Alberta is greenest it's ever been under the NDP and that will be tough to undo

mentalfloss

Prickly Curmudgeon Smiter
Jun 28, 2010
39,817
471
83
Shucks


Alberta is greenest it's ever been under the NDP and that will be tough to undo

6 months into carbon plan, Alberta's changes look made to last, no matter what party governs province


Alberta's NDP government hasn't wasted much time in bringing its climate change policies into effect.

In the past six months, Albertans have started to pay a carbon tax on gasoline and home heating and they have been eligible for subsidies on LED light bulbs, insulation, windows and solar panels. The coal phase-out has been negotiated, and an auction is underway to bring more renewable power to the province.

The provincial government has been galloping through the implementation of its plan, almost as though there is a deadline to hit. Which there may well be.

There's a fair bit of political turmoil in the province at the moment, with the right of centre opposition parties, Wildrose and the Progressive Conservatives, considering a merger. They split the conservative vote in 2015 and have a common desire to kill the carbon tax.

But can they? Or is Alberta simply too far along the road already? Let's figure that out.

Carbon tax

The current $20 per tonne carbon tax is the most visible of Alberta's climate policies. It amounts to about five cents a litre on gasoline and $1 a gigajoule on natural gas home heating, with subsidies offered to lower-income Albertans. Both those taxes are set to rise in January 2018, as the carbon tax rises to $30 per tonne.

On the surface, it would be relatively easy to kill the provincial carbon tax, if a new government were to be elected in the spring of 2019. However, that's not a permanent fix, because it's expected that the federal government also will have implemented a tax by then. In the spring of 2019, the federal tax would be $20 per tonne, moving up to $30 per tonne in 2020.

"In the case of carbon pricing, there is a strong federal backstop," said Sara Hastings-Simon of the Pembina Institute, a Calgary-based environmental think-tank.

"So the real choice in the province is between designing and implementing a carbon pricing policy that is designed with Alberta in mind and would address Alberta's competitiveness, or having the federal government impose something on you."

Industry is facing a slightly different set of rules. Large GHG emitters will also pay a $30 per tonne tax beginning in 2018, and will be offered subsidies based on the energy efficiency of their operations. The goal is to ensure they remain competitive with the rest of the world.

That means that companies like Cenovus, with relatively low emissions per barrel produced, would make gains from the tax, while less efficient companies pay more, according to Trevor Tombe, an assistant professor of economics at the University of Calgary.

Tombe points out the industry carbon tax has not been as controversial as the consumer tax.

"It's something where you don't hear a lot of opposition among opposition parties," he said

Oilsands emissions cap

A pillar of Premier Rachel Notley's climate change plan is a cap on oilsands emissions, which critics argue could stifle future growth.

The 100 megatonne limit is still at least a decade away and has a mix of supporters and opponents in the oilpatch.

Recently, an oilsands advisory group recommended the government publish annual data on oilsands emissions and eventually levy fines if the emissions limit is ever breached.

Of all the carbon policies of the NDP, this seems the easiest to wipe out.

"It's just a policy that exists on paper, and to the extent that it even exists on paper is very, very vague," said Tombe. "It would be extremely easy to get rid of with the stroke of a pen and it would have almost no consequence whatsoever."

However, if a new government removes the cap, there could be a risk to the oilsands' reputation.

"It doesn't help industry to be seen as a laggard on the environment, and what helps industry is to have certainty about planning for the future," said Hastings-Simon with the Pembina Institute.

Alberta is greenest it's ever been under the NDP and that will be tough to undo - Business - CBC News
 

petros

The Central Scrutinizer
Nov 21, 2008
118,585
14,557
113
Low Earth Orbit
Wow. Alberta is greenest it's ever been under the NDP?

As compared to other Alberta NDP Govts they are top drawer?
 

Bar Sinister

Executive Branch Member
Jan 17, 2010
8,252
19
38
Edmonton

Jinentonix

Hall of Fame Member
Sep 6, 2015
11,619
6,262
113
Olympus Mons
Umm, something about the complete elimination of coal-fired power plants. Haven't you been paying attention?

Alberta could be coal-free years ahead of deadline as ATCO plans transition to natural gas by 2020
BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA How the hell does trading CO2 for methane help anything? Seriously, do you guys have ANY idea how goddam clueless you are? Natgas may be cleaner burning than coal from a particulate perspective, but natgas is methane and methane is 20X more potent a GHG than CO2. Then of course there's all the fresh water that is effectively lost to us for thousands of years as a result of fracking. If global warming is causing a water crisis, I fail to see how removing fresh water from the system for thousands of years will help mitigate the problem.

You climate f*ckos do a great job of yapping but a piss poor job of actually thinking things through. It's ironic to think that in your support of "green" energy, you're actually throwing your support fully behind the oil, gas and coal industries and ensuring their profits for years to come. Good job.
 

Bar Sinister

Executive Branch Member
Jan 17, 2010
8,252
19
38
Edmonton
BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA How the hell does trading CO2 for methane help anything? Seriously, do you guys have ANY idea how goddam clueless you are? Natgas may be cleaner burning than coal from a particulate perspective, but natgas is methane and methane is 20X more potent a GHG than CO2. Then of course there's all the fresh water that is effectively lost to us for thousands of years as a result of fracking. If global warming is causing a water crisis, I fail to see how removing fresh water from the system for thousands of years will help mitigate the problem.

You climate f*ckos do a great job of yapping but a piss poor job of actually thinking things through. It's ironic to think that in your support of "green" energy, you're actually throwing your support fully behind the oil, gas and coal industries and ensuring their profits for years to come. Good job.

I guess the US plan to switch to natural gas is also flawed then. You also might want to actually see what happens when methane is burned. Amazingly it converts the methane to the much less harmful CO2. Before you start crowing perhaps you should check to see what you are blathering on about. Your uninformed responses only make you looks like a fool.
Coal To Natural Gas Switching In The U.S. Electricity System



https://www.forbes.com/sites/judecl...g-in-the-u-s-electricity-system/#6691a5721e34
 

Dixie Cup

Senate Member
Sep 16, 2006
6,392
4,053
113
Edmonton
Knowing that they may not be in power very long they are ensuring that it will cost us big time to reverse what they have done. I don't plan to be around to witness the results. Fel bad for the kids!
 

mentalfloss

Prickly Curmudgeon Smiter
Jun 28, 2010
39,817
471
83