I'm sorry, what? Of course it depends on the amount of emissions, unless you want them to generate a report each time someone farts.
Disqualify the City's climate goal initiative if you feel that's it's unworkable but it shouldn't arbitrarily be used to support a public policy position whenever somebody feels the initiative applies. There isn't a threshold fart level at city hall per se but a car manufacturer, for example, is subject to an emission threshold level for it's vehicles. So the size of an emission is already established by a standards body that takes its direction from public policies. That's not what we're talking about however. We're talking about the City having the option of emitting GHG at Warehouse Park or not emitting any GHG at Warehouse Park. For some reason, the City chose to emit GHG at Warehouse Park which flies in the face it's public policy initiative. Somebody must have made that decision and they must have had a reason for it - wouldn't you say?
 
Last edited:
Disqualify the City's climate goal initiative if you feel that's it's unworkable but it shouldn't arbitrarily be used to support a public policy position whenever somebody feels the initiative applies. There isn't a threshold fart level at city hall per se but a car manufacturer, for example, is subject to an emission threshold level for it's vehicles. So the size of an emission is already established by a standards body that takes its direction from public policies. That's not what we're talking about however. We're talking about the City having the option of emitting GHG at Warehouse Park or not emitting any GHG at Warehouse Park. For some reason, the City chose to emit GHG at Warehouse Park which flies in the face it's public policy initiative. Somebody must have made that decision and they must have had a reason for it - wouldn't you say?
Have you reached out to the planners of the Warehouse Park about the GHG estimates from the fire pits? Because until you do, I'll have to assume that you have no interest in actually learning the truth rather than just trolling.

PS: There is no option of "not emitting any GHG." All construction, all maintenance, etc. emits GHG. You can emit less or more, you can try to offset emissions with sequestration, you cannot not emit.
 
We're talking about the City having the option of emitting GHG at Warehouse Park or not emitting any GHG at Warehouse Park.
A false dichotomy fallacy to add on top of your litany of strawman arguments. It's getting hard to believe you aren't just a troll at this point. The volume of GHG emissions obviously is what substantively matters, and it's odd to be so myopically concerned about what amounts to negligible emissions at Warehouse Park. None of this is arbitrary or grossly violating the city's climate goal initiative.
 
Have you reached out to the planners of the Warehouse Park about the GHG estimates from the fire pits? Because until you do, I'll have to assume that you have no interest in actually learning the truth rather than just trolling.

PS: There is no option of "not emitting any GHG." All construction, all maintenance, etc. emits GHG. You can emit less or more, you can try to offset emissions with sequestration, you cannot not emit.
Stop trying to muddy the water. Did somebody use their power to overrule the objective of the City's climate goal policy? Yes or no?
 
Why are you asking people on this forum instead of asking the city?
Don't you follow the news? I'm asking you because you and others used the GHG controversy to support spending $100M on bike paths but adamantly oppose the policy at Warehouse Park. So what's your position at Blatchford because the GHG policy has a good likelihood of being challenged by some policy makers.
 
Don't you follow the news? I'm asking you because you and others used the GHG controversy to support spending $100M on bike paths but adamantly oppose the policy at Warehouse Park. So what's your position at Blatchford because the GHG policy has a good likelihood of being challenged by some policy makers.
Well, those were certainly generally words.
 
  • Administration said it intends to list for sale the land that Hangar 11 occupied before it was destroyed by fire in April 2024. Days before the fire, the city had transferred ownership of the historic resource to a new owner, who intended to repurpose it as a $62.5-million mixed-use development. After the building was destroyed, however, the owner determined a faithful reconstruction was not possible, and administration has initiated the process to buy back the land at the value it sold it to the developer, as laid out in the sales agreement. Administration will ask executive committee to recommend to council that it remove the historic designation from the land to facilitate the agreement.
 
Well, those were certainly generally words.
Open to domestic and international students, the English as an Additional Language (ESL/EAL) program offers a full range of English skill-building courses to build your English Language Proficiency (ELP) to meet prerequisites for academic, personal and professional goals.
 
Open to domestic and international students, the English as an Additional Language (ESL/EAL) program offers a full range of English skill-building courses to build your English Language Proficiency (ELP) to meet prerequisites for academic, personal and professional goals.
Oh, you need a little more than that, I'm afraid. Your coherence issues aren't strictly a matter of English fluency but with the deeply non sequitur nature of underlying thought patterns which you are assigning words to.
 
Last edited:
Oh, you need a little more than that, I'm afraid. Your coherence issues aren't strictly a matter of English fluency but with the deeply non sequitur nature of underlying thought patterns which you are assigning words to.
Would you understand a kick in the buttocks? That often helps people understand.
 
Would you understand a kick in the buttocks? That often helps people understand.
I would not count on this helping you understand how to ask better questions, no. If anything, corporal punishment seems to have taught you that being forceful is a substitute for actually asking intelligent questions.
 

Back
Top