Connect with us
[the_ad id="89560"]

Business

Ottawa’s proposed ‘food packaging’ ban will harm Canadians without helping the environment

Published

5 minute read

From the Fraser Institute

The Trudeau government, which recently banned plastic bags nationwide, is now considering a ban on plastic “food packaging” in support of its ambitious “Zero Plastic Waste by 2030” goal. However, if the government bans plastic food packaging, it will impose real economic costs on Canadians and jeopardize their health, for virtually no discernible environmental benefit.

First, let’s put plastic pollution in perspective. Canada contributes an estimated 0.4 per cent of all plastic waste in the world, including just 0.02 per cent of all plastic waste in the world’s oceans. Five countries—China, the United States, Germany, Brazil and Japan—generate nearly 50 per cent of global plastic waste. And 90 per cent of the world’s ocean plastic waste comes from Asia and Africa. Even if the government achieved “Zero Plastic Waste by 2030,” the effect on global plastic waste would be undetectable.

Before these bans, Canada’s track record on managing plastic waste was outstanding, ranking 49th out of 158 countries for minimizing mismanaged plastic waste (measured on a per-person basis). The federal government acknowledges this fact in its own report where it also states that 99 per cent of the country’s plastic waste is already disposed off safely through recycling, incinerating and environmentally-friendly landfills.

And plastic bans pose real risks to human health and the environment. For example, according to a recent study in the Journal of Food Additives and Contaminants, like plastic straws, straws made from plant-based materials such as paper, wood and glass (common substitutes for plastic straws) also contain a class of chemicals known as per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS), which can persist for thousands of years and migrate through the soil, potentially contaminating sources of drinking water. This contamination exposes both wildlife and humans to potential negative effects on the immune system, thyroid function, liver and other adverse effects that are yet to be fully understood.

In other words, we don’t fully know how plastic alternatives will affect our health and the environment.

There are other costs. For example, plastic wrapping, which could soon be banned, is instrumental in food preservation, food transit and the reduction of food waste by protecting against contamination and spoilage throughout the food supply chain. And any type of plastic packaging can increase the time food lasts from days to weeks, allowing families to cut their grocery spending. In addition, plastic is the most cost-effective among common packaging materials, so forcing the food industry to transition to pricier alternatives will raise the cost of food packaging and these added expenses will be passed on to consumers through higher food prices.

To make matters worse, eliminating plastic food packaging could also negatively impact the environment from an emission standpoint. Why? Because food production emits greenhouse gases (GHG) and the process of replacing spoiled food requires additional production, transportation and refrigeration, resulting in higher overall emissions.

Plastic substitutes such as paper are also heavier, require more energy to transport, present higher smog formation and ozone depletion potential, demand more water and energy to be produced, and ultimately result in higher greenhouse gas emissions. Researchers in Switzerland found that opting for plastic packaging for baby food, instead of glass, could reduce emissions by up to 33 per cent, mainly due to reduced weight when being transported. So, the ban on plastics can have a detrimental, rather than a beneficial impact on the environment.

Overall, the pursuit of a “zero plastic” waste goal by banning more plastic products will jeopardize the health of Canadians, negatively impact the environment, and burden the already strained finances of Canadians.

Automotive

Dark Web Tesla Doxxers Used Widely-Popular Parking App Data To Find Targets, Analysis Shows

Published on

 

From the Daily Caller News Foundation

By Thomas English

A dark web doxxing website targeting Tesla owners and allies of Elon Musk appears to be compiled from hacked data originally stolen from a massive ParkMobile app breach in 2021, according to records obtained by a data privacy group. 

The site, known as DogeQuest, first appeared in March and publishes names, home addresses, contact details and other personal information tied to Tesla drivers and DOGE staff. Marketed as a hub for anti-Musk “creative expressions of protest,” the platform has been linked to real-world vandalism and remains live on the dark web. Federal investigations into DogeQuest are already underway, the New York Post first reported.

“If you’re on the hunt for a Tesla to unleash your artistic flair with a spray can, just step outside — no map needed! At DOGEQUEST, we believe in empowering creative expressions of protest that you can execute from the comfort of your own home,” the surface-web DogeQuest site reads. “DOGEQUEST neither endorses nor condemns any actions.”

A screenshot of the DogeQuest surface website captured on April 3, 2025. (Captured by Thomas English/Daily Caller News Foundation)

ObscureIQ, a data privacy group, compiled a breakdown of the data — obtained by the Daily Caller News Foundation — and determined 98.2% of records used to populate the site matched individuals affected by the 2021 ParkMobile breach.

DogeQuest originally appeared as a surface web doxxing hub, encouraging vandalism of Teslas and displaying names, addresses, contact details and, in some cases, employment information for roughly 1,700 individuals. The site used stolen ParkMobile records along with data purchased from brokers, flagging anyone who had a Tesla listed in their vehicle registration profile, according to ObscureIQ’s analysis.

