A Farewell to Arms Essay Example for Free

A Farewell to Arms Essay A writers job is to tell the truth ? Ernest Hemingway. This quote means that it is a writers job to convey some sort of truth or accuracy to the reader. I agree. This is shown in the novel, A Farewell to Arms, by Ernest Hemingway through the setting and characterization in the novel. It is also shown in the novel, To Kill A Mockingbird, by Harper Lee through the themes and setting of the novel. In the war novel, A Farewell to Arms, Ernest Hemingway demonstrates that it is a writers job to convey some sort of truth to the reader through the setting of the novel. This novel takes place during a time of war and shows what war is like, realistically. For a war novel, there is not a lot of fighting but instead more of getting from one place to another and the situations that occur in the interim. This portrays a truth to the reader because it shows how war is in reality and that it is not all death and destruction. Hemingway expresses the emotions of the characters accurately for time of war and conditions or situations the characters are put into. The author shows us the characters interact with each other and how they deal with the war surrounding them. For example, in Book III of the novel, the priest says that people that summer finally realized the war and that people were gentler because they had been beaten. This, truthfully, shows how war affects people and their emotions because it shows how they are disappointed. Through the setting of the play, Hemingway tells the truth by stating that people are trapped biologically because of their setting and the fact that it is human condition. In the novel, Frederic feels trapped because of Catherines pregnancy. In the novel, A Farwell to Arms, the author establishes that a writers job is to deliver accuracy and truth to the audience of the piece of work through characterization in the novel. Hemingway shows the reader what war can do to a person. He shows this through Frederics personality and his change throughout the story. Frederic went from an innocent man who joined the army because he was in Italy at the time and spoke the language and after a lot of experience becomes cynical. This work of literature also shows how war can be dehumanizing on an individual. In Book III, Frederic shoots at a sergeant and thinks nothing of killing another human being because thats what occurs in war. Another way that the author tells truth in this novel is by showing that some characters keep their morals and human values. For example, in Book III, Frederic stops his fellow officers from harassing the two young girls who needed a ride. During the war times, most men did not have respect for their fellow people but Hemingway shows the reader that a select few fight to keep their morals straight. In the novel, To Kill A Mockingbird, Harper Lee confirms that a writers job is to tell the reader the truth through the themes of this novel. One theme of this novel is racism; the townspeople are prejudice towards Tom Robinson because hes black. Even though, many know and believe that he is innocent and he did not rape Mayella they still blame him and find him guilty in court. Another theme of this novel, that shows truth as well, is the coexistence of good and bad. Harper Lee shows his reader that in his story, just like it is in the real world, good and bad exists. The good in this story is Atticus and him trying to fight for Tom and stands up for him as his attorney to show he supports him even though the town turns against him and he knows he cant win. The bad in this story is racism and inequality. The author of this novel conveys a lot of truth because these problems still occur to this day in real life situations. Another important theme that expresses truth to us from the author is innocence and the loss of that innocence. When the novel begins, Scout and Jem seem very innocent to the evil in the world, mostly because they had not ever witnessed it. After they see the racism, prejudice and unjust treatment that are put onto many characters they start to lose that childlike innocence. This is a strong truth, to this day. Young innocent people are losing and missing out on a lot because of their environment and surroundings. In the novel, To Kill A Mockingbird, the author shows the audience that the writers job is to distribute the truth to the reader through, the literary element, of setting. This story takes place in Maycomb, Alabama. Maycomb is home to many complacent, racist and prejudice people. The people of Maycomb try to ignore the truth that is plain to see by not acting on it. They let people in the town, who may be of different skin color like Tom Robinson, be stepped on and treated unfairly just because of his skin tone while many of the people of the town know he is innocent. During the course of the novel, the Great Depression is occurring. This sets the stage for poverty to be a strong point in this story. The characters make this a separation element. Another factor of setting that expresses truth in this novel being in the South in these days. The South had many rules and segregation laws concerning black citizens and white citizens. This caused an increase in the racism. As shown above, the two novels, A Farewell to Arms and To Kill A Mockingbird, both have many literary elements that help the author to express truth in his/her literary work. Some of these literary elements were setting, characterization and theme among many others.

