Oil sands, green groups unlikely allies in push for carbon tax


mentalfloss
#1
Oil sands, green groups unlikely allies in push for carbon tax

Ottawa is facing growing calls for a carbon tax from some surprising quarters as it pursues plans to regulate industrial sources of greenhouse-gas emissions.

Oil sands producers and some environmental groups that agree on little else have opposed the Conservative government’s regulatory approach and endorsed the idea of carbon pricing. Now, that idea is being pushed in a new paper to be released Thursday by the University of Calgary’s School of Public Policy.

The author, Simon Fraser University’s Nancy Olewiler, urges Ottawa to scrap energy subsidies, streamline regulations and implement “full-cost pricing” on air contaminants, water use and greenhouse-gas emissions. The paper was sponsored by the Manning Foundation for Democratic Education, although the foundation took no responsibility for its conclusions.

Ms. Olewiler will have the opportunity to present her views directly to Natural Resources Minister Joe Oliver on Friday at a Manning Centre conference, when she shares the stage with him to speak on “energy development through smart regulation.”

The full-cost pricing approach would see the government set a price on pollution and carbon-dioxide emissions as a means to encourage industry to invest in abatement measures, and for consumers to reduce their use of polluting products.

With greenhouse gases, the market-based approach could be accomplished either with a direct tax on emissions, or with the kind of cap-and-trade approach Ottawa was considering two years ago.

“The task is daunting to say the least, but the sooner we get started, the better in terms of using all our natural resources wisely and insuring they'll be here for future generations,” Ms. Olewiler said in an e-mail.

“Once destroyed, it’s very tough and costly, if not impossible” to reclaim the clean water and air and pristine state of the natural environment, she said. The government is promising a sector-by-sector slate of climate regulations, including the oil sands and starting with the coal-fired power sector. Power companies – along with several provinces – have raised significant concerns about draft rules released last August. Industry and provincial critics say Ottawa’s plan involves far too much bureaucratic involvement in their operations and lacks flexibility.

Organizations as diverse as the Pembina Institute think tank and Imperial Oil Ltd. (IMO-T45.900.020.04%) have criticized the federal regulatory approach and endorsed a “market-based” mechanism to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.

Imperial Oil believes any climate policy should ensure the cost is applied evenly across the economy, maximize market mechanisms and minimize complexity and administrative costs, company spokesman Jon Harding said.

A carbon tax “is aligned with more of these key principles” than the cap-and-trade systems or regulatory approaches, Mr. Harding said in an e-mail.

Manning Foundation CEO and Reform Party founder Preston Manning said he supports the idea of full-cost pricing “in principle.”

“It’s eventually got to come,” Mr. Manning said. “It’s just fairly basic concept that, with any production of energy, you’ve got to figure out what are the environmental impacts and then the cost of avoiding or mitigating them and then integrating that into the price of the product.”

The Conservative government has rejected the carbon tax, and savaged former Liberal leader Stéphane Dion in the 2008 federal election for proposing one. Ottawa’s principle aim is harmonizing the Canadian system with whatever emerges in the United States. For now, that appears to be regulation by the Environmental Protection Agency.

Jack Mintz, who heads the University of Calgary’s School of Public Policy, said a carbon tax would allow Ottawa to cut subsidies to all forms of energy and allow the market to function.

Oil sands, green groups unlikely allies in push for carbon tax - The Globe and Mail
 
skookumchuck
+1
#2
Has anyone ever beat through devils club, waded dangerous icy streams of disinformation, clawed over boulders made up of layer after layer of bureaucracy, made it up the mountain, only to discover that there was still no definite evidence of just where carbon taxes ended up?
 
EagleSmack
+1
#3
Quote: Originally Posted by skookumchuckView Post

Has anyone ever beat through devils club, waded dangerous icy streams of disinformation, clawed over boulders made up of layer after layer of bureaucracy, made it up the mountain, only to discover that there was still no definite evidence of just where carbon taxes ended up?

In the government coffers, in the pockets of the companies selling them. There is big money to be made in carbon taxes and selling carbon credits. That is why the fight is so furious.
 
Tonington
+1
#4
Quote: Originally Posted by skookumchuckView Post

Has anyone ever beat through devils club, waded dangerous icy streams of disinformation, clawed over boulders made up of layer after layer of bureaucracy, made it up the mountain, only to discover that there was still no definite evidence of just where carbon taxes ended up?

