Nails in the Liberal Coffin

[Snman]

Good point. Still, regardless of whatever guise they come under, someone will replace them 8 years later. I do have one question though. If the NDP were doing so well, why then did the Liberals get elected?

[steven lloyd]

There is no argument the NDP had collected a lot of baggage by then – some fair and some not – but certainly one reason the Liberals were elected was an electorate that was sold a bill of goods by a snakeoil salesman who promised to cut taxes without cutting critical services.

[Smurf]

Exactly. They were elected on lies and deceipt. The same lies and deceipt that has gotten them in all the trouble they are in now. And if they do go down it will be things like BC Rail and GST that caused it. Not necessarily because they were bad but because of the way they were handled.

[Snman]

Well all of that must have just come to light because they did, in fact, get re-elected. Go figure.

[NAB]

Well all of that must have just come to light because they did, in fact, get re-elected. Go figure.

No. For many of us it came to light back in 2004/5/6. Unfortunately not many electors were paying attention as they were too busy trying to get on the gravy train to nowhere.

Nab

[Al Czervic]

It always has amazed me how quickly the electorate forgets how things were. Prior to the Liberals coming to power the province was in shambles created by the NDP. Nothing but complaints about the government up to election time. Here we are, several years later and all of a sudden it's the NDP that will save us from the evil Liberals. Are you kidding me? What BC needs is a good old Conservative bunch to come in here and sweep up all the debris left behind by the dinosaurs that currently exist. But, that won't happen so go Liberals! It's by far the lesser of two evils, which is really what elections in Canada have come down to. At least in my humble opinion.

All very true points. What I think B.C. really needs right now is a history lesson. Many in B.C. seems to think we are hard done by and poor us. We have one of the best unemployment and economic growth rates in Canada right now with a relatively small deficit compared to other Provinces.

Ultimately, and what people forget, is that JOBS are everything. Nothing can destroy your economy, your government revenues, and overall quality of life faster than a significant increase in the unemployment rate. People these days take their jobs for granted.

So I say bring back the NDP and let’s watch our credit rating decline again, and the unemployment rate rise. Let’s not forget that under the NDP 1 in 10 was on welfare. Let’s not forget that under the NDP basically EVERY Province outperformed B.C. by virtually EVERY economic measure. Mines didn’t leave Canada, they just B.C. under the NDP.

So let’s give B.C. a history lesson and go back to the NDP for a term. I think people need to be reminded of the fact that yes, things can get MUCH worse in B.C. Try being unemployed.

[Snman]

Oh, I see. Well, would anyone agree that the NDP's chances of winning the next election may be bolstered by the global recession and resulting slow economy in B.C.?

[NAB]

It's starting to look like all Liberal leadership candidates are looking for ways to promise more spending on the things that have the elctorate upset with them, and takes away a lot of the NDP's thunder before it even starts. Which begs the continuing question, where is that money going to come from no matter which party gets to form government? Obviously further increased taxes and fees in some form is one way, as is across the board cuts in other areas (or reshuffling existing revenues against revamped future priorities), including increased deficit and debt which will fly in the face of federal government efforts to stem that tide more quickly. But the most promising way IMO appears to be a rejection of Gordon Campbell's ever expanding spending focus, Thus perhaps some decent effort to dispense with a continuation of his agenda, particularly as it applies to the lower mainland.

Nab

[Al Czervic]

Oh, I see. Well, would anyone agree that the NDP's chances of winning the next election may be bolstered by the global recession and resulting slow economy in B.C.?

I think the NDP will have a tough time in the next election. ALL Political parties will. I get a sense that the “free ride” from voters has (or is coming to) and end. But on the other hand, voters also need some education as well.

[Al Czervic]

It's starting to look like all Liberal leadership candidates are looking for ways to promise more spending on the things that have the elctorate upset with them, and takes away a lot of the NDP's thunder before it even starts. Which begs the continuing question, where is that money going to come from no matter which party gets to form government? Obviously further increased taxes and fees in some form is one way, as is across the board cuts in other areas (or reshuffling existing revenues against revamped future priorities), including increased deficit and debt which will fly in the face of federal government efforts to stem that tide more quickly. But the most promising way IMO appears to be a rejection of Gordon Campbell's ever expanding spending focus, Thus perhaps some decent effort to dispense with a continuation of his agenda, particularly as it applies to the lower mainland.

Nab

Yes, the Federal Conservative Government who is preaching to all of the Provinces to get their deficits in line while the Federal Conservatives continue to run record deficits and keep free spending like crazy while claiming there is a “hold the line” spending approach. I agree with you Nabs that the piper needs to be paid but to me these candidates are all guilty of the same think that Harper is doing. Talking tough on spending from one side of the mouth but spending like crazy on the other.

I do agree though, how about a campaign telling us where the money comes from instead of always telling us where it will be spent ?

[NAB]

I do agree though, how about a campaign telling us where the money comes from instead of always telling us where it will be spent ?

A lot to expect from the current crop it would appear Al. At least they could make an effort to address both at the same time, but that's not what gets people elected, as well as why we are continually faced with surprises after the fact. Of course, that has been the situation we have been steeped in for the last decade.

Nab

[sphoaxperson]

I think the NDP will have a tough time in the next election. ALL Political parties will. I get a sense that the “free ride” from voters has (or is coming to) and end. But on the other hand, voters also need some education as well.

