office to ensure that all GOA departments under the mandate of the Premier's office implement fatality report recommendations? 8) Does any one do any sort of review of all these fatality reports over time? Or do citizens have to do the work of government to determine if the same problems are repeating and no action is being taken? 9) May I at this time also ask why we cannot have the fatality reports stay on the Alberta Justice website. In my opinion this would be sensible and I don't think that having all of them on the site will be a problem since the government has unlimited storage capacity. So why not leave them there? 10) From an e-mail I received about the Open Government portal I was told that there will be ten years of fatality reports uploaded. Can you let me know the total number of years for which the GOA has fatality reports? I was told that ten years of reports will be uploaded by January 2017. Have they only been done for 10 years? This seems surprising to me. 11) How many fatality reports in total are there? 12) Why aren't medical examiner reports filed by Alberta Justice in a similar database? 13) The federal government indicates a wide variation between provinces in medical examiner investigations. What percentage of deaths in Alberta undergo medical examiner review? http://www.statcan.gc.ca/pub/82-214-x/82-214-x2012001-eng.htm The Canadian Coroner and Medical Examiner Database (CCMED) is a new database developed at Statistics Canada in collaboration with the 13 provincial and territorial Chief Coroners and Chief Medical Examiners and the Public Health Agency of Canada. Currently, the CCMED combines data from 9 provincial and territorial databases to provide national information on the circumstances in which deaths reported to and investigated by coroners and medical examiners occur. Understanding these circumstances will facilitate the identification and characterization of emerging trends and unknown safety hazards. Such information will be significant in the CCMED's ultimate goal – the contribution to a decrease in preventable deaths in Canada. Because of the wealth of information contained in the coroner or medical examiner (C/ME) records, in particular the detailed information on the circumstances in which the deaths occurred and the C/ME's final decision on the cause of death, their records are often consulted by researchers. If national data are required, the researchers must visit the offices of all 13 chief C/ME's to identify relevant records and abstract the data. Each jurisdiction has developed a data management system; the CCMED is a response to make the compilation of this data more efficient. The 2006 to 2008 Canadian Coroner and Medical Examiner Report presents data on deaths investigated by a C/ME , with a particular focus on deaths resulting from accidents, suicides, homicides, and deaths of undetermined intent.http://www.statcan.gc.ca/pub/82-214-x/2012001/int-eng.ht The provincial and territorial C/MEs hold data on all deaths that they investigate in their jurisdictions. Depending on the province or territory, the percentage of deaths investigated by a C/ME can range approximately from 7% to 45% annually. Although the criteria for reporting deaths vary somewhat by jurisdiction, deaths caused by natural diseases account for about 61% of all C/ME cases annually 14) Do GOA departments receive the medical examiner reports? 15) Is there any attempt made to review medical examiner reports to prevent the same problems resulting in deaths repeatedly by the GOA? 16) What sort of adverse event reporting system is present in the GOA? I am speaking of Alberta Health, Human Services and Alberta Justice for the most part. Is there a centralized provincial database for all adverse events? If not why not? 17) Are adverse events in specific sites such as hospitals, nursing homes, group homes, child welfare system reportable to the GOA? Are these adverse events also reported to the federal government? 18) What is AHS and Covenant Health doing to reduce adverse events in the medical setting? 19) What is the continuing care industry doing to reduce adverse events in their facilities? 20) What is the GOA reportable incident criteria for health care, medical facilities, dental facilities and continuing care? 21) Who follows up on reportable incidents in Alberta? -- end of message. **********This is an automatically generated email, please do not reply to this email. **********



From: <AlbertaConnects@gov.ab.ca>
Date: Wed, Dec 7, 2016 at 12:12 PM
Subject: RE: Fatality reports, adverse events and tracking recommendations and post adverse event reporting (AC425296)
To:

**********This is an automatically generated email, please do not reply to this email. **********

Thank you for asking a question or sharing your thoughts with the Government of Alberta. We try to respond to all questions within 3 working days. If you need to visit us again, please visit Alberta.ca
Stay in touch

This site is frequently updated to provide you with important information about Alberta programs and services. It's also an opportunity for you to provide your government with feedback on the issues that concern you. Please visit our site again soon to read an article, or send a comment. Internet: Alberta.ca 
(AC425296) 