I waded through the BC carbon tax a while back. BC residents and businesses get more tax rebates than the province takes in with the carbon tax. In other words, the carbon tax costs the government money, lost revenue. Maybe you need to look closer.
 
B00Mer
+1
#5
THE 21st Century Scam--Carbon Credits Trading

[youtube]GjbtU2UJhyw[/youtube]
 
skookumchuck
#6
Since when was the carbon tax designed to create tax breaks and rebates? Does it go into general revenue earmarked for that purpose?
Nope, it was a politically expedient regressive tax affecting low income and senior groups, good grief it is levied on schools and hospitals. This agenda has been avoided by nearly all other governments both in the US and Canada. Now there are hints that the BC Lieberals would like a back door created.
The only people to embrace it are machiavellian hypocrites like the Suzuki Foundation and Tides Canada.
 
L Gilbert
+1
#7
www.policyalternatives.ca/sit..._SUMMARY_2.pdf (external - login to view)
 
Tonington
+1
#8
Quote: Originally Posted by skookumchuckView Post

Since when was the carbon tax designed to create tax breaks and rebates?

Since the Bill was drafted and passed in 2008... You were the one going on about digging through muck, did you not even start with the legislation? Maybe start there instead of the bowels of the internet, or wherever you were getting your information from:

Bill 37 — 2008: Carbon Tax Act

Here's my post from a while back with links to the budget documents, detailing the tax revenue returned to individuals and businesses in BC:

Quote: Originally Posted by ToningtonView Post

Well, it is required by law.

Nevertheless, how very prudent of you, BC actually cut taxes by more than they needed to make the tax scheme revenue neutral. Their carbon tax is revenue negative. The horror!

Go to page 105 of BC's 2010 budget plan, carbon tax revenue for 2009/10 is $542 million. Reductions of Income tax (corporate and personal) and the low income supplement add up to $767 million. The tax measures end up being net negative, by $225 million.

Go to page 45 of BC's 2011 budget plan, carbon tax revenue for 2010/11 is forecast to be $740 million, with tax reductions forecast to be $862 million. More deficit!

Again, ohh the horror!

 
skookumchuck
#9
When they floated that scow all the hype was about saving the planet, which somehow translated into all of us paying for government to pay corporations to clean up their act, with a secondary feel good line about how each of us could make a difference, as if.
I got no information from the internet, merely watching the scam unfold. If you wish to believe what they spoon out fly at it. The various climate change bs ers can say what they like and use whatever spin works on the sheeple.

I stand with my assertion that the numbers we are fed have been manipulated along with the so called results. Did you also believe that BC Hydro was profitable a few years back when that spin was spun? Oops, sorry, forgot you don't live here and must depend on what you read. You believe what you wish to and i will also.
 
Tonington
+1
#10
Quote: Originally Posted by skookumchuckView Post

I stand with my assertion that the numbers we are fed have been manipulated along with the so called results.

Yes, your unsubstantiated assertion.
 
damngrumpy
+3 / -1
#11  Top Rated Post
There is big I should say huge money in carbon credits and the sale of them. The companies want
them for that purpose its like owning a milk quota. The Greenies, aer happy to see them too as we
will eventually be on bicycles and on mass transit eating our organic fruit hanging out the windows as
air conditioning in vehicles will be a thing of the past.
Nope I will still be driving my truck right up until they take my drivers licence.
This whole thing is manipulated by the wolves and paid for by the sheep.
 
petros
+2 / -1
#12
Hey Econauts,

**** you and your "green" taxes.
 
L Gilbert
+1
#13
Quote: Originally Posted by skookumchuckView Post

When they floated that scow all the hype was about saving the planet, which somehow translated into all of us paying for government to pay corporations to clean up their act, with a secondary feel good line about how each of us could make a difference, as if.

Obviously you haven't gathered much information on the issue at all, just listened to the hype on one side of the issue.
Quote:

I got no information from the internet, merely watching the scam unfold. If you wish to believe what they spoon out fly at it. The various climate change bs ers can say what they like and use whatever spin works on the sheeple.

Same for the ignorant jackasses that deny climate change. lol

Quote:

I stand with my assertion that the numbers we are fed have been manipulated along with the so called results.