Working and Poor Essay -- essays research papers

It’s difficult to imagine how some people hold multiple jobs to support their family and still live below the poverty line. The saying â€Å"the rich gets richer and the poor get poorer† has never been so evident in today’s society. With a growing percentage of people living below the poverty line, one has to question the government policies enacted to elevate the living standings for its people. Government policies great influence the everyday life of its people. It is difficult to enact common ground policies to satisfy the entire public since not everyone is on same financial level. Strategic plans should be sought out to ensure effectiveness to its targeted group by considering all the interests of the stakeholders and the impact that will affect these stakeholder groups. According to the free market theory, the government ultimately has the social responsibility to its public. The important task the government must face is to maximize the benefit at a minimized cost. It must approve and implement laws that benefit overall society while adhering strictly to its budget constraints. The underlying concept of the â€Å"good will prevail† is also prevalent in its policy effectiveness. Good implementations to benefit society will stay and the benefit will multiply with time. Bad policies will be questioned, debated, and eventually thrown out. The invisible hand will always bring the market back to equilibrium. The issues on employment greatly reflect a utilitarian view. Utilitarianism is often used to determine the conflict of interest. Often times the employer and the employees will encounter conflict of interests. Which side will ultimately come out on top depends on which side is perceived as the greatest and whether it will generate the greatest bottom line value or the greatest societal gain. The conflict of interest is utterly apparent in a layoff, where the employers are doing so to maximize profit and minimize cost by outsourcing all of its jobs overseas. The stakeholder, employees, suffers greatly from such an act. Utilitarianism often stresses the importance of increased productivity and profit, and reducing cost while improving quality. Many people lose sight of the true benefit or damage in the long run. The only consideration was the short term gain and profit. It is not surprising that families living under the poverty line often hold some of the mo... ...ic’s living conditions, while the general public has duties to cooperate and carry out functions to ensure the success of these policies. Universal moral norms such as honesty, fairness, compassion, integrity, etc., are often expected between the stakeholders. The government and the companies must assess environmental scanning and fully evaluate issues management to ensure the public and its employees are protected, while the policy serves its underlying purpose. It is a depressing realization that some people work very hard to support those around them and never get the benefits they deserve. Tax, education, and health care policies are often working against those who are less unfortunate. It is apparent that the poor keep on trailing further and further behind. It’s not surprising to learn that the policies enacted today haven’t proven as effective as originally intended. Everyday is a learning process and ongoing improvements must be made, especially in this fast paced, ever-changing environment. Poverty will never be eradicated, but with thorough analysis and evaluation, the overall living standard can be improved for many who are counting on the government to help them.

Critically analyse how the Global Energy Assessment pathways represent future socio-technological change in the energy system, focussing on the building sector.

Abstract There has been growing concern surrounding climate change over recent years and much emphasis has been placed upon the ways in which the environment can be protected. Accordingly, because of how important it is for organisations and individuals to adopt environmentally friendly practices, effective environmental controls are vital. There is much debate as to the extent to which the Global Energy Assessment pathways represent future socio-technological change in the energy system, yet this study intends to find this out by focussing on the building sector. Introduction The government has placed a great deal of emphasis upon climate change in recent years by exploring the different ways it can be tackled (Department for International Development, 2011: 13). The Department of Energy and Climate Change aims to make sure that the UK has â€Å"secure, clean and affordable energy supplies† (DEEC, 2014: 1) and seeks to promote international action in order to eliminate climate change. In 2012 the Global Energy Assessment (GEA) was therefore