Your message was 
--
Fatality reports, adverse events and tracking recommendations and post adverse event reporting
In a recent response from Alberta Justice I was told that individual GOA departments are responsible for implementation of fatality report recommendations. Please refer to this e-mail: ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Ministry of Justice <ministryofjustice@gov.ab.ca> Date: Tue, Nov 8, 2016 at 10:42 AM Subject: Re: Fatality Reports To:> Cc: Office of the Premier <Premier@gov.ab.ca>   PCU 94078 Dear Ms. Ali: The Honourable Rachel Notley, Premier of Alberta, has forwarded me a copy of your follow-up to Ms. Jennifer Fuchinsky’s email response to you regarding removal of fatality reports from the government website. Premier Rachel Notley has reviewed your correspondence and has asked that I respond on her behalf in my role as Minister of Alberta Justice and Solicitor General. In an email from Jennifer Fuchinsky’s dated October 5, 2016, you were advised that in order to keep the Justice and Solicitor General website up-to-date and to provide an optimum user experience, we review the site’s information for how recent it is. Due to the volume of fatality inquiry reports, we only keep those from the last two years on our website. You were also advised that there was a project in the works to eventually place all fatality inquiry reports online. I am pleased to inform you that this project is now underway and reports pre-dating those on the Justice and Solicitor General website will be uploaded to the Open Government website on an ongoing basis. You can access these reports at the following web address:http://open.alberta.ca/dataset? tags=public+fatality+inquiries&sort=createdate+asc Fatality inquiry reports are distributed to the parties involved in the inquiry and to those who may be impacted by recommendations. The Government of Alberta does not follow up on recommendations as it is these parties who have the authority and responsibility to determine whether recommendations are appropriate to be implemented. When recommendations are directed at a ministry of the Government of Alberta it is the sole responsibility of that ministry to review and determine how or whether it is feasible to implement recommendations in whole, or in part. Thank you for writing to share your concerns with our government and I hope that this information is helpful. Sincerely, Kathleen Ganley Minister of Justice and Solicitor General cc: Honourable Rachel Notley Premier of Alberta This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you have received this email in error please notify the system manager. This message contains confidential information and is intended only for the individual named. If you are not the named addressee you should not disseminate, distribute or copy this e-mail. My questions are as follows: 1) Is there a specific section of GOA departments such as Alberta Health and Human Services that review the recommendations of fatality reports? 2) Is there a job order assigned to each recommendation for tracking? 3) Is there longitudinal follow up of each recommendation by each department? 4) When repeated fatality reports issue the same recommendation who is penalized for failures of the GOA departments to successfully implement recommendations? 5) Does anyone in any GOA department ever receive disciplinary action for failures in child welfare or in continuing care? 6) Is there any GOA department other than Alberta Justice reviewing these fatality reports? I assume here that Alberta Justice staff are reviewing these reports. Please correct me if I am wrong. 7) Is it not ultimately the responsibility of the Premier's office to ensure that all GOA departments under the mandate of the Premier's office implement fatality report recommendations? 8) Does any one do any sort of review of all these fatality reports over time? Or do citizens have to do the work of government to determine if the same problems are repeating and no action is being taken? 9) May I at this time also ask why we cannot have the fatality reports stay on the Alberta Justice website. In my opinion this would be sensible and I don't think that having all of them on the site will be a problem since the government has unlimited storage capacity. So why not leave them there? 10) From an e-mail I received about the Open Government portal I was told that there will be ten years of fatality reports uploaded. Can you let me know the total number of years for which the GOA has fatality reports? I was told that ten years of reports will be uploaded by January 2017. Have they only been done for 10 years? This seems surprising to me. 11) How many fatality reports in total are there? 12) Why aren't medical examiner reports filed by Alberta Justice in a similar database? 13) The federal government indicates a wide variation between provinces in medical examiner investigations. What percentage of deaths in Alberta undergo medical examiner review? http://www.statcan.gc.ca/pub/82-214-x/82-214-x2012001-eng.htm The Canadian Coroner and Medical Examiner Database (CCMED) is a new database developed at Statistics Canada in collaboration with the 13 provincial and territorial Chief Coroners and Chief Medical Examiners and the Public Health Agency of Canada. Currently, the CCMED combines data from 9 provincial and territorial databases to provide national information on the circumstances in which deaths reported to and investigated by coroners and medical examiners occur. Understanding these circumstances will facilitate the identification and characterization of emerging trends and unknown safety hazards. Such information will be significant in the CCMED's ultimate goal – the contribution to a decrease in preventable deaths in Canada. Because of the wealth of information contained in the coroner or medical examiner (C/ME) records, in particular the detailed information on the circumstances in which the deaths occurred and the C/ME's final decision on the cause of death, their records are often consulted by researchers. If national data are required, the researchers must visit the offices of all 13 chief C/ME's to identify relevant records and abstract the data. Each jurisdiction has developed a data management system; the CCMED is a response to make the compilation of this data more efficient. The 2006 to 2008 Canadian Coroner and Medical Examiner Report presents data on deaths investigated by a C/ME , with a particular focus on deaths resulting from accidents, suicides, homicides, and deaths of undetermined intent.http://www.statcan.gc.ca/pub/82-214-x/2012001/int-eng.ht The provincial and territorial C/MEs hold data on all deaths that they investigate in their jurisdictions. Depending on the province or territory, the percentage of deaths investigated by a C/ME can range approximately from 7% to 45% annually. Although the criteria for reporting deaths vary somewhat by jurisdiction, deaths caused by natural diseases account for about 61% of all C/ME cases annually 14) Do GOA departments receive the medical examiner reports? 15) Is there any attempt made to review medical examiner reports to prevent the same problems resulting in deaths repeatedly by the GOA? 16) What sort of adverse event reporting system is present in the GOA? I am speaking of Alberta Health, Human Services and Alberta Justice for the most part. Is there a centralized provincial database for all adverse events? If not why not? 17) Are adverse events in specific sites such as hospitals, nursing homes, group homes, child welfare system reportable to the GOA? Are these adverse events also reported to the federal government? 18) What is AHS and Covenant Health doing to reduce adverse events in the medical setting? 19) What is the continuing care industry doing to reduce adverse events in their facilities? 20) What is the GOA reportable incident criteria for health care, medical facilities, dental facilities and continuing care? 21) Who follows up on reportable incidents in Alberta?
--
end of message.