So? Everyone and anyone can have a baseless opinion.
 
petros
#14
Quote: Originally Posted by L GilbertView Post

Same for the ignorant jackasses that deny climate change. lol

Deny climate change or the causation? How many dollar bills do you have to drop into the atmosphere to fix it? Do you think it will work?
 
taxslave
#15
Quote: Originally Posted by ToningtonView Post

I waded through the BC carbon tax a while back. BC residents and businesses get more tax rebates than the province takes in with the carbon tax. In other words, the carbon tax costs the government money, lost revenue. Maybe you need to look closer.

B.C.s carbon tax was supposed to be revenue neutral. Most on the left claim the government is making money off it. There is also a considerable push to eliminate it because no one else has followed suit and it is claimed to be cutting into our competitiveness. I'm not sure if anyone really knows.
 
L Gilbert
+1
#16
Hey all you future generations. We ****ed up the planet and if you don't like it, well **** you.
Brilliant.
 
petros
#17
Did we?
 
L Gilbert
+1
#18
Quote: Originally Posted by taxslaveView Post

B.C.s carbon tax was supposed to be revenue neutral. Most on the left claim the government is making money off it. There is also a considerable push to eliminate it because no one else has followed suit and it is claimed to be cutting into our competitiveness. I'm not sure if anyone really knows.

Yeah, but TS, it ain't even neutral. If you people would read the link I posted, you'd see the gov't is losing money on the issue, not gaining.

But I guess Petros and Skookumchuk don't like reading about stuff that contradicts them.
 
petros
#19
Correleation through obersvation Les? Really? Are you serious?
 
L Gilbert
+2
#20
Quote: Originally Posted by petrosView Post

Deny climate change or the causation?

Having trouble reading? I said, "Same for the ignorant jackasses that deny climate change." What did that read like to you?
Quote:

How many dollar bills do you have to drop into the atmosphere to fix it? Do you think it will work?

Nope, but we can spend some to clean up our act and try to limit some future effects. DUH

Quote: Originally Posted by petrosView Post

Did we?

Yes.
 
petros
#21
Name ONE instance where throwing money around has fixed an issue.
 
B00Mer
#22
Hey Gilbert, you can always join ELF..

I don't think the world is that bad off.. I mean in 100 years the earth's temp was increased 1.6 degrees.

O.K. next 100 years 3.6 degrees.. still don't see a problem..

Canadian farmers are not complaining.. bunker crops.

 
L Gilbert
+1
#23
Quote: Originally Posted by petrosView Post

Name ONE instance where throwing money around has fixed an issue.

Just locally, Celgar pulp mill in Castlegar and Teck Cominco in Trail.
There was quite a pile of money spent on cleaning up. Now you might get a slight whiff of mill gas in Castlegar instead of nearly choking on it and Trail is actually growing green stuff on the hills around it for a change.
 
taxslave
+1
#24
Quote: Originally Posted by L GilbertView Post

Yeah, but TS, it ain't even neutral. If you people would read the link I posted, you'd see the gov't is losing money on the issue, not gaining.

But I guess Petros and Skookumchuk don't like reading about stuff that contradicts them.

Yea I read that. Tell it to the dippers that claim the government is raking in the loot from it. But don't for get that many of them use MF's math where if yo got a 5% raise last year but 2% this year that is a 3% cut.
 
L Gilbert
+1
#25
Quote: Originally Posted by B00MerView Post

Hey Gilbert, you can always join ELF..

I don't think the world is that bad off.. I mean in 100 years the earth's temp was increased 1.6 degrees.

O.K. next 100 years 3.6 degrees.. still don't see a problem..

Canadian farmers are not complaining.. bunker crops.

Spoken from pure ignorance. There's loads of information around if you can pry yourself away from the denial hype.
 
petros
#26
So what happened to the chems that were once aerosols? Tucked neatly away and stockpiled to appear clean?
 
L Gilbert
#27
Quote: Originally Posted by taxslaveView Post

Yea I read that. Tell it to the dippers that claim the government is raking in the loot from it. But don't for get that many of them use MF's math where if yo got a 5% raise last year but 2% this year that is a 3% cut.

Good point.

Quote: Originally Posted by petrosView Post

So what happened to the chems that were once aerosols? Tucked neatly away and stockpiled to appear clean?

Nope.
 
petros
#28
Well where are they?
 
L Gilbert
#29
Quote: Originally Posted by petrosView Post

Well where are they?

Teck - Trail Operations Zinc Smelter & Refinery (external - login to view)

Zellstoff Celgar:: Home (external - login to view)
 
petros
+1 / -1
#30
They got you hook line and lead sinker huh Les?
 
no new posts