Get ready for the Liberals' secret new carbon tax

[chuckChuck]

Where is the evidence that the clean fuel standard will produce a $350 equivalent cost per tonne of carbon to consumers? We need to see the details of any plan before we can assume that hyper inflated number designed to scare people!

The $350 per tonne is not the actual cost.

https://nationalpost.com/opinion/john-ivison-get-ready-for-the-liberals-secret-new-carbon-tax/wcm/992bb546-4ca3-403c-9f23-5b1969391305/ https://nationalpost.com/opinion/john-ivison-get-ready-for-the-liberals-secret-new-carbon-tax/wcm/992bb546-4ca3-403c-9f23-5b1969391305/

"The model proposed by the government allows businesses that can’t comply with the regulations to buy credits to make up the shortfall. In the CERI model, those credits were estimated at $200 per tonne of carbon dioxide.

"the CFS will be set at $350 per tonne, in order to force companies to invest in cleaner fuel, rather than simply buy credits. The higher the cost of the credits, the larger the price impact on solid, liquid and gaseous fuels."

"The cost implications for households and industry are unclear but a study by the Canadian Energy Research Institute in May 2019 estimated the impact of a 20 per cent reduction in carbon intensity. CERI suggested a total fuel decarbonisation cost of $15.3 billion a year, adding $84 or four per cent to household fuel bills; $62 or 2.8 per cent to the cost of gas; and 13 per cent to fuel costs for industry."

"Critics claim the CFS is an important policy instrument to do just that. Ottawa is set to present the new fuel standard as an opportunity for Western farmers to grow biofuels and will point out the main costs are set to be borne at refineries in Ontario, Quebec and New Brunswick."

BC, California, Oregon and The EU already have a clean fuel standards.

[Hamloc]

Where is the evidence that the clean fuel standard will produce a $350 equivalent cost per tonne of carbon to consumers? We need to see the details of any plan before we can assume that hyper inflated number designed to scare people!

The $350 per tonne is not the actual cost.

https://nationalpost.com/opinion/john-ivison-get-ready-for-the-liberals-secret-new-carbon-tax/wcm/992bb546-4ca3-403c-9f23-5b1969391305/ https://nationalpost.com/opinion/john-ivison-get-ready-for-the-liberals-secret-new-carbon-tax/wcm/992bb546-4ca3-403c-9f23-5b1969391305/

"The model proposed by the government allows businesses that can’t comply with the regulations to buy credits to make up the shortfall. In the CERI model, those credits were estimated at $200 per tonne of carbon dioxide.

"the CFS will be set at $350 per tonne, in order to force companies to invest in cleaner fuel, rather than simply buy credits. The higher the cost of the credits, the larger the price impact on solid, liquid and gaseous fuels."

"The cost implications for households and industry are unclear but a study by the Canadian Energy Research Institute in May 2019 estimated the impact of a 20 per cent reduction in carbon intensity. CERI suggested a total fuel decarbonisation cost of $15.3 billion a year, adding $84 or four per cent to household fuel bills; $62 or 2.8 per cent to the cost of gas; and 13 per cent to fuel costs for industry."

"Critics claim the CFS is an important policy instrument to do just that. Ottawa is set to present the new fuel standard as an opportunity for Western farmers to grow biofuels and will point out the main costs are set to be borne at refineries in Ontario, Quebec and New Brunswick."

BC, California, Oregon and The EU already have a clean fuel standards.

B.C. already has a clean fuel standard? From 2015 to 2018 C02 emissions in B.C. Have risen over 10%, whaaat, it certainly looks like we should follow their example LOL!

[chuckChuck]

Yes their economy and population has continued to grow at a remarkable rate driving up total emissions, in spite of their carbon tax and clean fuel regulations. So many people call the carbon tax an economy killer but BC proves that wrong.

But on a per capita basis have BC emissions gone down? I think so.

[Hamloc]

Yes their economy and population has continued to grow at a remarkable rate driving up total emissions, in spite of their carbon tax and clean fuel regulations. So many people call the carbon tax an economy killer but BC proves that wrong.

But on a per capita basis have BC emissions gone down? I think so.

Their economy has grown in a large part due to increases in real estate value but you are correct their economy has grown. But the point is so have their C02 emissions! If you had read the article I mentioned you would see that C02 emissions from passenger vehicles had gone up something like 13%(from memory could be wrong), B.C. Residents in Vancouver pay about 30 cents a litre more than Albertans yet the amount of gas they consume continues to rise. B.C. Has generous government programs to incentivize electric vehicles but emissions continue to rise. I would say all of Canada would like positive economic growth and positive population growth, using B.C.’s example that also means C02 emissions will continue to grow in the rest of Canada. Now let’s look at the numbers, C02 emissions in Canada have essentially been flat since 2005 at around 715-720 mega tonnes. Obviously other parts of Canada are doing better than BC!