**********This is an automatically generated email, please do not reply to this email. **********



In a recent response from Alberta Justice I was told that individual GOA departments are responsible for implementation of fatality report recommendations. Please refer to this e-mail:


---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Ministry of Justice <ministryofjustice@gov.ab.ca>
Date: Tue, Nov 8, 2016 at 10:42 AM
Subject: Re: Fatality Reports
To: "
Cc: Office of the Premier <Premier@gov.ab.ca>


PCU 94078

Dear Ms. Ali:

The Honourable Rachel Notley, Premier of Alberta, has forwarded me a copy of your follow-up to Ms. Jennifer Fuchinsky’s email response to you regarding removal of fatality reports from the government website.  Premier Rachel Notley has reviewed your correspondence and has asked that I respond on her behalf in my role as Minister of Alberta Justice and Solicitor General.

In an email from Jennifer Fuchinsky’s dated October 5, 2016, you were advised that in order to keep the Justice and Solicitor General website up-to-date and to provide an optimum user experience, we review the site’s information for how recent it is.  Due to the volume of fatality inquiry reports, we only keep those from the last two years on our website.

You were also advised that there was a project in the works to eventually place all fatality inquiry reports online.  I am pleased to inform you that this project is now underway and reports pre-dating those on the Justice and Solicitor General website will be uploaded to the Open Government website on an ongoing basis.  You can access these reports at the following web address:  http://open.alberta.ca/dataset?tags=public+fatality+inquiries&sort=createdate+asc

Fatality inquiry reports are distributed to the parties involved in the inquiry and to those who may be impacted by recommendations.  The Government of Alberta does not follow up on recommendations as it is these parties who have the authority and responsibility to determine whether recommendations are appropriate to be implemented.

When recommendations are directed at a ministry of the Government of Alberta it is the sole responsibility of that ministry to review and determine how or whether it is feasible to implement recommendations in whole, or in part.

Thank you for writing to share your concerns with our government and I hope that this information is helpful.

Sincerely,




Kathleen Ganley
Minister of Justice and Solicitor General

cc:        Honourable Rachel Notley
            Premier of Alberta

This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you have received this email in error please notify the system manager. This message contains confidential information and is intended only for the individual named. If you are not the named addressee you should not disseminate, distribute or copy this e-mail.


My questions are as follows:

1) Is there a specific section of GOA departments such as Alberta Health and Human Services that review the recommendations of fatality reports?

2) Is there a job order assigned to each recommendation for tracking?

3) Is there longitudinal follow up of each recommendation by each department?


4) When repeated fatality reports issue the same recommendation who is penalized for failures of the GOA departments to successfully implement recommendations?

5) Does anyone in any GOA department ever receive disciplinary action for failures in child welfare or in continuing care?


6) Is there any GOA department other than Alberta Justice reviewing these fatality reports? I assume here that Alberta  Justice staff are reviewing these reports. Please correct me if I am wrong.

