The three people that responded to it.
Maybe but they can have new careers in mud hut construction.
The carbon tax is killing us here in BC. Stupid idea and nothing but a scam.
There's now a Canadian consensus on climate change
- Thread starter mentalfloss
- Start date
The three people that responded to it.
Maybe but they can have new careers in mud hut construction.
The carbon tax is killing us here in BC. Stupid idea and nothing but a scam.
Yup taking tax dollars from cash strapped school districts and giving it to cash strapped companies like Western Forest Products for planting trees .
no - as I pointed out in that thread you've linked to, notwithstanding the mega overreach you made... for whatever value that survey/vote holds, this is what (the very few number of) Canadians that voted chose as their priorities:
(note: if you tweak education and/or age you can get 'climate change action' into the MyWorld 'top 6' prioritization 8O)
gee... that's sure counter to what the BC government is saying. Can ya help a brother out and provide some support/foundation to your "killing claim"? :mrgreen:
Dat Financial Post climate change bias.
Why the call for bigger and better carbon taxes is about to escalate
A large number of governments, climate activists and corporate interests have a vested interest in keeping oil prices high
When the first OPEC oil crisis struck in 1973, sending the price of crude as high as US$140 a barrel in today’s dollars, policymakers around the world — including Canada — scrambled for ways to bring the price back down. Today, the opposite is true. As the 2014 OPEC crisis pushed oil down to US$65 Monday, the major policy objective in many circles is to find a way to bring the price back up.
Consumers may like the idea of low energy prices and the inevitable boost to global economic growth, opening the door on a world of increasing prosperity and wealth distribution. But a large number of governments, climate activists and corporate interests have a vested interest in keeping oil prices high. Will they succeed?
As the world price of oil fell over the past few days, there has been no shortage of handwringing over the negative consequences.
[kaltura-widget uiconfid=”23273481″ entryid=”0_uljtdoik” ]
The U.S. shale oil industry was said to be doomed. Oil-rich nations dependent on massive dollar flows would be unable to meet their budget and debt payments. Capital investment in developing countries with oil potential would dry up. Big oil companies would suffer as share prices plunged.
And there would certainly have been no cheering Monday in Lima, Peru, where international climate negotiators were gearing up for the 20th annual United Nations’ Climate Change Conference. Low oil prices equal increased demand for oil that will drive up carbon emissions.
With the price of oil down about $50 from its last peak, climate policy advocates have lost a big unofficial carbon tax. On the rough estimate that there’s a tonne of carbon in every three barrels of oil, the world has just watched a $150-a-tonne carbon price get wiped out.
As the price of gasoline falls, the pressure will rise on governments to refill the gap with a direct carbon tax. The idea has already been picked up by Forbes columnist Tim Worstall. “The fall in the price of oil means we can impose [a] sane and sensible 50-cent gas tax [in the United States] without the pain being too great or apparent.”
[related_links /]
In weeks and months to come, calls for bigger and better carbon taxes will escalate, locally and internationally. Paul Boothe, a professor at the Ivey Business School at the University of Western Ontario, says Alberta Premier Jim Prentice may look upon a carbon tax opportunity as part of trade-off with Ontario and Quebec over pipeline policy. A $30 carbon tax would give Alberta an opportunity “get in front of the carbon issue.” Mr. Prentice on Monday even announced that he was ready to review the province’s carbon levy.
Internationally, as the UN climate negotiations in Lima this week adjourn and move to Paris next year, the low price of oil will loom even larger as an impediment to achieving global emissions targets. Some will see it as an opportunity promote carbon taxes to offset the OPEC-generated decline in the price of oil.
In booming economic conditions it might be possible for governments to raise energy taxes by portraying them as painless replacements to cover the shortfall left by the sudden move to lower oil prices. But economic conditions — in the United States, China and Europe — are far from robust. Any attempt by governments to seize the gasoline price gap with new carbon taxes is likely to meet stiff opposition.
Elsewhere, the complexity of the trade-offs to come in the wake of dramatically lower world oil prices has perhaps not fully registered.
Within the United States alone many contradictory forces are at work. Low oil prices boost the economy, but the value of U.S. oil exports yields lower returns. The impact on the Keystone XL pipeline decision is far from clear. Where does the new low price leave President Barack Obama’s climate plan?
Canadians may like the idea of lower gas prices as consumers, but a vast network of interests — corporate and government — are now aligned around building pipelines and exporting oil to a world that now operates on lower margins.
Renewable energy companies and biofuel producers will also come under competitive pressures if oil prices stay low and ethanol subsidies look more and more ridiculous.
And then there’s inflation. The first OPEC crisis in 1973 triggered massive monetary expansion by central banks, leading to a global inflation outbreak that continued for a decade and took another decade to bring under control. Today the worry is deflation, a concern that is likely to escalate as the fall in oil prices drives down consumer price indices around the world.