launched and a new global energy policy agenda was established (GEA Writing Team, 2012: 4). The GEA intended to change the way society uses and delivers energy in order to mitigate climate change. In doing so, it brings together hundreds of international researchers to provide an analysis of the current issues that exist and to identify the possible options that can be taken in tackling climate change. Technology options and policies are also included in the GEA and are considered vital in protecting the environ ment and maintaining sustainable development (GEA, 2014: 1). As noted by Greening, the Secretary of State for International Development: â€Å"The long-term effects of climate change threaten to undermine progress in reducing global poverty† (Department for International Development, 2011: 3). This is the main reason why the UK is committed to helping developing countries adapt to climate change in a positive way by ensuring that they take up low carbon growth and effectively tackle deforestation. This study will therefore examine some of the Global Energy Assessment pathways, by focusing on the building sector, in order to consider the effects these will have upon the energy system in the future. Socio-Technological Change in the Energy System In order for climate change to be tackled effectively, socio-technological changes are needed within the energy system. This can be ascertained by reviewing the different sectors which impact the environment and then considering what socio-technological changes are required. The building sector has a significant impact upon the environment because of the fact that it accounts for one-third of the planet’s total energy use (Global Alliance, 2012: 1). Technological improvements to buildings are therefore a cost-effective way of mitigating climate change. By using existing proven technologies we have the ability right to â€Å"reduce energy consumption in new and existing buildings by 30-50 percent at extremely low or no cost, and usually at negative cost (Global Alliance, 2012: 1). Increased building efficiency is therefore the future for the building sector because not only do greener buildings help to promote sustainability but they are also better for the consumer in that th ey are more comfortable and cheaper to maintain (NAR, 2014: 1). The pathways for transition that have been explored in the GEA therefore need to be followed if the building sector is to become more energy efficient. This is important given that GHG emissions are expected to nearly double by the year 2030 under a high-growth development scenario (Metz et al; 2007: 6). The GEA supports sustainability in the building sector by helping decisions makers address the challenges associated with building development (CCCSEP, 2012: 1). Energy Efficiency Barriers in the Building Sector The building sector can contribute to tackling climate change through socio-technological change in the energy system, yet there are many barriers towards improved efficiency in this sector. One of the main barriers that exists is a lack of technical, economic and general knowledge about the energy sector. Not only does this knowledge gap apply to consumers but it also applies to building designers, architects and politicians (Urge-Vorsatz, 2012: 702). Because of this lack of knowledge, it is very difficult for many of the technologies and practices that exist in this area to be implemented. Furthermore, although energy efficient practices are considered cost effective, they are not being widely adopted due to the high initial start-up costs. The high upfront costs are thus discouraging, especially when there is a lack of knowledge that exists in this area and unless greater awareness is provided, it is unlikely that the GEA pathways will have much of an influence in the future. Mark et failures also provide barriers to energy efficiency because of the failures in the way the market operates (Urge-Vorsatz, 2012: 702). Such flaws prevent the trade-off between energy efficiency investments and energy saving benefits. Behavioural barriers are also a problem for energy efficiency in the building sector as the behaviours of individuals and companies may be difficult to change. For example, individuals may fail to turn the lights off in their homes, whilst organisations may fail to identify energy saving opportunities, especially if they do not benefit directly from them. An example of this can be seen in relation to green leases since these are one of the main pathways to energy efficiency. Green leases thus impose obligations on landlords and tenants to achieve targets for energy consumption. This ensures that the energy use of commercial buildings is minimised through â€Å"better measurement, greater awareness and systematic management† (All Party Urban Development Group, 2008: 2). There are a number of