7) Is it not ultimately the responsibility of the Premier's office to ensure that all GOA departments under the mandate of the Premier's office implement fatality report recommendations?


8) Does any one do any sort of review of all these fatality reports over time? Or do citizens have to do the work of government to determine if the same problems are repeating and no action is being taken?

9) May I at this time also ask why we cannot have the fatality reports stay on the Alberta Justice website. In my opinion this would be sensible and I don't think that having all of them on the site will be a problem since the government has unlimited storage capacity. So why not leave them there?

10) From an e-mail I received about the Open Government portal I was told that there will be ten years of fatality reports uploaded.

Can you let me know the total number of years for which the GOA has fatality reports? I was told that ten years of reports will be uploaded by January 2017.

 Have they only been done for 10 years?

This seems surprising to me.


11) How many fatality reports in total are there?

12) Why aren't medical examiner reports filed by Alberta Justice in a similar database?

13) The federal government indicates a wide variation between provinces in medical examiner investigations.  What percentage of deaths in Alberta undergo medical examiner review?
http://www.statcan.gc.ca/pub/82-214-x/82-214-x2012001-eng.htm

The Canadian Coroner and Medical Examiner Database (CCMED) is a new database developed at Statistics Canada in collaboration with the 13 provincial and territorial Chief Coroners and Chief Medical Examiners and the Public Health Agency of Canada. Currently, the CCMED combines data from 9 provincial and territorial databases to provide national information on the circumstances in which deaths reported to and investigated by coroners and medical examiners occur. Understanding these circumstances will facilitate the identification and characterization of emerging trends and unknown safety hazards. Such information will be significant in the CCMED's ultimate goal – the contribution to a decrease in preventable deaths in Canada.
Because of the wealth of information contained in the coroner or medical examiner (C/ME) records, in particular the detailed information on the circumstances in which the deaths occurred and the C/ME's final decision on the cause of death, their records are often consulted by researchers. If national data are required, the researchers must visit the offices of all 13 chief C/ME's to identify relevant records and abstract the data. Each jurisdiction has developed a data management system; the CCMED is a response to make the compilation of this data more efficient.

The 2006 to 2008 Canadian Coroner and Medical Examiner Report presents data on deaths investigated by a C/ME , with a particular focus on deaths resulting from accidents, suicides, homicides, and deaths of undetermined intent.


http://www.statcan.gc.ca/pub/82-214-x/2012001/int-eng.ht



The provincial and territorial C/MEs hold data on all deaths that they investigate in their jurisdictions. Depending on the province or territory, the percentage of deaths investigated by a C/ME can range approximately from 7% to 45% annually. Although the criteria for reporting deaths vary somewhat by jurisdiction, deaths caused by natural diseases account for about 61% of all C/ME cases annually


14) Do GOA departments receive the medical examiner reports?

15) Is there any attempt made to review medical examiner reports to prevent the same problems resulting in deaths repeatedly by the GOA?

16) What sort of adverse event reporting system is present in the GOA?  I am speaking of Alberta Health, Human Services and Alberta Justice for the most part.  Is there a centralized provincial database for all adverse events? If not why not?

17) Are adverse events in specific sites such as hospitals, nursing homes, group homes, child welfare system reportable to the GOA?

Are these adverse events also reported to the federal government?

18) What is AHS and Covenant Health doing to reduce adverse events in the medical setting?

19) What is the continuing care industry doing to reduce adverse events in their facilities?

20) What is the GOA reportable incident criteria for health care, medical facilities, dental facilities and continuing care?

21) Who follows up on reportable incidents in Alberta?

Contact government

Ask a question or send a message about a government program or service.

Dave Chambers Steinar Landsgaard Greedy self centred types that don't want to change a damn thing because they are too comfortable and environmentally irresponsible.We'll add your name to the dirty oil spill response team. Like · Reply · 9 · December 1 at 7:12am Steinar Landsgaard Steinar Landsgaard And your a religious extremist masquarading behind made up facts. You would be right at home burning witches at the stake a few centuries ago. Why dont you and people like you give 50 cents for every kilowatt you use to help fight your cause. Why do you think it is your right to force all of us to prioritise and pay for your ideals. Lets see you suffer a bit for your cause or do you not think its fair if only the believers suffer. Good ideals catch on themselves you are trying to shove yours down peoples throat with government policy and taxes. Fu k off----Julie Ali Steinar Landsgaard Religious extremists? Nice try at marginalization of most of the public. As families we are concerned about the impact of fracking and other oil / gas activities in the province. We have been provided very little information about the negative aspects of this business. For example it is only recently that we learned of the two oil spills a day. We also only found out about well water on fire in Rosebud, Alberta only recently. It's concerning that folks try to label impacted rural Albertans as extremists. I imagine when fracking comes to the cities all of us will be such extremists. We want all the health concerns and environmental concerns of impacted citizens to be resolved by the industry in a fair manner (the just society model that the GOA is always asked to follow). I don't believe you are correct in saying that ordinary citizens asking the industry to do their due diligence and compensate for poor performance or accidents are extremists. No one bothers big oil since ordinary citizens usually don't have the courage or the cash to take the industry to court and simply take what they are offered to shut up about environmental or health problems. Like · Reply · 2 mins--

