• No we’re not.

      Resource extraction is necessary for human survival and progress. Our country does it more responsibly than lots of other places.

      We stopped coal fired electricity generation but various other countries can’t afford to just yet. They will continue importing coal. They deserve the best coal. 100%, slavery-free, cruelty-free, all-organic Alberta coal.

      I hope they nationalize the industry instead of letting private corporations making all the profits from Canadian coal.

      • Tigeroovy ( Tigeroovy@lemmy.ca ) 
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        4 days ago

        I hope they nationalize the industry instead of letting private corporations making all the profits from Canadian coal.

        In Alberta? I’ll give you one guess which way they’ll go.

        • Lol they’re still crying about the National Energy Program proposal in Alberta.

          Alberta loves 1 Pierre unconditionally and hates another Pierre wholeheartedly. Most Albertans get the 2 mixed up. The detestable Pierre is the favourite and the Pierre that cared about the country is the villain.

      • DeadEndLink ( DeadEndLink@lemmy.ca ) 
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        edit-2
        3 days ago

        Exporting a shit ton of thermal coal for profit and burning coal domestically when there are viable alternatives has nothing to do with “human survival.”

        The recycled corporate ecocide propaganda in this group is astounding.

        • theprogman ( theprogman@lemmy.ca ) 
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          edit-2
          3 days ago

          I think it’s all muddled together. The capitalist economy, individuals emotional attachment to material things, having no sense of moral obligation towards the environment unless it’s self-centered (e.g. I like parks to go on walks, to take pictures there, therefore I like parks). We will never be able to convince the majority that we’re destroying our planet’s ecosystems in a futile quest for materialism, a quest that we were most of us conditioned to believe in from early childhood.

          “No, we need those mines for our economy so that we don’t become a poorer nation!” All the while, we destroy what, I believe, is the most precious thing in this part of the world: ecosystems that have grown, evolved and survived for millennia. But because that has no value for the common person, who cares?

          I will admit that I understand in part why some would want our economy to go at full speed extracting more resources, because they’ve been promised that it would bring jobs, security and material comforts. IMHO, that is just a naive mindset as we see the global economy being more and more centralized in the hands of a few owners. But who cares when you can buy a 40’’ screen for 500$ to watch Netflix all night, right?

        • Not every country in the world can afford to ditch coal just because you demand that they stop using it this very moment.

          We got that sweet sweet cruelty-free, slavery-free, all organic, beautiful Canadian coal. Nationalize it and sell it to the people in need.

          • codydodd ( codydodd@lemmy.ca ) 
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            3 days ago

            Coal causes serious respiratory issues and is carcinogenic. Toronto had regular smog days until they closed the coal plants. It has an immediate impact on health. You pushing for coal sales is like pushing for us to continue to export asbestos. Its an ethics question you are bypassing. Making people sick for profit.

      • betanumerus ( betanumerus@lemmy.ca ) 
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        edit-2
        3 days ago

        “Resource extraction”

        Never say “resource”. Always be clear as to what “resource” you’re talking about. You are in your next sentence. That is fine but I’m sick of people saying “resource” and “energy” to greenwash their fossil fuel promotion, sound clean while polluting, change climates forever and unpredictably, and cover up their own shame and guilt about it all.

        Saying “resource” instead of “thermal coal” is like confusing '“food” with “fried bacon double cheese burger dipped in gravy”. Eat that 3 times a day and see what happens.

        • That poor serf in China or that outcast “untouchable” in India would have a much more difficult life without their shitty government using dirtyass polluting coal to generate electricity. Just 2 countries are 35% of the world’s population.

          Wealthy countries agreed that we’ll reduce out footprint first because we are the ones who contributed in destroying the environment more than the global majority. We didn’t change anything significant by the looks of it. That’s on our government and our consumerism.

          Those guys over there still need their coal.

          • betanumerus ( betanumerus@lemmy.ca ) 
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            3 days ago

            “Those guys over there still need their coal.” - That is exactly the kind of thinking, framing it as a “need”, that keeps worsening the problem decades after decade. A transition was never meant to be a joke. Supplying thermal coal creates and promotes a dependency. A gradual transition, decreasing supply of thermal coal to replace it with a sustainable source, is the way out of that dependency. That is what they “need” help with.

            • No argument there from me.

              I’m not saying we should keep them dependent and let our shitty multinational corporations continue making bank selling them coal forever. I’m all for nationalizing it and using the profits to transition to a better solution.

              I’m just saying that they won’t stop using the only means of electricity generation they’ve already invested into just because we tell them it’s bad for the environment. Especially since we’re still burning coal for electricity in Saskatchewan.

              I thought we had stopped but someone corrected my stupid assumption.

              • betanumerus ( betanumerus@lemmy.ca ) 
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                4
                ·
                3 days ago

                “they won’t stop using the only means of electricity generation they’ve already invested” - That is not a Canadian problem. Canada either helps with combustion or doesn’t.

                “just because we tell them it’s bad for the environment” - India doesn’t need Canada to explain the effects.

                “we’re still burning coal for electricity in Saskatchewan” - That is a Canadian problem.

                • Yeah.

                  They need coal. We got coal. They either buy slavery-free Canadian coal or they look elsewhere. Refusing to sell coal changes nothing.

                  India doesn’t need our elitist, entitled, supremacist lectures. They need coal.

  • There was no complete ban in place to begin with.

    It was a promise by the former prime minister. Like election reforms.

    I really hope Mark Carney government does reverse the ban on horse exports for slaughter.

    Alberta has a lot of all organic, free range, cruelty free, grass-fed, free grazing horses running around feral and the government has to pay to keep their population in check. Crate them up and ship them for people who wish to eat all natural lean animal protein.

    That’s a better use of resources than shooting them and letting them go to waste. Instead of banning it just because it hurts the feelings of a few horse-people.