[farming101]

Yes their economy and population has continued to grow at a remarkable rate driving up total emissions, in spite of their carbon tax and clean fuel regulations. So many people call the carbon tax an economy killer but BC proves that wrong.

But on a per capita basis have BC emissions gone down? I think so.

Too funny. Ignore simple math and it all works?

China the largest emitter in the world gets a pass because their per capita emissions are less than many other places. It is only fair they be allowed to put out a lot more GHG because to do otherwise would mean each person in China is at a disadvantage! Emit on!

To illustrate this on a worldwide scale: If the world population continues to grow and per capita the rate of GHG emissions stays constant then it's all good. But wait, more people equals more GHG in total. Doesn't seem to matter. It's per capita! Stupid!

Apparently simple math skills are not required to be an authority these days

[jazz]

ha what is BCs main industry besides real estate speculation and money laundering from china?

Of course thats continued to grow. A carbon tax wont hurt that fake economy.

[AlbertaFarmer5]

Yes their economy and population has continued to grow at a remarkable rate driving up total emissions, in spite of their carbon tax and clean fuel regulations. So many people call the carbon tax an economy killer but BC proves that wrong.

But on a per capita basis have BC emissions gone down? I think so.

Goal post Moved.

Chuck, can you please provide the policy statement where it was stated that the goal of implementing the CO2 tax was to have higher CO2 emissions, and higher economic growth? I don't recall anything about per capita at the time.

No wonder you aren't concerned about CO2 levels falling in the other thread. If rising CO2 levels are an acceptable and apparently desirable outcome, then this isn't about CO2 levels is it? Tell us again why you pretended to install your fake solar panels then?

[chuckChuck]

Goal post Moved.

Chuck, can you please provide the policy statement where it was stated that the goal of implementing the CO2 tax was to have higher CO2 emissions, and higher economic growth? I don't recall anything about per capita at the time.

No wonder you aren't concerned about CO2 levels falling in the other thread. If rising CO2 levels are an acceptable and apparently desirable outcome, then this isn't about CO2 levels is it? Tell us again why you pretended to install your fake solar panels then?

Why not ask the BC government? it’s their policy not mine. But you won’t believe what they say anyway because everything is “fake” If you don’t agree with it! Lol.

Maybe your alleged engineering degree is fake? Post your certificate and ID here to prove that it is not. I already posted photos of my solar panels many months ago.

Or better yet come up with another red herring to distract us froM
The scientific consensus on the cause of climate change. LOL

[AlbertaFarmer5]

Why not ask the BC government? it’s their policy not mine. But you won’t believe what they say anyway because everything is “fake” If you don’t agree with it! Lol.

Maybe your alleged engineering degree is fake? Post your certificate and ID here to prove that it is not. I already posted photos of my solar panels many months ago.

Or better yet come up with another red herring to distract us froM
The scientific consensus on the cause of climate change. LOL

You are the one making the ridiculous claim that rising CO2 emissions in BC makes the tax a success. What would you define as a failure?

As to the solar panels, I'll trust the word of a poster who doesn't lie about his identity, or affiliations, or location, and posts all about his operation.

[chuckChuck]

I trust posters who actually provide some independent credible scientific evidence from reliable sources to back up their opinions and not the "fake" evidence of some flim flam conspiracy denial site! LOL

[Hamloc]

I trust posters who actually provide some independent credible scientific evidence from reliable sources to back up their opinions and not the "fake" evidence of some flim flam conspiracy denial site! LOL

Actually Chuck in the article I quoted there was verifiable government numbers showing that as a province B.C’s C02 emissions continue to rise proving that present C02 taxes and related policies will not lower emissions. Therefore policies to adapt to higher levels of C02 are far more prudent. The promotion of and investment in renewables as the solution is in my opinion wrong. I have no problem with the use of renewables just the belief that they are the answer. But the fact remains the B.C. Government is spending millions of dollars to curb emissions and overall it is not working, that simple.

[Guest]

Actually Chuck in the article I quoted there was verifiable government numbers showing that as a province B.C’s C02 emissions continue to rise proving that present C02 taxes and related policies will not lower emissions. Therefore policies to adapt to higher levels of C02 are far more prudent. The promotion of and investment in renewables as the solution is in my opinion wrong. I have no problem with the use of renewables just the belief that they are the answer. But the fact remains the B.C. Government is spending millions of dollars to curb emissions and overall it is not working, that simple.

but to simple for a chuck