https://www.facebook.com/Care2/posts/10157959206135093?comment_id=10157979926275093&notif_t=like&notif_id=1481133815258475

The Canadian government pays the oil and gas industry $3.3 billion dollars a year in subsidies, despite the Prime Minister promising to reduce carbon emissions and take real action against climate change.
If you wanted to stop carbon emissions would you pay the oil and gas industry $19 for every tonne of carbon they emitted?
THEPETITIONSITE.COM
Like
Comment
197 Comments
Comments
Julie Ali
Write a comment...
Julie Ali Yes it is odd that we have to pony up cash for the Carbon tax in Alberta but the oil and gas industry get off free plus get our subsidies.


Steinar Landsgaard How can you call an arbitrary cost assigned to future consequences of burning fossil fuels a subsidy? You have no idea what the economic consequenses are, you dont take into account the fact that fossil fuels are the most economical way to adapt to climate changes (try moving a city with solar elctric cars, or desalinating water without natural gas, transporting water during droughts) . There are countries in the world whose government budget is made up almost entirely by fossil fuel royalties, so tell me again how it is subsidised. If you make a return on investment it is not a subsidy, it is an investment. When you knowingly expect a negative return on investment in order to prop up an industry like the solar power industry that is a subsidy. Please use some rational and logical thinking.
Jean Pierre Petit If they make so much money they do not need ours. We want to put our money in clean energy technologies not yours. Scram.
LikeReply6December 1 at 7:48pmEdited
Steinar Landsgaard Absolutely but then your revenue stream will be less. Im all for those who want to spend 4 times us much on wind and solar having a rigjt to do it. Just dont make all the rest of us pay too.
Dave Chambers When climate change causes so many droughts and fires and destructive storms and floods there will be no economy to fund a damn thing...a and that's' where we are headed. Armageddon for your kids and their kids..and that should about do it for the human race..
Steinar Landsgaard I think you have watched to many movies. Less people are dying today from natural disastors than at any time in history.
Dave Chambers Steinar Landsgaard Greedy self centred types that don't want to change a damn thing because they are too comfortable and environmentally irresponsible.We'll add your name to the dirty oil spill response team.
Steinar Landsgaard And your a religious extremist masquarading behind made up facts. You would be right at home burning witches at the stake a few centuries ago. Why dont you and people like you give 50 cents for every kilowatt you use to help fight your cause. Why do you think it is your right to force all of us to prioritise and pay for your ideals. Lets see you suffer a bit for your cause or do you not think its fair if only the believers suffer. Good ideals catch on themselves you are trying to shove yours down peoples throat with government policy and taxes. Fu k off
Andrea Stangeland Steinar Landsgaard by "subsidies" they are actually referring to industry-specific tax cuts and incentive programs. They have just broken down the amount of subsidies per tonne of pollution. I won't argue amount or validity or wisdom of subsidies... I don't know enough about it.
Rob Bright How about the subsidies in terms of tax dollars going to clean up the spills and catastrophes caused by fossil fuels? Or how about the subsidies in terms of health care costs directly related to burning fossil fuels? Or how about the subsidies in terms...See More
Dave McCormick So what's your reasoned approach to the damage that fossil fuels are causing to the environment?
Lorrie Thompson Steinar Landsgaard you don't want to pay for clean energy? Your children and grand children will not thank you. Oil is a limited resource, as is water and clean air. Just when do we make the changes, when all the oil is completely gone? You might not be directly effected by an oil spill (yet) but many people are. Let's cut down on our oil use and save some of the reserves for future use.
Dennis Ermantrout No they are taking about pollution and traffic congestion with not enough taxes on gas they believe to cover the end user emissions and call it a subsidy to the producer.
Steinar Landsgaard over 50 cents a litre in BC is taxes. I am quite certain if you add that together with royalties, corporate income tax and personal income taxes on the vast amount of good paying jobs the industry creates it more than covers costs. THe reason they can come up with hugely inflated costs for environmental and health effects is there is no way to accurately calculate this. What do you think the health effects would be if everybody was burning wood instead of fossil fuels. What would be the effect on health care if all the energy the health care system used was 3-4 times as expensive. Everything bad from the fossil fuel industry can be mitigated with good engineering, and our standard of living will still be far above what it will be if we continue to pursue these sub par energy sources at attrocious costs. Talk to us again when you have some real solution like nuclear fusion on a small scale. Oh and another point brought up about us running out of fossil fuels is simply rediculous. We have more proven reserves today than at any point in history. I think we will come up with something far superior to a wind turbine or solar panels in the next 400 years. Humans will not explore the universe by reducing our energy use per capita, only increasing it.