different green lease shades which represent different commitments to the green agenda: light green leases represent a modest commitment to the agenda, whilst dark green leases reflect a much more serious commitment (Bright, 2008: 158). Regardless of the benefits green leases have on the environment, however, they are not being used as much as they should. This is largely the result of the â€Å"conventional relationship between the landlord (as building owner) and tenant (as occupier)† which generally neglects â€Å"environmental co nsiderations† (Hinnells et al; 2008, 1). The extent to which green leases represent future socio-technological change in the energy system is therefore unclear and it seems that further changes are required if a more robust system is to be implemented. Green leases should be used more frequently than they are at present, yet it is questionable whether this is likely to happen given that â€Å"change may be rapid, disruptive and challenging (Hinnells et al; 2008: 1). Bright believes that capital investment will allow for more efficient equipment to be introduced that will allow for better energy savings to be made (Bright, 2008: 158). This will encourage landlords and tenants to enter into a green lease if they can identify the real benefits that are associated with them. Consequently, it is evident when looking at green leases that one of the main barriers towards improved energy efficiency is the lack of awareness that exists. In order to remove this barrier to energy efficiency, campaigns and sector learning networks could be introduced in order to increase the current awareness of GEA’s (Carbon Trust, 2005: 16). Furthermore, actions could also be taken that raise the attention of building owners such as; tax incentives and low interest loans (Rezendes, 1994: 41). This will allow greater access to energy efficient equipment and will encourage individuals to take advantage of the opportunities that are available. Another barrier towards energy efficiency in the building sector is transaction costs and the limited availability of capital. Because building owners do not generally have spare capital available to make their buildings more energy efficient, they are less likely to take the GEA pathways into consideration (Ecofys, 2012: 3). Furthermore, as has been pointed out; â€Å"financial barriers to the penetration of energy efficiency and building integrated distributed generated technologies include factors that increase the investments costs and/or decrease savings resulting from the improvement† (Urge-Vorsatz, 2012: 698). Arguably, building owners are unlikely to make energy efficient changes if they are not also cost-effective despite the fact that the equipment is more efficient. This could also be rectified through tax incentives and low interest loans, yet economic instruments could also be introduced that reduce the overall costs of the equipment. Energy prices could also be increased so that going green would be more of an incentive than it is at present. This is because, unless there are significant cost benefits of becoming more energy efficient, it is unlikely that individuals will be actively encouraged to do so. Market misalignment is another barrier that prevents â€Å"the consistent trade-off between specific energy-efficient investment and the societal energy-saving benefits† (The Carbon Trust, 2005: 16). An example of this can be seen in relation to tenant-landlord relationships where companies have no direct control over the premises and so are reluctant to invest in energy effi ciency. This barrier could be overcome through the provision of split-incentives. This would encourage landlords to become more energy efficient if they were being incentivised to do so. If the GEA pathways are implemented, the environment will benefit significantly from this and the passivhaus standard will be applied in the building sector. This standard is the robust approach to building design which seeks to minimise the heating demand of buildings by building houses that have exceptional thermal performance (Passivhaus, 2011: 1). Unless it is less costly for builders to employ the passivhaus standard, there will be no incentive for them to do so as they will not benefit from the reduced energy savings. GEA Pathways for the Energy Efficiency Transition Because of how important it is to protect the environment, it is necessary that the multiple objectives outlined in the GEA are being met through environmental control. The main objective of the GEA pathways is to understand the combination of measures, time scales and costs that are needed to transform the energy system. In understanding this, however, it is necessary to first identify the energy efficiency barriers that exist so that appropriate measures can be implemented to alleviate them. Reducing thermal energy