Posts
Propane is the most used and possibly least understood heating source for colder climates. Your propane cylinder contains liquid. That liquid expands 270 times to become a gas. The lower flammability limit for this gas is a 2% mixture air/propane.
That means 1 liter of propane will form an explosive gas cloud 270 cubic meters large! One has to wonder why it is kept in basements.
The stench, or Methyl Mercaptan smell you know as propane can be washed out with water. If propane is spilled on snow, the stench will stay at the point of entry to the snow while the propane will run down hill under the snow and create a problem in another area. Example a leaking propane tank on a barbeque on your back deck leaks into the snow. The snow takes out the Mercaptan and the gas being heavier than air sinks into the soil and through your foundation into your basement with no alarm of smell. Link
Of equal importance to people using propane heat in a confined space: When propane burns it gives off water vapor and carbon dioxide.
The water vapor given off by burning propane will make the confined area wet as in wet bedding and clothes. Because of this it is nearly impossible to stay warm. Exhausting (a chimney) the heater will fix this!
The carbon dioxide will kill you by shutting down your breathing. You will feel no discomfort or become alarmed with "oxygen deprivation" symptoms. In fact, you will be entirely comfortable as you pass on. Your body does not sense oxygen, but it monitors carbon dioxide. When your body thinks it has enough carbon dioxide, you stop breathing and die.
cyberclark@shaw.ca
(Formerly The Dangerous Goods Training Centre)
Tuesday, November 28, 2006
Monday, November 27, 2006
Feds put the CPP at risk!
I told the world you could count on the Harper crew to practice every kind of political theft and mayhem invented. Crooks, thieve and liars; the works! Religious fundamentalists and goose stepping right wing bandits.
In their latest charade Jim Flaherty literally stole the Canada Pension Fund!
He has put the assets of the CPP (Owned by all provinces except Quebec who has their own plan) up against a 480 billion dollar federal debt. He still has to pay 30 billion dollars a year interest payments on the funds. And, he as put the CPP at risk!
Fiscal Skullduggery
The conservatives have long been trying to do away with the CPP. Ted Morton of Alberta and the Fraser Institute have long been toying with how to do this. I say to you, this is the first step!
These crooks are after the political control of the CPP. It’s time to fight them, now!
Beneficiaries and their families should protest a possible move of CPP pensions back into political control.
In their latest charade Jim Flaherty literally stole the Canada Pension Fund!
He has put the assets of the CPP (Owned by all provinces except Quebec who has their own plan) up against a 480 billion dollar federal debt. He still has to pay 30 billion dollars a year interest payments on the funds. And, he as put the CPP at risk!
Fiscal Skullduggery
The conservatives have long been trying to do away with the CPP. Ted Morton of Alberta and the Fraser Institute have long been toying with how to do this. I say to you, this is the first step!
These crooks are after the political control of the CPP. It’s time to fight them, now!
Beneficiaries and their families should protest a possible move of CPP pensions back into political control.
Tuesday, November 21, 2006
We have an opportunity to start change!
To Conservatives I say: If Dinning gets the gold ring, that is the end of the Conservative Government in this province.
To Other party members I say: Mark Norris is front and centre as the only Conservative, socially responsible individual running!
Regardless of your political strip it is worth your time to vote!
The first advance poll is on today from 5:00 p.m. to 9:00 p.m. (MST).
Advance polls are open in the following locations for eligible voters ordinarily resident in the respective cities, who are unable to or who for religious reasons cannot vote in their own riding on election day.
Edmonton Advance Poll LocationGrant MacEwan College, City Centre Campus10700-104 AvenueRoom 7-142 (use the south entrance, under the GMCC clock)Calgary Advance Poll LocationConnaught Community School1121-12 Avenue SWMain Gym
For other Alberta advance poll locations click onhttp://www.albertapc.ab.ca/admin/contentx/default.cfm?PageId=4424
Regular Voting Poll Stations, Saturday, November 25, 2006
Up to date poll stations can be found by clicking onhttp://www.albertapc.ab.ca/public/custom/stationsIf you are unsure of your constituency you may click on the following constituency link. All you need is your postal code.http://www.marknorris.ca/Constituency.cfm
Note if a second ballot is required, that advance poll shall occur on Wednesday, November 29, 2006 from 5:00 p.m. to 9:00 p.m. (MST).
Who Can Vote
In accordance with the PCAA Constitution, eligible voters shall be:
1) Canadian citizens;
2) Of the full age of 16 years;
3) Ordinarily resident in Alberta for at least six (6) months immediately prior to the voting date;
4) Members in good standing of a Provincial Progressive Conservative Constituency Association.