A decade of bad policy, including Canada’s disastrous National Energy Program, followed the first OPEC crisis. The challenge in 2014 is to avoid making a new series of policy disasters.
Terence Corcoran: Why the call for bigger and better carbon taxes is about to escalate | Financial Post
Why the call for bigger and better carbon taxes is about to escalate
A large number of governments, climate activists and corporate interests have a vested interest in keeping oil prices high
When the first OPEC oil crisis struck in 1973, sending the price of crude as high as US$140 a barrel in today’s dollars, policymakers around the world — including Canada — scrambled for ways to bring the price back down. Today, the opposite is true. As the 2014 OPEC crisis pushed oil down to US$65 Monday, the major policy objective in many circles is to find a way to bring the price back up.
Consumers may like the idea of low energy prices and the inevitable boost to global economic growth, opening the door on a world of increasing prosperity and wealth distribution. But a large number of governments, climate activists and corporate interests have a vested interest in keeping oil prices high. Will they succeed?
As the world price of oil fell over the past few days, there has been no shortage of handwringing over the negative consequences.
[kaltura-widget uiconfid=”23273481″ entryid=”0_uljtdoik” ]
The U.S. shale oil industry was said to be doomed. Oil-rich nations dependent on massive dollar flows would be unable to meet their budget and debt payments. Capital investment in developing countries with oil potential would dry up. Big oil companies would suffer as share prices plunged.
And there would certainly have been no cheering Monday in Lima, Peru, where international climate negotiators were gearing up for the 20th annual United Nations’ Climate Change Conference. Low oil prices equal increased demand for oil that will drive up carbon emissions.
With the price of oil down about $50 from its last peak, climate policy advocates have lost a big unofficial carbon tax. On the rough estimate that there’s a tonne of carbon in every three barrels of oil, the world has just watched a $150-a-tonne carbon price get wiped out.
As the price of gasoline falls, the pressure will rise on governments to refill the gap with a direct carbon tax. The idea has already been picked up by Forbes columnist Tim Worstall. “The fall in the price of oil means we can impose [a] sane and sensible 50-cent gas tax [in the United States] without the pain being too great or apparent.”
[related_links /]
In weeks and months to come, calls for bigger and better carbon taxes will escalate, locally and internationally. Paul Boothe, a professor at the Ivey Business School at the University of Western Ontario, says Alberta Premier Jim Prentice may look upon a carbon tax opportunity as part of trade-off with Ontario and Quebec over pipeline policy. A $30 carbon tax would give Alberta an opportunity “get in front of the carbon issue.” Mr. Prentice on Monday even announced that he was ready to review the province’s carbon levy.
Internationally, as the UN climate negotiations in Lima this week adjourn and move to Paris next year, the low price of oil will loom even larger as an impediment to achieving global emissions targets. Some will see it as an opportunity promote carbon taxes to offset the OPEC-generated decline in the price of oil.
In booming economic conditions it might be possible for governments to raise energy taxes by portraying them as painless replacements to cover the shortfall left by the sudden move to lower oil prices. But economic conditions — in the United States, China and Europe — are far from robust. Any attempt by governments to seize the gasoline price gap with new carbon taxes is likely to meet stiff opposition.
Elsewhere, the complexity of the trade-offs to come in the wake of dramatically lower world oil prices has perhaps not fully registered.
Within the United States alone many contradictory forces are at work. Low oil prices boost the economy, but the value of U.S. oil exports yields lower returns. The impact on the Keystone XL pipeline decision is far from clear. Where does the new low price leave President Barack Obama’s climate plan?
Canadians may like the idea of lower gas prices as consumers, but a vast network of interests — corporate and government — are now aligned around building pipelines and exporting oil to a world that now operates on lower margins.
Renewable energy companies and biofuel producers will also come under competitive pressures if oil prices stay low and ethanol subsidies look more and more ridiculous.
And then there’s inflation. The first OPEC crisis in 1973 triggered massive monetary expansion by central banks, leading to a global inflation outbreak that continued for a decade and took another decade to bring under control. Today the worry is deflation, a concern that is likely to escalate as the fall in oil prices drives down consumer price indices around the world.
A decade of bad policy, including Canada’s disastrous National Energy Program, followed the first OPEC crisis. The challenge in 2014 is to avoid making a new series of policy disasters.
Terence Corcoran: Why the call for bigger and better carbon taxes is about to escalate | Financial Post
MF, the price of a bbl today is the result of geopolitics via OPEC (Saudi Arabia). They will change the supply to raise the price once they feel they are ready.
The article above assumes the value of oil will remain low from this point forward.
The article above assumes the value of oil will remain low from this point forward.
If that's true, then its unfortunate as we're being taken for a ride. But, stupid is as stupid does I guess. sigh...I'm glad to think people actually think we can afford to pay more for literally everything - as tho' we don't pay enough for stuff as it is. Our poverty rate is gonna rise but the greenies, who seem to be in the upper 1% of so, could care less about those of us in the middle to lower class.
