Rewards
Walmart logo
Amazon logo
PayPal logo
Amazon gift card
Take surveys and collect rewards from the industry-leading e-commerce website, Amazon.com, Via "amazon gift cards". The more you take or create survey, larger the amazon gift card you earn.

Results: An area of Canada risks losing a $2.5-billion plant that would employ 1,000 workers because it can't guarantee its power system can supply the necessary electricity. While demand for power increases in the country many supply sources are being eliminated.

Published on 05/28/2022
By: DavKar
2156
Politics
The oil sands in Alberta don't look pretty, neither does a coal fired power plant. Wind turbines are a blight on the landscape and the factories that make solar panels use more power than the product they produce. Current nuclear power generation pollutes for centuries and there is no new non polluting electricity generation source that will produce sufficient energy to bridge the gap between increasing demand and projected supply. We all want a cleaner planet but are we being naive about our climate change goals?
1.
1.
When you bought your last vehicle, if there had been different versions available for around the same price which one would you have purchased?
I would have bought the electric version.
13%
263 votes
I would have bought the gasoline version.
37%
773 votes
I would have bought the diesel version.
3%
62 votes
I would have bought the hybrid version.
22%
471 votes
Other (please specify)
1%
19 votes
Not Applicable
29%
608 votes
If not for the current higher purchase price, will you buy an electric vehicle next time?
  • An electric vehicle would be ideal for my needs
  • no
  • no
2.
2.
Companies that supply energy or the fuel to generate it are in a competition that has negative consequences for consumers. There are car engines that can run on water, nuclear fusion that can operate at room temperature, scrubbers that can make what comes our of a coal fired power plant as clean as what went in, wind turbines that generate power in the slightest breeze and are small in size, generators that can split water into hydrogen and oxygen, combust these two gases to generate power producing water as a byproduct. This technology is actively suppressed by those who prefer the status quo. Some question that this technology even exists. No significant development of them is currently under way. We will have to focus on the two key factors of supply and demand to meet our climate change goals. Which of the following will (or could have) the most impact beyond their current contribution?
Dam more rivers to generate hydro electricity. (negative impact on wildlife and first nation land)
11%
240 votes
Build more solar farms (the manufacture of solar panels uses more power than it replaces and is polluting).
20%
420 votes
Reopen closed coal fired power plants and build new ones (but only if they are pollution and carbon free)
14%
290 votes
Erect more wind turbines (it uses energy to make and install them and where will we put them?)
19%
396 votes
Increase the use of nuclear fission power generation (and pollute the planet for centuries)
9%
179 votes
Use nuclear fusion technology (many years away from practical use)
7%
138 votes
Build pipelines to move oil products from areas of surplus to areas of need more safely than by rail or waterway (only if risk of spillage is significantly lower than by any other method)
20%
415 votes
Other (please specify)
2%
34 votes
Not Applicable
39%
810 votes
Reverse the current trend of increasing demand and reduce our power consumption needs (how?)
15%
314 votes
Suggestions for how to increase supply and/or reduce demand for energy.
  • Buy a vehicle as practical and efficient as you can - not something sporty or macho
  • None
  • will think about it and comment if have good idea below
3.
3.
Current government tactics to reduce Canada's carbon emissions to meet future targets are causing the price of almost everything to increase leaving no money in the hands of ordinary Canadians to make their homes and vehicles more energy efficient. There are very few incentives that ordinary Canadians can make use of. Do you think current government climate change policies are an attack on the poor and disadvantaged and favour the wealthy and privileged? Do you think the rising cost of living does a good enough job of getting people to become more energy efficient without the need of a "stick" approach using the carbon tax?
I would much prefer a carrot (incentive) approach to dealing with climate change.
14%
295 votes
I think people need to be coerced into conserving energy, incentives are not enough.
16%
327 votes
I think the carbon tax is no longer needed because of other price increases.
15%
314 votes
I think government responses to climate change have very little impact on wealthy Canadians but are damaging the quality of life for ordinary Canadians.
28%
578 votes
Other (please specify)
1%
21 votes
Not Applicable
43%
912 votes
Do you think the carbon tax lowered your carbon fooprint or just your bank balance?
  • It's just a tax and nothing more.
  • No
  • My bank balance
COMMENTS