The platform — now operating as “DogeQuest Unleashed” via a .onion dark web address — has also published personal details of high-value targets including senior military officials, federal employees and private sector executives in Silicon Valley. A spreadsheet reviewed by the Daily Caller News Foundation indicates several individuals targeted work areas like cybersecurity, defense contracting, public health and diplomatic policy. DOGE staff and their families appear prominently throughout the data.

A screenshot of DogeQuest's surface website, captured on April 3, 2025. (Captured by Thomas English/Daily Caller News Foundation)

A screenshot of DogeQuest’s surface website, captured on April 3, 2025. (Captured by Thomas English/Daily Caller News Foundation)

No other reporting has yet tied DogeQuest directly to the ParkMobile breach, which impacted over 21 million users in 2021. The company, which facilitates cashless parking across the U.S., quietly disclosed the breach in April of that year, admitting that “basic user information” had been accessed. ObscureIQ’s research shows that exposed data included email addresses, license plate numbers and phone numbers — enough to triangulate identity when paired with commercial data brokers.

The company agreed to a $32 million settlement to resolve a class-action lawsuit stemming from the data breach. The lawsuit alleged that ParkMobile failed to secure its Amazon Web Services cloud storage, allowing access to the data. Although payment data were reportedly not compromised, plaintiffs argued the exposed information still posed serious privacy risks — a claim now reinforced by its use in the DogeQuest doxxing campaign.

Despite federal attention, the site has proven difficult to keep offline, as the dark web mirror incorporates anonymized hosting methods, frustrating law enforcement takedown efforts.

The Department of Justice charged three suspects last week linked to physical attacks on Tesla vehicles, charging stations and dealerships across multiple states, though it has not publicly confirmed any link between those suspects and DogeQuest. Meanwhile, the FBI has acknowledged it is “actively working” on both the doxxing campaign and a parallel rise in swatting incidents affecting DOGE affiliates.

Continue Reading

Business

Will Trump’s ‘Liberation Day’ Tariffs End In Disaster Or Prosperity?

Published on

 

From the Daily Caller News Foundation

By J.D. Foster

“Liberation Day” has come. So what does it mean? Beats the hell out of me.

What we know is that President Trump’s avalanche of tariffs was to hit a peak on April 2; not end, mind you; not necessarily “the” peak, as more could be on the way; but a peak.

No Trump policy more completely breaks with America’s past than his “beautiful” tariffs on just about everything coming into the United States from just about anywhere.

Will this new policy liberate American manufacturing from foreign shackles? Will it usher in a new era of prosperity, keeping in mind the United States had for many years the consistently best-performing economy in the industrialized world, even overcoming the many inane obstacles erected by the Biden-Harris Administration?

Or will it leave the United States isolated, friendless, and weakened?

The correct answer at this point is no one knows, not even the bloviating talking heads on TV confidently predicting demise or Shangri-la.

Think of it this way. Suppose you’re a restaurant chef and a woman hands you a new recipe. Her father turns 75 soon and they want to have a party at the restaurant. The recipe is for the father’s favorite dish, one her mother made for years.

The recipe looks old, with odd ingredients and processes you’ve not seen before. Now judge it as a chef.

You can’t. Even as you start chopping and dicing, mixing ingredients as instructed, you’re not too sure how this is going to turn out. You have to wait until the dish is on the plate and taste it.

That’s the case with Trump’s tariffs. How will this all turn out? It’s too soon to tell.

The stock market sure doesn’t like it, but why should it? The investor class doesn’t understand this any better than you do. What they do understand is this new policy has upended assumptions and created enormous new uncertainties. We know that dish as those ingredients are always good for a big pullback.

Much of the confusion arises because we don’t know the underlying policy and likely this uncertainty is intentional. Trump likes keeping his counterparts, in this case our trading partners, guessing. If it means Americans are confused for a bit, Trump’s cool with that. Breaking eggs to make an omelette. It will pass and America will be great again afterward. Bon appetite.

If the core policy is to erect massive and mostly permanent tariff walls behind which American firms can hide, then we know how this will turn out: America, meet the dustbin of history.

If the core policy is to force our trading partners to deal with America fairly by reducing their trade barriers after which Trump will remove his tariffs, then this could turn out very well. Tariffs (and non-tariff barriers) in the U.S. and those of our trading partners would fall, reinvigorating the free trade that has energized prosperity for decades.

Which is it? Walls and doom or freedom and prosperity? Again, too early to tell.

Whatever else Trump does in his second term, these tariffs will define his presidency, akin in consequence to Ronald Reagan’s pro-growth tax cuts and Joe Biden’s inflation.

Trump in his second term clearly lives by the saying, “go bold or go home.” He’s got “bold” down pat. We will see over the next year or so whether he and the Republicans go home. Has he liberated Democrats from any fear of Republicans in the mid-terms or in 2028, or he’s liberated America from any fear of Democratic socialism and wokism returning in our lifetimes. The chips are all-in. Soon we will see the cards. Uncertainty, indeed.

JD Foster is the former chief economist at the Office of Management and Budget and former chief economist and senior vice president at the U.S. Chamber of Commerce. He now resides in relative freedom in the hills of Idaho.

Continue Reading

Trending

X