use is achievable through a number of different pathways such as; best practice in building design, construction and operation; the elimination of energy poverty; the increase of living space and economic development ((Urge-Vorsatz, 2012: 703). Before these pathways can be incorporated, it will be necessary to for significant investments to be made as well as the introduction of new appliances and technology and discounted energy saving costs. Because this will require h igh start-up costs, increased knowledge of the GEA pathway benefits will be needed so that individuals and organisations will be incentivised to adopt such pathways. Hence, many approaches have already been implemented to manage pollution-generating processes (Stuart, 2006: 1), yet it cannot be said that the obligations placed upon individuals under the Environmental Protection Act 1990 and the EU’s Council Directive 96/61/EC to control the environment are being realised (McEldowney and McEldowney, 2010: 48). This is likely to be the result of market failures and behavioural barriers since individuals and organisations may not be able to identify when an energy saving opportunity arises. Nevertheless, since the Climate Change Act 2008 was first enacted various mitigation and adaption strategies have been introduced, such as the Government’s ‘Green Deal’. The objective of this deal was to limit greenhouse gas emissions so that the increase of global tempe rature could be decreased. The Green Deal has been considered a welcoming development because of the fact that it has enabled the energy efficiency of many households and businesses to be improve â€Å"without consuming so much energy and wasting so much money† (DEEC, 2010: 1). This is beneficial for consumers and is likely to reduce the initial startup costs. The Green Deal is also effective in increasing the awareness of energy saving benefits, which is likely to remove any subsisting behavioral barriers. Conversely, it has been argued that the implementation of the GEA pathways may actually lead to further energy use, through the so-called rebound effect (Gillingham et al, 2013: 474). Although the GEA have identified the possible re-bound effect the implementation of their pathways may have, it seems as though little consideration has been given to this (GEA, 2012: 1573). Accordingly, it cannot be said that the barriers to energy efficiency have been given much thought and unless the behaviour of individuals and organisations change, it is unlikely that the GEA pathways will have much of an impact in the future. There are both direct and indirect rebound effects that are likely to occur. The direct rebound effect happens when people consume more energy as a result of the low costs, and the indirect rebound effect happens when people use savings from lower energy costs to spend on other energy intensive activities (Sorrell, 2010: 636). In view of this, is thereby essential that rebou nd effects are taken into consideration when evaluating how beneficial energy efficiency really is. As noted by Giillingham et al; however: â€Å"Empirical evidence indicates that the direct rebound effect will dominate in the near term† at around 10-30 per cent (2013: 476). Regardless of this, it was also pointed out that rebound effects are not necessarily bad since the overall well-being of society will be improved as a result. Therefore, even if the re-bound effect does not lead to a significant reduction in energy use, societal well-being will be improved. It is unclear whether the target of 80 per cent emission reductions by 2050 will be achieved since there are a number of different changes that need to be implemented in order for the barriers to energy efficiency to be overcome (Bell and McGillivray, 2008: 531). In effect, whilst many implementations have been made towards establishing a sustainable future in the energy sector, the extent to which these have proven su ccessful remains largely unclear. If the barriers to energy efficiency are removed and the GEA pathways are followed, there is a possibility that the emission reductions will be reduced by 2050, yet it remains to be seen whether this will be by 80 per cent. This is because as put by Riahi et al; â€Å"although the GEA pathways have shown that such a transformation is possible, the task remains and ambitious and will require rapid introduction of policies and fundamental policy changes that lead to coordinated efforts to integrate global concerns† (2012: 1300). Consequently, the barriers to energy efficiency will need to be overcome before the GEA pathways can be implemented, yet this is likely to prove extremely complex. Increased awareness would be the first step as this will lead to behavioural changes that will ensure the GEA pathways are being adopted. Conclusion Overall, whilst there are a number of different GEA