Dave Chambers Steinar Landsgaard " Less people are dying today from natural disasters than at any time in history." ..You may be right ..but when it comes to extreme weather from climate change .. the troubles are just beginning and will get much worse ..very fast...See More
Steinar Landsgaard I would like to see your source on that dave. Things are also tracked and recorded mor than ever before. I remember plenty of calamities growing up. Natural disastors are nothing new.
Kevin Sawyer Dave Chambers You are right. Some models give us less than 10 years. This is why I don't bother arguing - there's no amount of words that will crystallize humanity enough to do anything short of localized Biblical events that trigger the self preservat...See More
Dave Chambers Steinar Landsgaard "Natural disastors are nothing new." ..yes I agree... BUT...20 people DROWNED this week... in Qatar and Saudi Arabia... they got 32 inches of rain ...in a day..... that is ..1 Years RAINFALL .. IN A DAY. ..in the desert...the new + billion dollar airport in Qatar was inundated.. THAT AIN'T NATURAL.... That is Climate Change in action...and it will happen again...next week. Taxpayers are going to fork out $+1 billion for Fort McDirtyOil reconstruction... What are they going to do if they have more fires this year... like Kentucky and Israel are having this week.? Can the Alberta taxpayers afford a billion dollars for every community that suffers a horrendous fire or flood given the exponential increase in the frequency of these events ??
Diana Lee Butler Spoken like a true capitalist!
Sylvia Perkins what a cop out.. all those issues u have listed can b rectified without using fossil fuels.. what do u think they will never run out? that there is a endless supply? grab a brain whether we WANT to subsist forever on this type of energy it ISN"T goin...See More
Geoff Sander Sylvia Perkins have you seen whats happening in Ontario, and all over Europe? No one can afford these half baked schemes that DON'T reduce emissions even though they're supposed to.You're all being sold a basket of lies that serve no purpose other than turning the fear-mongers into millionaires.
Geoff Sander Dave Chambers you have no right to pass judgement on Steinar Landsgaard or call him names. He is obviously more reasonable and well read than most of the commenters here, including yourself, whose self-righteousness precludes any logical thought. Pay attention to what he said, even thought it infuriates you because it is accurate and contrary to your eco-religion. There are lots of us who are just as concerned as anyone about the environment, not mention people who are in real need of real help. Think of the good we could do in the world with the billions that are being gobbled up by the Al Gores and wind power industrialists!
Geoff Sander Great response, well reasoned, accurate, and polite. I sure have to laugh at the anger that causes in people who are so solemnly sold on the snake oil environmentalists' lies.
Ian Andrew 4 times as much? maybe like 25 years ago. Renewables are already cheaper in a lot of countries, and they continue to be more cost effective each year while fossil fuels continue to be less cost effective. Would be even better if we took the subsidies we put towards oil, like the multi million dollar exploration and development funds, and put them towards renewables. http://goo.gl/A1ci3Ghttps://www.deutschebank.nl/.../Solar_-_2014_Outlook_Let...https://about.bnef.com/.../renewable-energy-now-cheaper.../
LikeReply2December 3 at 7:17pmEdited
Steinar Landsgaard ontario initially promised solar 80 cents a killowat and wind 35 cents a killowatt plus guaranteed pruchase agreements. as these subsidies have come down so has the willingness to invest. It also affects the cost effectiveness of the fossil fuel power ...See More
Mike Hogan Future subsidies can be debated. Past messes left behind for communities to pay for are real and are a form of subsidy when companies are left off the hook.
Steinar Landsgaard Why dont we just demand better quality pipelines and more stringent operating practices. This could easily be achieved with the costs saved from litigation etc dealing with protestors. It is currently our best energy source and if we stopped debating its use and just got after it, we would have a lot of money to spend on doing things better.
LikeReply1December 3 at 7:38pmEdited
Ian Andrew Always 80% or more hydro and biomass? Is this because you ignore anything you see that isn't in line with your views? I'd like to see your source on wind and solar having almost negative contributions, as most of the other things you say are completely false.https://www.theguardian.com/.../wind-power-spain...
Steinar Landsgaard Your link wont open for me at work, but I will get to it. Usually these articles fail to acknowledge the source of all their imported electricity, and refer to capacity instead of actual production.
Mike Hogan Steinar Landsgaard Are you suggesting we should banish protesting. free speech, free choice and all the stuff that follows?