Remember, you can buy a membership at the voting station, so if you have a friend or family member who lives in the same riding and who wants to vote for a better Alberta, take them with you to vote.
Upon arrival at the polling station you must present or purchase your membership card and two pieces of identification (one should be photo ID) to establish identity and residency within the constituency.
Examples of identity identification include your driver's license, your passport, citizenship card, firearms card, student ID, etc.
Examples of residence identification include utility bills, insurance pink card, vehicle registration, etc.
Voters whose age eligibility may be in doubt must show identification that also states their age.
Voters whose eligibility as Canadian citizens may be in doubt must show evidence of citizenship.
FOR MORE INFORMATION CALL THE MARK NORRIS CAMPAIGN, 1-888-481-7205.
To Other party members I say: Mark Norris is front and centre as the only Conservative, socially responsible individual running!
Regardless of your political strip it is worth your time to vote!
The first advance poll is on today from 5:00 p.m. to 9:00 p.m. (MST).
Advance polls are open in the following locations for eligible voters ordinarily resident in the respective cities, who are unable to or who for religious reasons cannot vote in their own riding on election day.
Edmonton Advance Poll LocationGrant MacEwan College, City Centre Campus10700-104 AvenueRoom 7-142 (use the south entrance, under the GMCC clock)Calgary Advance Poll LocationConnaught Community School1121-12 Avenue SWMain Gym
For other Alberta advance poll locations click onhttp://www.albertapc.ab.ca/admin/contentx/default.cfm?PageId=4424
Regular Voting Poll Stations, Saturday, November 25, 2006
Up to date poll stations can be found by clicking onhttp://www.albertapc.ab.ca/public/custom/stationsIf you are unsure of your constituency you may click on the following constituency link. All you need is your postal code.http://www.marknorris.ca/Constituency.cfm
Note if a second ballot is required, that advance poll shall occur on Wednesday, November 29, 2006 from 5:00 p.m. to 9:00 p.m. (MST).
Who Can Vote
In accordance with the PCAA Constitution, eligible voters shall be:
1) Canadian citizens;
2) Of the full age of 16 years;
3) Ordinarily resident in Alberta for at least six (6) months immediately prior to the voting date;
4) Members in good standing of a Provincial Progressive Conservative Constituency Association.
Remember, you can buy a membership at the voting station, so if you have a friend or family member who lives in the same riding and who wants to vote for a better Alberta, take them with you to vote.
Upon arrival at the polling station you must present or purchase your membership card and two pieces of identification (one should be photo ID) to establish identity and residency within the constituency.
Examples of identity identification include your driver's license, your passport, citizenship card, firearms card, student ID, etc.
Examples of residence identification include utility bills, insurance pink card, vehicle registration, etc.
Voters whose age eligibility may be in doubt must show identification that also states their age.
Voters whose eligibility as Canadian citizens may be in doubt must show evidence of citizenship.
FOR MORE INFORMATION CALL THE MARK NORRIS CAMPAIGN, 1-888-481-7205.
Thursday, November 16, 2006
Conservative celebration a farce!
Ralph’s tribute is over cooked.
He saved us from the debt? Such crap! The Conservatives deliberately drove us into debt in order to debilitate services and the infrastructure so the stage would be set for privatization, in their minds the only thing that will save us.
Part of this debt was because of their subsidies and hand outs to friends and business interests and the direct give away of infrastructure such as parks of which they had previously put millions of dollars into.
Their construction offers for capital projects are run at a cost plus 10 or 15 percent. There are no bids; no police and no effort to keep the costs down through a proper bid process.
Not only did they run us into debt they spent the Heritage Trust fund and shorted pension funds. Some of the screw ups we are still paying for, like Swan Hills at 600 million a year.
This collection of conservatives has all but debilitated this province.
If any of you find this confusing, just remember that this is the crew that took us into such drastic debt!
Huge spending for infrastructure when the prices are the highest is another way of showing you how much government projects cost. Don’t forget they are trying to get elected again and, when and if that happens, the shoe is going to fall and we as individuals in this province will experience huge financial pain because there is no secondary industry in this province, no diversification.
No more celebrating please! Look at the history and bury them.
John Clark
cyberclark@shaw.ca
He saved us from the debt? Such crap! The Conservatives deliberately drove us into debt in order to debilitate services and the infrastructure so the stage would be set for privatization, in their minds the only thing that will save us.
Part of this debt was because of their subsidies and hand outs to friends and business interests and the direct give away of infrastructure such as parks of which they had previously put millions of dollars into.