pathways that are intended to make effective socio-technological changes in the energy system, the extent to which these will prove successful remains unclear. This is because, whilst many of the pathways are considered effective ways of creating an environmentally friendly energy system, it cannot be said that the current mechanisms are being employed by all. This is evidenced by the introduction of green leases, which are aimed at establishing energy efficient ways of occupying commercial property. Whilst these leases do seem rather beneficial to both landlords and tenants, their place in the market has not yet been established. The lack of incentives may be one reason for this, which signifies how further benefits ought to be made available. In addition, the future of the mitigation and adaption strategies that have been implemented into the building sector is also unclear because of the fact organisations do not always co-operat e in the implementation of such strategies. The re-bound effect is also not being given enough consideration and thus needs to be taken into account when analysing the GEA pathways. Consequently, in order to maintain sustainable development and minimise climate change, it is vital that the GEA pathways are being promoted a lot more so that the impact the building sector has on the environment can be minimised, yet in doing so the re-bound effect should be taken into account in order to ensure that a more realistic approach is undertaken References All Party Urban Development Group., (2008). Greening UK Cities Buildings; Improving the Energy Efficiency of Our Offices, Shops and Factories. A Report Delivered by the Officers, (2008), 20 March 2014. Bell, S. and McGillivray, D. (2008). Environmental Law, 7th edn Oxford University Press. Bright, S., (2008). Going Green. 158 New Law Journal 1135, Issue 7333. CCCSEP. (2012) ‘Global Energy Assessment: Energy-Efficient Building Modelling Scenarios’ Centre for Climate Change and Sustainable Energy Policy, Centre European University, 29 March 2014. DEEC. (2010). ‘What is the Green Deal?’ (2010) The Department for Energy & Climate Energy, Accessed 20 March 2014. Department for International Development. (2011) ‘Tackling Climate Change, Reducing Poverty’, UK International Climate Fund, Accessed 19 March, 2014. Dowden, M., (2008). Property/Landlord & Tenant: Contentious Carbon158 New Law Journal 1707, Issue 7348. Ecofys. (2012) ‘The Benefits of Energy Efficiency – Why Wait?’ Sustainable Energy for Everyone, Accessed 30 March 2014. Gillingham, K. Kotchen, M. J. Rapson, D. S. and Wagner, G. (2013) ‘The Rebound Effect and Energy Efficiency Policy’ Yale University School of Forestry & Environmental Studies, [Online] Available: http://www.yale.edu/gillingham/ReboundEffectLongForm.pdf [03 April, 2014]. Global Alliance. (2012) Why Buildings, Global L-eadership in our Built Environment, Accessed 20 March 2014. Global Energy Assessment (GEA) Writing Team. (2012) Global Energy Assessment, Towards a Sustainable Future, New York: Cambridge University press. Global Energy Assessment (GEA). (2014) ‘Global Energy Assessment’ International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis, Accessed 19 March 2014. Hinnells, M., Bright, S., Langley, A., Woodford, L., Schiellerup, P., and Bosteels, T., (2008). McEldowney, J. and McEldowney, S. (2010) Environmental Law, 1st edition Longman. NAR. (2014) ‘What is Green Building’ National Association of Realtors, Accessed 14 March 2014. Passivhaus. (2011) ‘The Passivhaus Standard’ [Online] Available: http://www.passivhaus.org.uk/standard.jsp?id=122 [03 April 2014]. Rezendes, V, S. (1994) Geothermal Energy, DIANE Publishing. Riahi, K., et al; (2012) Global Energy Assessment, Chapter 17, [Online] Available: http://www.iiasa.ac.at/web/home/research/Flagship-Projects/Global-Energy-Assessment/GEA_Chapter17_pathways_lowres.pdf [03 April 2014]. Sorrell, S. J. (2010) ‘Dimitropoulus, The Rebound Effect: Microeconomic Definitions, Limitations and Extensions’ Ecological Economics, 65(3): 636-649. Stuart, R. (2006) ‘Command and Control Regulation’, The Encyclopaedia of Earth, Accessed 20 March 2014. The Carbon Trust. (2005) ‘The UK Climate Change Programme: Potential Evolution for Business and the Public Sector’ Making Business Sense of Climate Change, Accessed 29 March 2014. The Department of Energy and Climate Change (DEEC). (2014) What we do, Gov.uk, Accessed 20 March 2014. The Greening of Commercial Leases. Emerald Group Publishing Ltd, 20 March 2014. James, R., (2010). Not Easy Being Green. Property Law Journal 22, 20 March 2014. King, V., (2009). Is My Lease Green32 Company’s Secretary Review 24, Issue 24. LRCI., (2009). Guidance: Green Commercial Leases. Low Carbon Research Institute Convergence Programme, 20 March 2014. Urge-Vorsatz, D. (2012) ‘Energy End Use: Buildings’ Accessed 29 March 2014.

