Alberta supports industrial carbon pricing, Premier says

[chuckChuck]

Alberta supports industrial carbon pricing, Premier says



Emma Graney ([url]https://www.theglobeandmail.com/authors/emma-graney/)Energy[/url] reporter
Published YesterdayUpdated 37 minutes ago

For Subscribers

36 Comments ([url]https://www.theglobeandmail.com/business/article-alberta-supports-industrial-carbon-pricing-premier-danielle-smith-says/#comments[/url])

Alberta has no plans to cancel its carbon pricing on large emitters, which Premier Danielle Smith says is key to reducing greenhouse-gas emissions from its oil and gas sector.

But the province also has no intention of setting interim targets any time soon to reduce pollution from any industrial sector as it pursues its goal of bringing emissions to net zero by 2050, Ms. Smith told a Globe and Mail editorial board on Thursday.

Alberta’s United Conservative government released its Emissions Reduction and Energy Development Plan more than a year ago. As part of that plan, it promised to establish Indigenous and youth consultation groups, examine lowering the oil sands emissions cap, and said it had already hired a third party to develop sector-by-sector targets.

It has not done any of that ([url]https://www.theglobeandmail.com/business/article-alberta-fails-to-move-needle-on-emissions-reduction-plan/[/url]), nor has it released any reports documenting its progress on any area of the plan.

When asked whether Alberta would set interim targets to reach its net-zero goal, Ms. Smith said her government was “taking a different approach.”

“We expect our businesses to be carbon neutral by 2050, so that is our target, and every business is going to have a different pathway to get there,” she said.

For example, the oil and gas sector was Canada’s largest source of emissions in 2022, accounting for 31 per cent of the country’s total.

The majority of that came from the oil sands in northern Alberta. Absolute emissions from oil sands production were flat in 2022 even as total production grew, according to an analysis by S&P Global Commodity Insights. It also found that the intensity of oil-sands production, which measures the amount of carbon dioxide emitted per unit of economic output, decreased slightly.

Ms. Smith pointed to the reduction in the oil sands as proof of the effectiveness of carbon pricing on large emitters.

“We’re going to continue with an industrial carbon-pricing strategy because it is working,” she said.

The largest companies in the oil sands are aiming to bring production to net zero by 2050, in part through a massive carbon capture project. It’s that kind of innovation that Ms. Smith said will be crucial to Alberta meeting its broader goal.

“We have made progress and we’re going to continue to make more. I’m just not going to set arbitrary targets until I know that the technology exists to achieve that,” she said.

As with the oil sands, the government seems to be banking on private industry making investments in emissions-reducing technology and projects to meet the province’s 2050 goal.

Ms. Smith pointed to Dow Chemical, for example, which plans to begin an $11.5-billion facelift ([url]https://www.theglobeandmail.com/canada/article-dow-chemical-announces-115-billion-project-in-alberta/[/url]) and expansion of its Edmonton-area chemicals plant next year to build the world’s first net-zero ethylene cracker. She also listed Heidelberg Materials’ project to develop the cement industry’s first global full-scale carbon capture and storage facility as part of its Alberta plant.

“They become the standard by which new businesses are going to be judged so that when capital turnover happens, we will expect each of the companies in those industries to use the best available technology,” Ms. Smith said.

The Premier argued that setting interim targets about how the province intends to bring its entire economy to net zero in just 25 years isn’t practical until technologies including carbon capture, small modular nuclear reactors and hydrogen can be scaled and regulatory processes are in place.

“I just frankly don’t know when that technology is going to be available to set our timelines,” she said.

“I know that the federal government likes to put out arbitrary targets and then never meet them. We actually like to put out targets that we know are achievable.”

[chuckChuck]

I can't wait for A5 and the other stooges to tell us that CO2 is not a pollutant and more CO2 is good for us!

And that human caused climate change is not real!

So that must be why Alberta supports a carbon tax on large emitters?