Their construction offers for capital projects are run at a cost plus 10 or 15 percent. There are no bids; no police and no effort to keep the costs down through a proper bid process.
Not only did they run us into debt they spent the Heritage Trust fund and shorted pension funds. Some of the screw ups we are still paying for, like Swan Hills at 600 million a year.
This collection of conservatives has all but debilitated this province.
If any of you find this confusing, just remember that this is the crew that took us into such drastic debt!
Huge spending for infrastructure when the prices are the highest is another way of showing you how much government projects cost. Don’t forget they are trying to get elected again and, when and if that happens, the shoe is going to fall and we as individuals in this province will experience huge financial pain because there is no secondary industry in this province, no diversification.
No more celebrating please! Look at the history and bury them.
John Clark
cyberclark@shaw.ca
Sunday, November 12, 2006
Nuclear power in Alberta?
I have been asked to weigh in on the debate of Nuclear power as applied in the Tar Sands scenario.
I think it is a great idea that deserves more study.
Understand first, any tar sands resources such as water and heat used is coming directly from taxpayer pockets!
Either the oil companies move it into their cost of start up (Royalties paid at 1% of gross production sales)
Or, 5% of the net production after all costs of the start up and on going daily costs have been deducted. Yes, you are correct both percentages are pretty much the same number of 1%
Now, consider we are quickly running out of natural gas in this province and the oil companies get first crack at what ever is remaining. For this reason the push was put onto developing the Arctic gas supplies for use in the “south”.
The information I have is suggesting there will be no Arctic gas to come south! The gas will only get as far as the Tar Sands projects. If they take all that gas, we will be switching from Natural Gas to Oil for heat in this province.
Perhaps now is a good time to switch rather than switch later?
One sure way to slow the inevitable would be to put in a nuclear generation plant in the tar sands. It would have to be sufficiently large, in the realm of 4 times our present electrical system just to keep up with Tar Sands demand.
Yes, the price of this facility like the price of the gas and the drain of our water will come out of the taxpayer pocket or cup as the case may be.
I see the very expensive nuclear power as being the only reasonable course to take as renewable energy..
John Clark
cyberclark@shaw.ca
I think it is a great idea that deserves more study.
Understand first, any tar sands resources such as water and heat used is coming directly from taxpayer pockets!
Either the oil companies move it into their cost of start up (Royalties paid at 1% of gross production sales)
Or, 5% of the net production after all costs of the start up and on going daily costs have been deducted. Yes, you are correct both percentages are pretty much the same number of 1%
Now, consider we are quickly running out of natural gas in this province and the oil companies get first crack at what ever is remaining. For this reason the push was put onto developing the Arctic gas supplies for use in the “south”.
The information I have is suggesting there will be no Arctic gas to come south! The gas will only get as far as the Tar Sands projects. If they take all that gas, we will be switching from Natural Gas to Oil for heat in this province.
Perhaps now is a good time to switch rather than switch later?
One sure way to slow the inevitable would be to put in a nuclear generation plant in the tar sands. It would have to be sufficiently large, in the realm of 4 times our present electrical system just to keep up with Tar Sands demand.
Yes, the price of this facility like the price of the gas and the drain of our water will come out of the taxpayer pocket or cup as the case may be.
I see the very expensive nuclear power as being the only reasonable course to take as renewable energy..
John Clark
cyberclark@shaw.ca
Wednesday, November 08, 2006
Manning pushes private health care - Good respone
Hello,
The following column, by Parkland Research Director Diana Gibson, was written in response to an article written last week by Preston Manning and Mark Milke advocating private health insurance. Diana's column appeared in Monday's Edmonton Journal and today's Calgary Herald. We hope you enjoy it....
'Manningcare' failed once, it will fail againCostly private insurance too expensive for some, even with subsidiesby Diana Gibson
Preston Manning identified real problems with Canada's health-care system, but his prescriptions do not hit the mark. Most notably, he, like his father Ernest Manning, favours private health insurance. Ernest Manning already tried private health insurance when he was the premier and it was a dismal failure.
In 1962, the Socreds were desperate to avoid public health insurance, which had emerged in Saskatchewan. As an alternative, premier Manning created a scheme, dubbed "Manningcare," that required individuals to buy their own health insurance, with subsidies for the poor.
A year after Manningcare was introduced, Albertans were paying the highest premiums in the country. Only the elderly, chronically ill, and those with pre-existing conditions were subsidized. But only 40 per cent of those eligible for the subsidy applied because even with the subsidy, the premiums were too high.