Steinar Landsgaard No I am suggesting that you are adding a lot of cost to the process and not accomplishing anything. Take transmountain for example, It will get built, but all the unneccessary money that was spent in the last few years trying to appease people when everything points to the neccessity of said project, could have been used to up the quality of that pipeline. Im not against their right to protest, im just trying to educate people on the fact that all they do is make things worse, because the solutions they offer up are not based in reality. Thus if you pursue an unrealistic solution, you are having a further detrimental effect on the the realistic neccessities and only making things worse. By all means I am for total freedom, but most of you are for policies that basically increase government involvement in everything and will severely reduce our ability to pursue individual goals. I am a libertarian, you people are all using bunk science to justify your vision of a government controlled utopia. You can not engineer the perfect society, the perfect society exist in free market chaos because the best ideas thrive and the worst die off.
Dave Chambers Steinar Landsgaard "demand better quality pipelines and more stringent operating practices" ...More BullCrap.. Pipeline companies are all about profit.. they are too damn cheap to spend on anything..if they could get away with paper machete pipes they...See More
LikeReply3December 5 at 7:48pmEdited
Dave Chambers Steinar Landsgaard There is NO NECESSITY for Trans Mountain at all...ship filthy bitumen tar offshire to be burnt.. raw logs to foreign markets....no quality job generating upgrade like a refinery.. fast buck gains for foreign companies....hopefully this lunatic idea will die at the B.C. border...mired in years of legal wrangling...
Steinar Landsgaard Well your wrong again dave. Regulations can be very effective at setting standards for industry. Problem is you can only regulate so much or it becomes cost prohibitive. When you already spent a rediculous amount on litigating with religious extremists om the left this bar has to be lowered. If you read about how the requirements for both drilling and pipeline infastructure have increased over the years, you would see how wrong you are.
Keith Widgington Steinar Landsgaard Are you serious. Everything bad from fossil fuels can be mitigated. That's like telling a rape victim the actions of her aggressor can be justified based on the victims habits. The oil industry makes enough profits from the sale of...See More
Julie Ali Mike Hogan Very true. We don't have enough money in the kitty for the environmental messes we will have to clean up in Alberta once big oil runs off with its profits. Of course this is what happens when all the political parties do not work in the public interest. There is absolutely no excuse for the environmental problems being left to the public to deal with. The AER is a farce. There isn't enough cash to fix the orphan well problem and its being suggested to enthusiastic audiences in the NDPC government in Alberta that we make a job program to clean up these sites. What the heck? Are we the bank for all idiotic ideas? We're being used, bled and fleeced. But of course everyone yaps about how great the oil and gas industry is for us. It is good for the province. But the bad side needs to be looked at, planned for and paid for by big oil. Remember those tailing ponds? We're stuck with that moonscape for life. Many decades of research hasn't cracked this nut and folks who started research on tailings ponds are retiring without any success in remediation. We even paid for this research. Heck what didn't we pay for?
Julie Ali Steinar Landsgaard I am sure that most of the oil and gas industry do obey the regulations but I am afraid that not all of them seem to do a good job and the social license tends to vanish when citizens are abused. You only have to look at the burning water in Rosebud, Alberta where folks have wells on fire from fracking to see that there were problems and no one in government gave a darn under the PCs. Actually no one still gives darn under the NDP. We have Jessica Ernst tell us all about the lack of government action but of course she wil be bankrupted by the industry and the court system before we hear the full story. Meanwhile we have Diana Daunheimer tell us about alleged non-compliances and exposure to fracking pollution. It's not right that citizens are abused and exposed to risks without the oil and gas industry taking responsibility for these non-compliances. Regulations are useless if the AER and the energy regulators before the AER simply are ineffective. It's like the situation in nursing homes. You have no interest by government-no oversight--no autopsies but you sure do have a ton of regulations. What are we stupid?
Allan Menard First thing I would do is kill all the economists. It always comes down to money. Stay the course, cause money. Who cares about the future, cause more money right now. The changes that need to happen will take time. 20-30 years. Plenty of time to mitig...See More
Travis Woodworth Maybe Im stupid, isnt burning fossil fuels poluting the planet?
LikeReply320 hrs
Russel Johnsen First, it is the job of economists to try to get a picture of the future on an economic basis. It is not easy but the idea is to assess both losses and gains. To do this in an area of pollution is not too difficult when we know the effects of certain polutants and we can calculte the damage and put up against the numbers percieved without the polution.
