this blog has moved to a new address: daveberta.ca

Please update your RSS, bookmarks, and links to http://daveberta.ca.

Wednesday, January 10, 2007

worst blizzard in 18 years...

...is what I heard. I'm going to take some pictures today...

Up to 10 cm of snow forecast today
Valleyview-area woman dies of exposure in late-night walk for help after car slides off remote road
Joel Kom, The Edmonton Journal
Published: Wednesday, January 10, 2007

EDMONTON - Icy roads have already claimed one life this week as much of the province braces for blizzards that could see whiteouts kick up on area highways.

Forecasters expected blizzards to be underway by this morning in Edmonton and northern parts of the province, with winds wind gusting up to 60 kilometres an hour or more.

Environment Canada said the snowfall would extend from the Grande Prairie and southern Peace regions all the way to Lloydminster, with five to 10 centimetres of new snow likely in most areas.

10 comments:

docsanchez said...

Plus the seemingly-unrelenting storm after storm BC is getting and the fact the US climate centre has announced 2006 was the warmest year ever, and maybe the feds are listening to more that just "the people" in making the environment their #1 priority.

Nastyboy said...

Snow in the street,...with winds,....in Canada.

My folks left for Cuba this morning. I hate them.

Anonymous said...

docsanchez,
May be minor to you, but they said "warmest year on record". Records began in 1895.

I don't want to unleash yet another Kyoto self-flaggelation party (Dion is coming to Calgary on Friday already), but most people have a much shorter sense of time that the average geologist. And most people are easily lead to believe that greenhouse gas emissions = pollution = smog. A good chunk of people hold out that Elvis could be alive.

I can agree that it has been warmer this year and last year than in recent history (but not in the last several hundred years). I can agree that - at the margin - humans can be contributing to climate change. I do not agree that buying credits from Russia will do any good for anyone - other than the Russians. Or that attempting to cut emissions when some of the largest emitters (China, India) are doing nothing is going to make any measurable difference, other than making us feel noble. I certainly do not agree that anyone can make an accurate prediction of what the world's weather will be in the next century, given the large number of variables involved.

Agree with me or not. But everyone has an agenda, whether they be scientists on both sides of the debate (and yes, it is still a debate), or politicians, or even plain citizens like us.

One written diatribe a day keeps my fingers from locking up.

docsanchez said...

lol. True. But my "ever" is significantly less than 102 years. So it's still warmest ever for me.

Let's all just go make snow angels instead of arguing over water conservation etc... (once the winds die down a hint of course).

c-lo said...

Anonymous,

You realize that the scientific community is pretty unified in the assertion that global warming is occuring. Did you know that chemicals like smog have likely protected us from the increased greenhouse gases by reducing how much sunlight reaches the surface?

No offence, but in the last 10 years, the average world temperature is rising very fast. Now I don't recall hearing any major geological events that would release anything that would alter the climate that much.

I also hope that you are not primarily trusting geologists for your information, since geologists study the rocks. I would recommend looking at the work of climatologists and meteorologists.

Also, what do you think is the scientific community's agenda? I think they actually believe that the data indicates something very bad is happening, much like acid rain, desertification, lake atrophication, deforestation and many other human-caused environmental problems.

I also do not think Canadians should use the excuse of "well they're not doing it, so we shouldn't" as an excuse. We've enjoyed an opulent life with little regard for potential consequences for quite some time. We have a responsibility to try - every Canadian.

Jim said...


Also, what do you think is the scientific community's agenda? I think they actually believe that the data indicates something very bad is happening, much like acid rain, desertification, lake atrophication, deforestation and many other human-caused environmental problems.


C-lo: Are you taking HIST 114 this semester?

Anonymous said...

c-lo,

I said I didn't want to kickstart another Kyoto chat/spat, but I suppose I brought this upon myself. Reference to geologist was to most people's sense of time (which is short, like 10 years) versus the earth's history (which is very long). I do know what a geologist does - I live and work in Calgary after all.

Your comment about: "Also, what do you think is the scientific community's agenda? I think they actually believe that the data indicates something very bad is happening, much like acid rain, desertification, lake atrophication, deforestation and many other human-caused environmental problems."...

brilliantly illustrates my point. It has been to several groups' advantage to blur the issue of greenhouse gas reduction by lumping in a general pollution argument. Many Kyoto "solutions" would not otherwise be agreeable to other environmental groups (e.g. hydroelectricity, nuclear power, water diversion, etc.). If you think the scientific community is unamimous, you are mistaken. There is a such a backlash to any that dispute the data underlying the famous "hockey-stick" graph that has become the article of faith for in-crowd, that a lot of scientists just shut up. Also, the media and entertainment industry bears some blame (movie "The Day After Tomorrow" being a great case in point). All of the big C celebrities that espouse their own pet environmental case might look to their own backyard, and their habits of excessive consumption (a little less bling, a little more compost).

I am not saying there is a problem with the environment. All I am saying is that various groups have a vested interest in how things are communicated, and what information is available.

You want to make a real difference? Take the bus to work (I do), buy a low-flush toilet (I did), and limit your buying of products with excessive packaging (I try).

Anonymous said...

Interesting news...

http://www.cbc.ca/canada/story/2007/01/11/lapierre-resignation.html

docsanchez said...

Making room for Trudeau? Man, that could backfire...

More interesting news which I'm sure dave will have something to say about: http://www.cbc.ca/canada/calgary/story/2007/01/11/stelmach-fundraiser.html

Anonymous said...

Dion seems lukewarm to the idea of a Trudeau candidacy. What are your thoughts? Is it because the media would likely fawn over him, distracting attention from the Liberal leader, because the Trudeau is a novice and new to the party, or for some other reason?