I'd hate to be critical about such initiatives which appear to be very beneficial, but this is definitely not the way to help make Canada more environmentally friendly, and cutting down on its overall ecological footprint and emissions reduction. Problem #1 is that this pledge is betting on the goodwill of the average household to encourage more environmentally friendly retrofitting. As in the past, such changes will not necessarily be appealing for the average household to invest in. Once again, the government is betting on the use of incentives to lure Canadians out of a consumerism type of a lifestyle, and although this is the more liberal way to approach the issue, the fact of the matter is that the average person, unless environmentally motivated, will not make the changes necessary if they are only being partially compensated for the changes. The mentality of making changes only when it deems suitable for ourselves is essentially a selfish concept that is engrained in the minds of many living in this culture of ours, and that itself would fundamentally prevent any significant changes in the environment. Only regulations, laws, and a more intimidating approach towards saving the environment will actually reap results, when it comes to the need for people to sacrifice their own freewill living for the benefit of the entire world. The 2nd problem is that this does nothing to actually tackle the real offenders of global greenhouse emissions. The average household contributes a marginal amount to the overall pie, and the real issue is in the energy sector, the industrial sector, and the automobile industry, combined with an aggressive forestry industry. The energy sector alone contributes to the largest greenhouse gas emissions, ranging from the oil sands of Alberta, to the large demand of energy controlled by ontario hydro, sourcing from its high reliance on coal. Many businesses have also not seen any benefit to making progress towards reducing emissions simply because the government tends to protect them from suffering in the economy (and hence affecting the Canadian economy). The automobile sector is also a large offender of emissions pollutions for obvious reasons. Unless initiatives are taken to change the main sources of emissions, we can never claim to have accomplished anything. The question always appears to be: How can we make a difference in the environment, without taking away from the consumeristic lifestyles that we live; and the answer is that such a lifestyle can never support a healthy environment. People and government alike, need to realize that no technology will ever make up for the harm we have already caused the environment, and that sacrifices are needed in order to ever make a difference.

Tories pledge $300M for energy efficiency efforts

Sun. Jan. 21 2007 3:07 PM ET

CTV.ca

The Conservatives have pledged $300 million to help Canadians make their homes more energy efficient -- the latest in a list of environmental initiatives recently announced by the government.

The announcement, made at Toronto's home show on Sunday morning, will give homeowners an average grant of $1,000, ranging up to a possible $5,000, said Natural Resources Minister Gary Lunn. The grants will come in the form of cash, not a tax rebate.

The $1,000 grants, Lunn said, will help reduce homeowners' energy costs by 30 per cent.

"So not only would they receive the $5,000 to help them in the retro fits -- that's a maximum -- but they'll also go on to receive thousands of dollars in savings in their energy costs year after year."

Lunn also said 800 small businesses will receive help from the so-called Eco-Energy Efficiency Initiative.

Earlier in the week, Lunn promised Ottawa would spend $230 million over four years towards researching clean energy options.

After the Sunday announcement, Lunn appeared on CTV's Question Period.

He countered claims that the initiative is nothing more than a repackaging of the EnerGuide program, one of the former Liberal government's programs that was cancelled by the Conservatives.

"It's important to note under the old Liberal program, almost 50 cents of every dollar spent went to doing audits and administration," he said.

"But even worse than that, of those people who had the audits done, only 30 per cent of those actually went on to do renovations. Seventy per cent of the people didn't do anything, and nothing was done for the environment."

By comparison, he said the Conservative program will deliver 90 per cent of every dollar spent, to renovations or retrofits. That will have a direct impact on reducing greenhouse gases, Lunn said.

Lunn said he has been working on the initiatives since early spring.

David McGuinty, the newly minted Liberal environment critic, said the ideas unveiled this week were originally announced by the previous Liberal government.

"There's no problem with these announcements except they're one year too late," he told Question Period.

"They are Liberal programs that were first cancelled by the government when they slashed almost $600 million of climate change funding in the last budget."

McGuinty said the recent Conservative announcements don't seem to be part of a comprehensive plan.

"What's concerning here is that we have lost the year, but, secondly, what we're seeing is ministers dispatched, as I like to say, jumping from ice floe to ice floe around the country and announcing these programs, but we don't see how they connect."

Nathan Cullen, the NDP's environment critic, said the announcements appear to be an attempt for the Conservatives to boost their environmental credentials -- fast.

"There's not a lot of substance behind the announcements. A lot of them are played out," Cullen told Question Period.

However, Cullen said, hope does lie in the fact the NDP is playing a key role in helping rewrite the Conservative Clean Air Act.

"We're quite comfortable working with the other parties, the Bloc and the Liberals as well as the government, to actually get something done, because, essentially, we head into another election and we don't want to waste another year," Cullen said.

"There's an opportunity for us in this parliament to do some really decisive things and move us along."