It is possible to evolve a damage report - losses that could be caused at certain ranges of changes in temperature.
This is often done in many parts of our world.
It's less and less acurate depending upon the length of time being focussed upon.
Nevertheless it does give the numbers trend and a damages trend into the future and the trends forecast are bad.
LikeReply18 hrs
Allan Menard Its to bad that everything environment is an intangible and thus not considered worth anything in the mind of economics. Thus they can and do not take into account such things. However, those progressive enough to actually wish to take on those challenges could do it given enough time and resources. However, that is not done being done in the above, nor do they wish to do that outside of the UN.
LikeReply18 hrs
Keith Widgington Steinar Landsgaard all the more reasons to put our money into renewable energies. Dispute why you say about the high cost the oil companies are still making billions in profits. Which is coming at the expense of our well being and test if the planets.
LikeReply19 hrs
Julie Ali Keith Widgington I have no problem with greening the energy sector What I have a problem with is downloading costs to us via a Carbon tax. Why should we pay for greenwashing? If wind farms work so well why don't they get private investors to fund them. Why do we have to subsidise them via our forced donations in terms of the carbon tax? Isn't there a free market in Alberta? We are already supporting the oil and gas industry with pipelines and other subsidies such as the refinery business. We support the continuing care industry with P3 arrangements where we give private land developers 50% of the cost of their infrastructure and even AHS staff while they earn profits. What do we get for this major outflow of cash? We have no assets in the continuing care industry, residents have no rights and can be forced to go where AHS and Covenant Health decides. These operators can evict at any time and use the Trespass to Premises legislation created by the PCs to shut up folks by banning them from seeing their families. We pay for a ton of private works and we don't get value from these investments of public cash. Albertans like myself are fed up. Government culture, entitlement and behaviour needs changing and I will vote Wildrose to ensure this change happens.
LikeReply15 mins
Julie Ali Dave Chambers I don't believe that there is any need for any pipelines at this time. There may be in the future. Right now the world is swimming in oil. I also believe that we-the citizens are going to be subsidising these pipelines. The only certain in everything in the energy sector is that we pay.
LikeReply14 mins
Julie Ali Ian Andrew I have looked at the information for Ontario and it's not pretty. It is clear to me that the wind generation of electricity is full of risks. In other words we will pay for set up and for the running of a business sector that is not profitable. Also wind generated electricity can't meet all the needs. Where will we get back up power? I imagine that BC will provide this back up power. Do you think BC will give it to us cheap? When it's cold outside like it is now, we will be stuck paying top dollars. The decommissioning of the use of plants using coals was ongoing and the NDP had no reason to pay out major public dollars for something that was going extinct in the first place. I am pretty sure we will pay increased costs in the next few years that is being subsidised by the Carbon tax (in other words -our own money). Its all dumb greenwashing to make Alberta look good to the world that is awash in oil.
LikeReply10 mins
Julie Ali Jean Pierre Petit You may want to put public dollars into green technologies that cost more and need our dollars to make a profit but I do not. I want green solutions that are able to make a profit without public subsidy. If they can't do this then they aren't a business are they? They are subsidised public ventures that most of us don't want to pay for when we have more pressing concerns like families in continuing care who need this cash.
LikeReply7 mins
Julie Ali Steinar Landsgaard Religious extremists? Nice try at marginalization of most of the public. As families we are concerned about the impact of fracking and other oil / gas activities in the province. We have been provided very little information about the negative aspects of this business. For example it is only recently that we learned of the two oil spills a day. We also only found out about well water on fire in Rosebud, Alberta only recently. It's concerning that folks try to label impacted rural Albertans as extremists. I imagine when fracking comes to the cities all of us will be such extremists. We want all the health concerns and environmental concerns of impacted citizens to be resolved by the industry in a fair manner (the just society model that the GOA is always asked to follow). I don't believe you are correct in saying that ordinary citizens asking the industry to do their due diligence and compensate for poor performance or accidents are extremists. No one bothers big oil since ordinary citizens usually don't have the courage or the cash to take the industry to court and simply take what they are offered to shut up about environmental or health problems.
LikeReply2 mins
Julie Ali
Write a reply...