It is the socialist that need to realize that the free ride has to come to an end.

Check out the UK or France, Italy or Germany - all of which are slashing socialist programs in order to stay alive.

You have had it good BC.

[NAB]

The hydrogen highway to hell is one of my favourite Liberal Coffin nails. Most of us will remember Ballard Power Systems, the hype surrounding hydrogen fuel cells, the 2005 BC election and the Campbell Liberal's naive and unresearched head long rush to invest in making BC the leader in advancing such technology, and their pipe dream of the West Coast "Hydrogen Highway" to California. I often wondered how those who were lead to invest as a result of that and other "environmentally friendly" hyped up initiatives by the BC government felt after it all went south in short order.

This article describes "the rest of the story" associated with those over hyped efforts to capitalize on being seen as having an environmental plank in their vote getting platorm, and the inefficiencies and energy losses associated with such energy conversions. Even battery storage systems introduce energy loss and inefficiencies apparently....

Nab

Future looks bleak for fuel cells
RICHARD GILBERT
Globe and Mail Blog
Posted on Sunday, December 26, 2010 9:58AM EST

Richard Gilbert is a Toronto-based consultant who focuses on energy and transportation. His latest book is Transport Revolutions: Moving People and Freight without Oil, written with Anthony Perl.

My last post described one way of benefitting from electric traction while also dealing with the “range anxiety” resulting from batteries’ low energy capacity. It is to equip the vehicle with an internal combustion engine (ICE) that can charge the battery and even drive the wheels.

Other posts by Richard Gilbert
Batteries v. gas - so far, it's no contest
Why electricity is the best alternative transport fuel
Hybrid cars: The high cost of saving fuel

The ICE and associated drive train, pollution control devices, and fuel tank are little used if the daily range requires no more energy than can be provided to the battery from an overnight charge.
Conversely, the electric motor and battery are little used during long journeys on highways. In each case, such hybrid vehicles carry a mostly unnecessary, heavy, and costly load.

Moreover, to the extent the ICE is used, the vehicle would likely use an oil product. This would defeat the objective of moving away from a reliance on oil toward electricity - a much better vehicle fuel, for the most part.

Another way of generating electricity on board a vehicle is to use a fuel cell. There were once high hopes for this option. A 2005 Scientific American article claimed, “Car company executives … foresee no better option to the hydrogen fuel-cell vehicle in the long run.” In the same year, a report by the International Energy Agency suggested, “…30% of the global stock of vehicles could be powered by hydrogen fuel cells by 2050 – about 700 million vehicles.”

Canada was a leader in the development of fuel cell applications, through the work of Vancouver-based Ballard Power Systems Inc. The November, 2007, announcement of Ballard’s sale of its automotive fuel cell division to Daimler and Ford was the first major nail in the fuel cell coffin. The decision was characterized as “a tacit admission that the hydrogen fuel car, the Holy Grail Ballard has chased for two and a half decades, is dead.”

The second, near-final nail was hammered in on March 4, 2008, when General Motors and Toyota separately announced they saw little future in fuel-cell vehicles. Both companies were concerned about the continuing high costs of fuel cells. Toyota also noted the lack of infrastructure for hydrogen distribution. The announcements came two weeks after the spot price of light crude oil first rose above $100 a barrel on the New York Mercantile Exchange. This gave urgency to the task of getting off oil.
Even if fuel cells became much cheaper, and the challenges of piping and storing hydrogen were solved, a fundamental problem with the so-called “hydrogen economy” would remain: its inherent inefficiency.

The long-term vision for this economy is to produce hydrogen from renewable sources rather than from natural gas, the fossil fuel from which almost all hydrogen is now produced. This will involve first generating electricity from wind power, solar panels, marine currents or other such means. Then the electricity will be used to make hydrogen through the well-established process of electrolysis. After distribution and storage, the hydrogen will fuel a vehicle’s on-board fuel cell.

Electrolysis has an energy-conversion efficiency of about 50 per cent, as do fuel cells. This means that only a quarter of the initially available energy reaches the electric motor. If the intermediate product, hydrogen, is liquefied to facilitate storage, the energy loss becomes 80 rather than 75 per cent.

Compare this system, which wastes 75 or 80 per cent of the energy it generates, with the fuelling of Calgary’s light-rail vehicles. Since 2001, Calgary Transit has purchased the amount of power used by the light-rail system from the operators of 12 wind turbines in southern Alberta. The system is in effect fuelled by renewably produced electricity, hence the program’s name: Ride the Wind. The energy loss across the Alberta electricity grid, between the wind turbines and the vehicles’ electric motors, is about 10 per cent.

In an energy constrained world, a system that loses 80 per cent of its initial energy will not fare well when up against a system that loses only 10 per cent.

If batteries stood between the turbines and the motors rather than the wires of the grid, the losses would be greater, but nowhere near as large as the fuel-cell system loses.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/report-o ... le1849758/

[nolanrh]

It is the socialist that need to realize that the free ride has to come to an end.

Check out the UK or France, Italy or Germany - all of which are slashing socialist programs in order to stay alive.

You have had it good BC.

Canada ranks near the bottom in regard to social spending in the developed world.

[sphoaxperson]

Compared to what?

CIT, GDP, Corporate tax rates, labour income tax rates?

Please explain.