[furrowtickler]

Common sense approach and not alarmism reaction for ridiculous short term goals of 2030 .
glad you agree with “Danny” finally

[shtferbrains]

From reuters.com

Cleaner shipping fuel is contributing to ocean warming, scientists say

Shipping fuel regulations introduced in 2020 have led to a substantial cut in sulphur dioxide (SO2) pollution, but may also have made the ocean warmer by reducing cloud cover, according to a modelling study in a paper published late on Thursday.

[AlbertaFarmer5]

As I was saying a few days ago, we don't have any conservative politicians.
They are all afraid to point out that the emperor has no clothes. By making token virtue signaling sacrifices under the mistaken belief that they can actually appease the climate lunatics.

Playing along to get along is not working. And won't work when we aren't dealing with rational people. It's preposterous to think that people whose stated goal is the destruction of capitalism will be satisfied by a solution within the capitalist system.
And when the problem is imaginary and the results unmeasurable.

Notley already proved that the notion of social license is a myth that does not exist.

[blackpowder]

"The Premier argued that setting interim targets about how the province intends to bring its entire economy to net zero in just 25 years isn’t practical until technologies including carbon capture, small modular nuclear reactors and hydrogen can be scaled and regulatory processes are in place.

“I just frankly don’t know when that technology is going to be available to set our timelines,” she said.

“I know that the federal government likes to put out arbitrary targets and then never meet them. We actually like to put out targets that we know are achievable.”

This article is not proof of anything.
Except perhaps a premier who is standing up to a dictatorial fed gov with sustainable change concepts.

You barely took time to read the headline before you pasted it with a standard rant.

[chuckChuck]

We don't have any real conservatives because they think human caused climate change is real?

So fiscal conservatives don't believe in protecting the environment and reducing pollution? Huh?

What rock are you living under A5? A Libertarian anti science rock to be sure!

Of course the petro premiers want to go slow because their buddies might not make as much profit and the oil sands will potentially be a stranded asset.

Lower cost clean energy must be stopped or the oil barons will suffer!

[AlbertaFarmer5]

Lower cost clean energy must be stopped

That is what is known as an oxymoron.

Or did you finally find an example of unreliable energy resulting in lower cost energy to the consumer?

[chuckChuck]

Speaking of Oxy Morons!

The guy who says more CO2 will be good for us!

Even Danny Smith doesn't believe crap like that!

[AlbertaFarmer5]

Speaking of Oxy Morons!

The guy who says more CO2 will be good for us!

Even Danny Smith doesn't believe crap like that!

Judging by your childish response and name calling, I will assume you have still not found any proof of your propaganda that so-called green energy is not considerably more expensive for the consumer.

Perhaps you should give up already on the false claim that renewable energy is not more expensive.
That will free up your time to try to prove your other mantra that increased CO2 is not good for us. Can you find any evidence whatsoever that the world is worse off due to the increase of CO2 in the atmosphere? Is there any measure by which the world is worse off than when we were at 250 ppm?. Real time, actual measurable statistics.

[chuckChuck]

Give up the evidence is all around you but you choose to ignore it and pretend the science is all wrong.

Even Danny Smith recognizes climate change is real and has a carbon tax. But you on the other hand are just a flat earth climate change denier!

[AlbertaFarmer5]

What evidence? By what measure is the world worse off at these levels of co2?

[chuckChuck]

“Climate change, along with the natural disasters, such as wildfires and flooding, continue to hit the insurance industry hard,” he said. “The insurance providers will need to balance these losses on their books, potentially leading to a rise in premiums for everyone.”

Canada is warming faster than the rest of the world and its insured losses are also growing faster than the rest of the world, said Nadja Dreff, senior vice-president and head of Canadian insurance at Morningstar DBRS.

Severe weather events threaten to drive insurance premiums higher: experts

Author of the article:
The Canadian Press
Rosa Saba


Published Jan 12, 2024 • Last updated Jan 12, 2024 • 3 minute read
([url]https://financialpost.com/pmn/business-pmn/severe-weather-events-threaten-to-drive-insurance-premiums-higher-experts#comments-area[/url])


The escalating risk of severe weather events is one of several factors putting pressure on insurance companies and potentially increasing premiums for consumers, experts say.

