Emergency Travel Advisory

Travel Advisory during a weather emergency:


"Essential travel only."

"May be significant inconveniences."

"Stay home."

"Don't drive unless you have to."

"Do not travel."

"State of emergency."

"Travel ban."

"Motorists can be fined or arrested if found driving on public roadways for a non-emergency reason."

"Flights cancelled."



Travel Advisory during a climate emergency: 



"There is no emergency." 

"No restrictions."

"Go, go, go!"

Are we in a climate emergency?

The following quotes are from “Don’t Mention The Emergency? Making The Case For Emergency Climate Action”, by Jane Morton.

“The emergency message is not reaching the public.” 

“Time is running out to address the climate emergency, but there remains a vast gulf between what political leaders and the media say, and the truth.”

“All people have the right to know the truth and make informed choices in what has been referred to as The Age of Consequences”.

“In times of emergency, the priorities of communities shift radically: people readily support rationing or regulation of essential services and are willing to direct all available resources to the shared task of overcoming the crisis.”

Scientists Recommend Cutting Fossil Fuel Consumption Immediately

One way we explore places farther than our property line is by accessing web cams. This photo is a web cam screen shot of a sunrise on Digby Harbour, which is about a 24 km round trip by car from home. Being there in person is nice, but not without negative consequences for the health of the planet. I can ride my bike there, but it is a bit too far to push Linda in her wheelchair.

Since arriving in Nova Scotia in 2014 we haven't done much exploring in our van. 

In keeping with our "minimize driving" philosophy that we pioneered during our 9 years on the west coast, we usually only drive to pick up groceries, or attend the rare appointment. 

Why? Scientists have told us that continued use of fossil fuels endangers all life on Earth, and we are taking that message seriously. 

We are willing to make sacrifices for the benefit of all living things, many of which are faced with imminent extinction.

Another web cam we like to visit is at Belliveau Cove on St. Mary's Bay. It is about a 50 km round trip by car from home. This photo shows a sunset over the Maritime province of New Brunswick, which is on the other side of the Bay of Fundy. 

If the scientists are right, we are implementing the only logical solution, which is cut fossil fuel consumption now. If they are wrong, I guess we save a lot of money and create a cleaner world for nothing.

Either way, we don't worry. We are enjoying getting to know our immediate area well, since there is beauty to be found everywhere on this amazing planet. We are surrounded by it constantly, no matter where we are. 

Cutting out driving does not mean cutting out the enjoyment of place. You can explore your immediate location, whether by looking out the window, sauntering in the yard, or strolling around the neighbourhood. 

If you like to go farther afield, a bicycle is a great no-carbon mode of travel.

You really don't need to go anywhere to see beautiful things. The grass is plenty green right where you are, despite what car manufacturers and the travel industry want you to believe. 

The scientists might be wrong, but what if they are right? 

You can visit Nova Scotia web cams here.

Earth Day 2018: End Plastic Pollution

Today the Earth Day Network takes on a formidable foe - plastic. This year's campaign is to end plastic pollution, a tall order considering plastic has invaded the entire planet. 

Plastic is found in bottled water. It is in our food, meaning it is also in each of us. The effects are unknown, but they are unlikely to be good. I can envision the plastic-industrial complex inventing fake news to convince us that "ingesting plastic is good for you!". Watch for that as awareness of plastic pollution builds.

"A 2017 study... concluded that of the 9.1 billion tons of plastic produced since 1950, close to 7 billion tons are no longer in use. 

The authors estimate that only 9 percent got recycled over the years, while another 12 percent was incinerated, leaving 5.5 billion tons of plastic waste littering the oceans and land." - The Great Pacific Garbage Patch

If you are concerned about plastic patches floating in the oceans, many the size of small continents, or about plastic bag trees, or plastic in food, then there are things that can be done. 

The plastic backlash is finally happening, with Taiwan, Scotland and Britain (along with cities in other parts of the world) getting things going by banning single use plastic straws. But you can't ban all plastic. Or can you?

Each of us can choose to ban plastic in our own lives, although it is a challenge to avoid completely when it is so prevalent in our everyday lives. 

The most effective "R" to be used here is Refuse. The biggest change I have seen in the produce section of food stores is the amount of plastic packaging. There are many things that I will not buy because they are packaged unnecessarily in plastic containers.

I don't use single use plastic bags, and bring my own mesh bags when I go food shopping to put fruit and veggies in for the trip home.

We can also let businesses know that we prefer not to buy products that come in excessive plastic, or are made from plastic when less harmful alternatives are available. We have switched to glass containers for food storage, and when we make things like yogurt, we eliminated the need for a plastic container.