How Much Alcohol Can Visitors Bring Into Canada

If you are a visitor to Canada, you are allowed to bring a small quantity of alcohol (wine, liquor, beer, or coolers) into the country without having to pay duty or taxes on it as long as: the alcohol accompanies youyou meet the minimum legal drinking age for the province or territory at which you enter Canada.  The legal age for purchase and consumption is 19 years  of age in British Columbia, New Brunswick, Newfoundland and Labrador, Northwest Territories, Nova Scotia, Nunavut, Ontario, Prince Edward Island, Saskatchewan, and Yukon;  and  18 years  of age in Alberta, Manitoba, and Quebec. Please note that rules change, so confirm this information before you travel.   Alcohol Quantities Permitted You may bring in only  one of the following: 1.5 liters (50.7 U.S. ounces) of wine, including wine coolers over 0.5 percent alcohol. This is equivalent to (up to) 53 fluid ounces or two 750 ml bottles of wine.  1.14 liters (38.5 U.S. ounces) of liquor. This is equivalent to  (up to)  40 fluid ounces  or one large standard bottle of liquor.Up to 8.5 liters of beer or ale, including beer with more than 0.5 percent alcohol. This is equivalent to 287.4 U.S. fluid ounces or about 24 cans or bottles (355 ml or 12.004 U.S. fluid ounces each). According to the Canadian Border Services Agency, the quantities of alcoholic beverages you can import must be within the limit set by provincial and territorial liquor control authorities that apply where you will  enter  Canada. If the amount of alcohol you want to import exceeds your personal exemption, you will have to pay the duty and taxes as well as any provincial or territorial levies that apply. Contact the appropriate provincial or territorial liquor control authority for more information  before  you go to Canada. Assessments typically start at 7 percent. You must be staying for more than 24 hours to bring alcohol into the country. For Canadians  returning after a stay in the United States, the amount of personal exemption is dependent on how long the individual was out of the country; the highest exemptions accrue after stays of more than a 48 hours. In 2012, Canada changed exemption limits to more closely match those of the United States. More on the Taxes Visitors are allowed to bring into Canada $60 in gifts duty-free per recipient.  But alcohol and tobacco do not qualify for this exemption. Canada defines alcoholic beverages as products that exceed 0.5 percent alcohol by volume. Certain alcoholic and wine products, such as some coolers, do not exceed 0.5 percent by volume and, thus, are not considered alcoholic beverages. If you go over your personal exemption, you will have to pay duty on the full amount, not just the excess. Note that each personal exemption is per person, not per vehicle.  You are not allowed to combine your personal exemptions with someone else or transfer them to another person. Goods brought in for commercial use or for another person do not qualify under the personal exemption and are subject to full duties. Customs officials calculate the duties  in the currency of the country you are entering. So if you are a U.S. citizen crossing into Canada, you will need to convert the amount you paid for your alcohol in the United States into Canadian currency at the applicable rate of exchange. If You Exceed the Duty-Free Allowance   Except in the Northwest Territories and Nunavut, if you are a visitor to Canada and you bring in more than the personal allowances of liquor listed above, you will pay customs and provincial/territory assessments. The amounts you are allowed to bring into Canada are also limited by the province or territory in which you enter Canada. For details on specific amounts and rates, contact the liquor control authority for the appropriate province or territory before you travel to Canada. In the Northwest Territories and Nunavut, its illegal to bring in more than your exempted amount. A Growing Problem of Alcohol Overconsumption in Canada   Although there have long been restrictions on the number of alcohol visitors can bring into Canada, a growing problem of rising and overconsumption of alcohol has raised alarms in Canada. Anyone trying to bring in large quantities of cheaper American alcohol, wine, and beer might be unpopular  at the border. Staying within personal exemption quantities is the safest path. Since about 2000 and the release of the Canada Low-Risk Alcohol Drinking Guidelines in 2011, the first such national guidelines, many Canadians have  been on a mission to reduce alcohol consumption across the board. Much research has been done on how harmful even moderate alcohol consumption can be and the  serious long-term effects on  young adults ages 18–24, when risky alcohol consumption peaks. In addition, risky drinking is on the rise in other segments of the population. High Canadian Prices Tempt Importers There has been a movement to encourage lower consumption by  increasing or maintaining the overall price  of alcohol through interventions such as excise taxes and indexing prices to inflation. Such pricing, according to the Canadian Center on Substance Abuse, would encourage production and consumption of lower-strength alcoholic beverages. Establishing minimum prices, the CCSA said, could remove inexpensive sources of alcohol often favored by young adults and other high-risk drinkers. Visitors may be tempted to bring in large quantities of alcoholic beverages bought in the United States, which can sell for about half the price of such drinks in Canada. But if this is done, well-trained officers of the  Canada  Border  Services Agency will find such goods, and the offender will be assessed duties for the entire amount, not the just excess. Customs Contact Information If you have questions or need more information about bringing alcohol into Canada, contact the Canada Border Services Agency.