Ripley was extremely adept at presenting truths in the form of outlandish statements and challenging the hearer to accept or otherwise. In that context the subject of global warming has proven to be controversial, economy versus the environment. Comments include "The world is coming to an end" Regardless of how serious the situation is I could add, "Nonsense, we will adapt".

The upcoming climate change conference in Copenhagen faces such a dichotomy. While some European countries are taking it seriously the U.S. and Canadian politicians appear to be shrugging their shoulders as if they don't believe the situation to be that serious. The prospect of the representatives reaching any form of consensus is starting to appear remote unless they do. Certainly the results of the meeting could be a major set back to real action being taken on this side of the Atlantic.

A Globe and Mail article, "Denmark: Something is rotten in the State of Canada" (Gary Mason, Oct 12, 2009) notes action being taken by European countries to find alternative, less polluting, forms of energy. Currently the world runs on burning fossil fuels with resultant emissions causing global warming. There can be no doubt arctic ice is melting as are glaciers for whatever reason. Changing ocean temperatures are shifting currents which will have a devastating effect on local climates. Increasing heat also adds to the thawing of permafrost hence releasing mercury and other stored pollutants. A more acceptable opinion for me would be that the world 'as we know it' is coming to an end believe it or not.

Canada was one of the signatories of the original Kyoto accord at a time when it was quite possible to achieve our promises. The Copenhagen conference is a unique opportunity for countries to agree to make significant changes in the world's quality of life. The big question is whether our representatives are going to take the matter seriously enough to help form a workable consensus. Certainly successive governments have chosen to place a living environment second to the almighty dollar.

A primary consideration is agreeing to a binding commitment to reduce emissions. That means enforcement of rules on industry which could require costly changes to industrial operations. Jeffery Simpson et al ( Hot Air, 2007) emphasized the fact that 8 ineffective climate change plans have been presented to parliament by successive prime ministers, none of which including any form of binding agreement. The article noted "Canada is one of the nations which have so far refused to take the kind of bold, politically tough actions necessary to have a real impact on cutting CO2 emissions".

With or without a consensus change is under way. European countries are turning the tide, instituting alternate, non-polluting forms of energy, hence taking a lead role in producing technology which they are marketing world wide. Our industrial base is lagging far behind which we will rue in the future. There was a time when we led the world through harnessing water power, providing us with a big advantage in developing a manufacturing industry.

A current article in the Globe and Mail, quoting the International Energy Agency, bemoans our lack of progress in developing fossil fuel capacity to meet future energy needs. Drilling of new oil wells has declined. Should I cheer or cry? "Current policies put us on an alarming fossil-energy path". The agency is warning that, unless we accomplish a dramatic revolution in production of low-carbon energy, we will experience severe effects on the world's temperature by the end of the century. Their negative caution is in fact a clue to a potential solution, development of alternative energy technology.

Of even greater significance was a note "Energy conservation in transportation, buildings and industrial processes remains the most practical and cost-effective means of reducing emissions" We are in for hard times undoubtedly but these are two major recommendations for achieving our goal and ones that our representatives to Copenhagen should consider very seriously next month. It can be done, believe it or not, if our government would take the matter seriously and agree to work with other countries in making the world a better place to live.