When plastic does make its way into our homes, we can make sure that it is refilled, reused, repurposed, or recycled responsibly. Ending plastic pollution will be a challenge, but each of us can do our part and make a difference. 

I hope this happens before we become Planet Plastic, inhabited by plastic people that live a short time, then don't biodegrade for hundreds of years after death. 

How do you ban plastic from your home? 


Happy Earth Day. 

It is still a great little planet, and one worth saving, from plastic and other harms.

"Hypocrites!"

I would argue that these tailings ponds (and many others) leach toxic substances into the Athabasca River.
Because I use fossil fuels does not invalidate my point. Research has shown toxic leaching is happening.
I would like an "oil activist" to respond to this without telling me, "You're a hypocrite, so shut up".

With Jane Fonda recently conducting a tour of Alberta's tar sands, I was ready for the predictable backlash from oil activists (yes, it's a thing). I was not disappointed.

Often when anyone tries to defend the environment, they are labelled hypocrites. They point out how Fonda arrived in Fort McMurray in a plane powered by the fossil fuels she seems to be speaking out against. They may not realize it, but they are committing a logical fallacy, or error in reasoning.

The logical fallacy of Tu Quoque (pronounced "too kwoh-kway"), Latin for "you too", seeks to avoid responding to criticism by turning it back on the accuser. It assumes the accusers argument is wrong because they "do it too". It attacks the person, not the argument, and it is both wrong arguing and wrong thinking.

Oil activists and other anti-environment types (if you aren't for it, you're against it), often use attacks on the other side involved by making blatant or subtle efforts to sabotage, undercut or demean them. This also is used to make the speaker look good, right, moral, trustworthy or in other ways better than their opponent.

But the whole purpose of an argument, or discussion, is not make yourself look good. It is to address the issue at hand. It is to be involved in a communication process whose goal is the growth of both personal and mutual understanding. Personal attacks are a no-no. Please stick to the argument.

Because the celebrities that speak out against the tar sands consume fossil fuels to get there, does not invalidate their argument that this extractive industry is harmful to life in general.

And it is. The tailings ponds alone are an environmental catastrophe - if birds land in them they die. Thousands have died in them already, and more will in the future, despite all the sound cannons they blast off on a regular basis to prevent birds from doing what comes naturally. The environmental NGO Boreal Songbird Initiative has estimated that some 166 million birds could be killed over the next 30 to 50 years as a result of tar sands extraction.

Another problem with using the "you too" personal attack is that there are currently not any viable alternatives to fossil fuels. So how, exactly, is one to get to the open pit mines of Fort McMurray without burning fossil fuels, in order to have a discussion about fossil fuels?

I wonder if we could successfully remove the opportunity for the tu quoque error in communicating if  we walked to the tar sands wearing "no fossil fuel footwear" and a woollen outfit? And lived caves and grew all our own food? And didn't have computers?

Better yet, maybe when our opponents dismiss our arguments by saying we are hypocrites, we could respond by saying,

"You know, that was a personal attack, so you automatically lose the argument. Sorry.

If you'd like to re-offer your last comment without the personal attack then you may still convince me, but otherwise... thanks for the discussion.

Like Jane, I'll take my win and go home."

Our Beds Are Burning

An 86,000 hectare wildfire raging in record high temperatures burns the Alberta oil sands town of Fort McMurray. Over one thousand homes burned to the ground. Almost 100,000 people evacuated and probably not returning any time in the near future.

Is there a message here for us?

"How do we sleep when our beds are burning?", asked the band Midnight Oil. In Fort Mac they are literally burning. Something is going on, although it is too complex to say exactly what. Of course, theories abound. Some are more blamey than others.

Some people are saying it is karma for helping produce some of the largest concentrations of greenhouse gases in the country. Their compassion chip might be disengaged mentioning this while so many are in so much pain, but again I ask myself what the take away from this apocalyptic disaster is going to be.

What is the lesson here? Is there one? I don't know.

If it is karma, it is karma that anyone that uses fossil fuels to drive their cars, or heat their homes, or provide them with electricity must share equally. Our beds may not be burning, but they are definitely smouldering.

If it is karma, it is karma for all of us, not just those working the oil sands while trying to provide for their families.

Thankfully, most people do have their compassion chip engaged by viewing the horror of what is going on up north. Folks are coming together to help out with basic needs, ease the pain, and help those affected rebuild their lives.

There are many, many helpers showing us a better way of responding to this tragedy that we have all created. Soon though, we should probably take a look at what this awful event is trying to tell us. All of us.

Or maybe it is just a forest fire of catastrophic proportions.