So, Preston Manning should be familiar with the failures of private health care. But while he points out some ailments in Canada's system -- relatively few doctors; less access to MRIs and CT scans; waiting lists for some non-emergency procedures -- his prescriptions don't address those problems.
Private health insurance is more expensive. America's private health "system" costs 50 per cent more than Canada's and delivers worse health outcomes for its population. Forty-eight million Americans have no health insurance.
More generally, a study of industrialized countries by the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) found private health insurance correlates with higher health spending per capita.
The study found that moving to private insurance actually increased costs for the public system in France. When looking at the Australian example, the Canadian Institute for Health Information found that adding a parallel private health insurance scheme did not even reduce public spending on health care; private premiums were so expensive that the government had to subsidize them in order to convince people to enrol.
The evidence is no better on wait lists. OECD studies reveal that shorter wait lists do not correlate with countries that have private health insurance. Creating a parallel private health system siphons doctors out of the public system, worsening wait times (doctors, as skilful as they are, cannot be two places at once). And the wait times for those 48 million Americans are infinitely long.
Manning also proposes "cost sharing" for publicly funded specialists and hospital services. "Cost sharing" is newspeak for user fees, which were shown to reduce access to health care in France and Switzerland. This reduced access results in more cases going to emergency, which adds yet more costs.
He also suggests competition in the hospital sector (code for private hospitals). Yet studies, including one recently published in the Canadian Medical Journal, show that private hospitals have worse outcomes and cost more than public ones. The Workers Compensation Board has to pay Calgary's private Health Resources Group Clinic at least 10 per cent more for the same procedures than a public hospital.
To address the real problems in the health system, we need to move away from ideological agendas like Preston Manning's and instead look to the evidence.
Spending in the most public parts of our mixed health-care system -- hospitals and staff -- has actually fallen as a portion of health spending, and is the same portion of GDP as it was in 1975. The fastest growing costs in health care are the private parts -- pharmaceuticals and for-profit health care, where costs are going through the roof.
If anything, the evidence suggests moving to a more public system, not a more private one. Alberta's public solutions to wait lists are working well. We need to invest more in hospitals, doctors, nurses and health-care staff, and waste less on private profits and shareholder dividends. Patent laws need to be changed to reduce drug costs. A national pharmacare program needs to be introduced.
Canada's public single-payer tax-funded model is the best in the world. It can be improved, but it needs re-investment after the ill-advised cuts of the '90s.
And it needs to be managed with a view to improving outcomes, rather than maximizing profits.
Diana Gibson is the research director for the Parkland Institute and co-author of The Bottom Line: The truth about private health insurance (published by NeWest press and the Parkland Institute)
PARKLAND INSTITUTE
11045 Saskatchewan Drive,
Edmonton, AB. T6G 2E1
Phone: (780) 492-8558 -
Fax:(780)492-8738 Link
email: parkland@ualberta.ca
By John: Preston Manning is one of the leading members of the Fraser Institute; Extreme right wing think tank made up of US business and politial interest and Canadian Conservatives.
The following column, by Parkland Research Director Diana Gibson, was written in response to an article written last week by Preston Manning and Mark Milke advocating private health insurance. Diana's column appeared in Monday's Edmonton Journal and today's Calgary Herald. We hope you enjoy it....
'Manningcare' failed once, it will fail againCostly private insurance too expensive for some, even with subsidiesby Diana Gibson
Preston Manning identified real problems with Canada's health-care system, but his prescriptions do not hit the mark. Most notably, he, like his father Ernest Manning, favours private health insurance. Ernest Manning already tried private health insurance when he was the premier and it was a dismal failure.
In 1962, the Socreds were desperate to avoid public health insurance, which had emerged in Saskatchewan. As an alternative, premier Manning created a scheme, dubbed "Manningcare," that required individuals to buy their own health insurance, with subsidies for the poor.
A year after Manningcare was introduced, Albertans were paying the highest premiums in the country. Only the elderly, chronically ill, and those with pre-existing conditions were subsidized. But only 40 per cent of those eligible for the subsidy applied because even with the subsidy, the premiums were too high.
So, Preston Manning should be familiar with the failures of private health care. But while he points out some ailments in Canada's system -- relatively few doctors; less access to MRIs and CT scans; waiting lists for some non-emergency procedures -- his prescriptions don't address those problems.
Private health insurance is more expensive. America's private health "system" costs 50 per cent more than Canada's and delivers worse health outcomes for its population. Forty-eight million Americans have no health insurance.
More generally, a study of industrialized countries by the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) found private health insurance correlates with higher health spending per capita.