I'm hoping I'm not going to be around when the sh**t hits the fan!
JMHO
Actually, I'm not sure that's true. There have been other "polls" done where this is the LAST thing on the list of concerns for Canadians. The first one or two is the economy and jobs!! I'd take this with a grain of salt.
JMO
I'm hoping I'm not going to be around when the sh**t hits the fan!
JMHO
Per the 39-nation Pew Research Center survey of ~ 38 thousand respondents... Canadian respondents consider the threat of global climate change as the top global threat:
Actually, I'm not sure that's true. There have been other "polls" done where this is the LAST thing on the list of concerns for Canadians. The first one or two is the economy and jobs!! I'd take this with a grain of salt.
JMO
OPEC, in particular the Saudis, UAE and Kuwait have increased their supply beyond what is considered their common objective (ie price stabilization). Economically, it is not in their best interests. They are doing this to achieve a calculated ends.
Led by Saudi Arabia, OPEC announced it would stay the course; it would not curb production to tighten supply, and less than 24 hours later the price of West Texas Intermediate crude oil shed $7.70 per barrel, falling to $65.99. It was the biggest one-day plunge in years.
OPEC Decision Not to Curb Production Causes Oil Prices to Plummet - US News
This marks a big shift in global oil politics. Essentially, OPEC is now engaged in a price war with oil producers in the United States. The cartel will let prices keep falling in the hopes that many of the newest drilling projects in the US will prove unprofitable and shut down.
Oil prices keep plummeting as OPEC starts a price war with the US - Vox
This is an excellent article that touches on some geopolitics, impacts on currency, taxes lost and consumer impacts.
Oil Prices Plunge After OPEC Stays Put - WSJ
In the global climate change thing, if they did a mofel that showed a change would make supporting 10B very easy would change (of any kind) still be feared. That is where most of the bull**** is. Change can't be stopped on a global scale, adapting to the change doesn't have to be a global disaster either. At the same time you have to weed out the false parts, like if things got colder the green area between the ice and the deserts would shrink, that isn't how it would work and science should know that. The desert regions get water and without vegetation to capture the water there will be flash floods and more erosion. The solotion is drastic, build dams 1 meter high along said wash outs and the floods stop and the swater sinks into the ground and that can feed plants and trees and 10 years later you have a stream that is controlled and bordered by green things. If more snow on land is the trend then ocean levels will drop a few feet rather than rise that much.
You can't have it that all change is bad compared to this moment. The worst thing for the PTB is to have a population that is overfed naturally as food is one of the bifgger stick used to control whole populations and if you want to kill million taking away the food is the way you do it, or at least that is the preferred way in our planet's history.
You can't have it that all change is bad compared to this moment. The worst thing for the PTB is to have a population that is overfed naturally as food is one of the bifgger stick used to control whole populations and if you want to kill million taking away the food is the way you do it, or at least that is the preferred way in our planet's history.
The oil industry has no idea how prolific the shale oil/gas will be coming from these tight formations nor the life-span of the wells
Initial production rates are high, but they fall off like a brick in short order.
Initial production rates are high, but they fall off like a brick in short order.
1780
May 19, 1780 was the date for the first sign of the last days, "The Dark Day." Certain Adventists still hold to this date. It was said by Ellen that "Since the time of Moses no period of darkness of equal density, extent, and duration, has ever been recorded." (Great Controversy, p. 308) This was touched on in Studies in the Scriptures - The Day Of Vengeance (1897) p.604;
May 19, 1780 was the date for the first sign of the last days, "The Dark Day." Certain Adventists still hold to this date. It was said by Ellen that "Since the time of Moses no period of darkness of equal density, extent, and duration, has ever been recorded." (Great Controversy, p. 308) This was touched on in Studies in the Scriptures - The Day Of Vengeance (1897) p.604;
"Reckoning a hundred years from 1780, the date of the first sign, the limit would reach to 1880; and, to our understanding, every item predicted had begun to be fulfilled at that date"
The time of darkness, the first sign of the end, was caused by fires in New England and was confined mostly to the North-Eastern part of the United States. Quite typically a new religion will think their country is predicted in prophecy. The Adventists, Mormons and Watchtower Society all began as US centric religions.
There is no reason for all the gloom&doom over the temporary fall in oil prices. Energy should be cheap. That is what makes everything else work.
The irony being that it represents so many nails in the coffin of both the climate change truthers as well as the artificial propping-up of the unsustainable renewable energy industry.
Makes you wonder if Davie Suzuki will be having heart palpitations over this
From 2008 Is oil going back under $100 a barrel? Not if Opec can help it | Business | The Guardian
We are at war.
We are at war.
nah... They'll see really fast that they can afford that 3/4 ton truck for Dad and an H3 for Mom to get the kids to soccer practice.
Materialism trumps ideological bent every time