The study found that moving to private insurance actually increased costs for the public system in France. When looking at the Australian example, the Canadian Institute for Health Information found that adding a parallel private health insurance scheme did not even reduce public spending on health care; private premiums were so expensive that the government had to subsidize them in order to convince people to enrol.
The evidence is no better on wait lists. OECD studies reveal that shorter wait lists do not correlate with countries that have private health insurance. Creating a parallel private health system siphons doctors out of the public system, worsening wait times (doctors, as skilful as they are, cannot be two places at once). And the wait times for those 48 million Americans are infinitely long.
Manning also proposes "cost sharing" for publicly funded specialists and hospital services. "Cost sharing" is newspeak for user fees, which were shown to reduce access to health care in France and Switzerland. This reduced access results in more cases going to emergency, which adds yet more costs.
He also suggests competition in the hospital sector (code for private hospitals). Yet studies, including one recently published in the Canadian Medical Journal, show that private hospitals have worse outcomes and cost more than public ones. The Workers Compensation Board has to pay Calgary's private Health Resources Group Clinic at least 10 per cent more for the same procedures than a public hospital.
To address the real problems in the health system, we need to move away from ideological agendas like Preston Manning's and instead look to the evidence.
Spending in the most public parts of our mixed health-care system -- hospitals and staff -- has actually fallen as a portion of health spending, and is the same portion of GDP as it was in 1975. The fastest growing costs in health care are the private parts -- pharmaceuticals and for-profit health care, where costs are going through the roof.
If anything, the evidence suggests moving to a more public system, not a more private one. Alberta's public solutions to wait lists are working well. We need to invest more in hospitals, doctors, nurses and health-care staff, and waste less on private profits and shareholder dividends. Patent laws need to be changed to reduce drug costs. A national pharmacare program needs to be introduced.
Canada's public single-payer tax-funded model is the best in the world. It can be improved, but it needs re-investment after the ill-advised cuts of the '90s.
And it needs to be managed with a view to improving outcomes, rather than maximizing profits.
Diana Gibson is the research director for the Parkland Institute and co-author of The Bottom Line: The truth about private health insurance (published by NeWest press and the Parkland Institute)
PARKLAND INSTITUTE
11045 Saskatchewan Drive,
Edmonton, AB. T6G 2E1
Phone: (780) 492-8558 -
Fax:(780)492-8738 Link
email: parkland@ualberta.ca
By John: Preston Manning is one of the leading members of the Fraser Institute; Extreme right wing think tank made up of US business and politial interest and Canadian Conservatives.
20 million announced for housing homeless
Kline announced a program to pump 20 million dollars or so into accommodations for homeless people. Most of this money will be spent in Mc Murray, Edmonton and Calgary. As far as it goes, all is good.
Let’s see how much of this money goes to oil companies to house workers.
Let’s see how much of this money goes to ATCO or who ever to put up barrack type housing.
Let’s see how many insiders get low (no) interest loans or grants they never have to pay back in order to supply temporary accommodations.
Let’s see how many of the Cities chronic unemployed get accommodation.
There is no heart in the Conservative Government, we all know that. And, the right wing news media will not track the inside.
Lots going on; news in the making!
John Clark
cyberclark@shaw.ca
Let’s see how much of this money goes to oil companies to house workers.
Let’s see how much of this money goes to ATCO or who ever to put up barrack type housing.
Let’s see how many insiders get low (no) interest loans or grants they never have to pay back in order to supply temporary accommodations.
Let’s see how many of the Cities chronic unemployed get accommodation.
There is no heart in the Conservative Government, we all know that. And, the right wing news media will not track the inside.
Lots going on; news in the making!
John Clark
cyberclark@shaw.ca
Wednesday, November 01, 2006
Oil royality review a promise!!
Mark Norris clearly the best chance to save industry in Alberta. Industries other than oil related are suffering to a point of extinction in Alberta. Mark Norris was first off the spot to publicly acknowledge this. Mark Norris was also was the first to offer to do something about our disastrous oil royalty programs.
In this turmoil remember. If the royalties were doubled, they would still be the lowest in the world and this doubling would return 10 times more to provincial coffers than the present rates. The oil stock would still be the best performing stock. Personally I think doubling is not enough!
Your life times are going to past before you have another opportunity to vote specifically for a premier! Time to get your conservative membership and help shape your future.
Quote from Email from Mark Norris.
Hi John.
‘ Was the first candidate on record to call for a complete review of the Oilsands Tax Regime and am committed to doing so.
All the economics of the original deal have changed, time to review.
Many of my comments can be found on our website under “news”
Thanks
Mark
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