Extreme weather losses, inflation and reinsurance costs have all helped drive insurance premiums higher in recent years, said Craig Stewart, the Insurance Bureau of Canada’s vice-president of climate change and federal issues.([url]https://financialpost.com/news/economy/policies-economic-growth-solve-canada-productivity-emergency[/url])

Severe weather caused more than $3.1 billion in insured damage in 2023, the bureau said, making it the fourth-worst year on record for insured losses.

“This grim statistic highlights the financial costs of a changing climate to insurers, governments and taxpayers,” the bureau said in a release.

The Okanagan and Shuswap-area wildfires in B.C. cost $720 million in insured damage, the bureau said, while severe summer storms in Ontario and spring ice storms in Ontario and Quebec cost a combined $670 million.

Rising building costs for materials and labour have also contributed to higher premiums over time, Stewart said.

“As we build more and more homes to address the affordability crisis, ironically, what we’re seeing is that materials and labour costs are going up,” he said — “because of inflation, but also because of increased demand.”

Globally, 2023 was the hottest year on record, according to European climate agency Copernicus.

Extreme weather events like wildfires and storm surge flooding tend to result in a higher volume of insurance claims, Ratehub.ca vice-president of insurance Matt Hands said in a statement.

“Climate change, along with the natural disasters, such as wildfires and flooding, continue to hit the insurance industry hard,” he said. “The insurance providers will need to balance these losses on their books, potentially leading to a rise in premiums for everyone.”

Canada is warming faster than the rest of the world and its insured losses are also growing faster than the rest of the world, said Nadja Dreff, senior vice-president and head of Canadian insurance at Morningstar DBRS.

Despite this, the underwriting profitability of Canadian insurers has held up pretty well in recent years, she said, “especially if you compare it to some of the global reinsurance players who have been absorbing the brunt of these extreme weather losses.”

But alongside severe weather losses and mounting costs to rebuild, there’s a third major factor influencing premiums: reinsurance, which is essentially insurance for insurers.

Canada is a higher-risk area for reinsurers than many other parts of the world, Stewart said.

For some regions, particularly Alberta and B.C., “reinsurers have raised their premiums for insurers operating in those areas,” he said. Advertisement 4

“Insurers have absorbed part of that cost. But they also have passed on those increased costs to home insurance policies.”

In response to a “drastic rise” in reinsurance prices in 2023, insurers raised their thresholds for reinsurance to rein in costs, Dreff said.

“It may differ company to company, but in general, what we’ve seen is that insurers have been buying less reinsurance,” Dreff said. “In other words, reinsurance kicks in at higher levels of claims.”

That means the insurers would have to absorb more of their claims — a trade-off with potential consequences that depend on how the year goes, she said.

According to a Morningstar DBRS outlook report published in December, premiums rose in 2022 and 2023 in the low-single digits.
Dreff expects premiums will continue to be pushed higher this year.

However, higher interest rates have improved investment outcomes, helping partially mitigate higher costs that might otherwise be passed on to consumers, she said.
Insurance costs are just one piece of a larger puzzle: the rising cost of living that Canadians have been grappling with for several years. Advertisement 5

Climate risk, population growth and macroeconomic conditions support premium rate increases, but “they may prove to be more and more difficult to execute over time,” according to the Morningstar DBRS report.

“After years of rapidly increasing prices on a range of goods and services, consumers are finding it more difficult to absorb additional costs, including that of insurance, amid their growing concerns related to the cost of living.”

No one event drives up premiums, said Stewart, noting that a survey of insurers after the summer fires found no change in availability or affordability of wildfire insurance coverage. Instead, insurance pricing is driven by trends over time, he said.

Fire insurance is a core part of home coverage and highly unlikely to become unavailable, he said.

But escalating losses and revised risk modelling mean that many Canadians can’t access flood insurance, the bureau said in its report

The government has committed to a national flood insurance program, but progress on that has stalled, said Stewart.

“We are urging the federal government to put that program in place as soon as possible.”

[AlbertaFarmer5]

So according to the article, inflation and population growth have caused insurance rates to go up, and by your logic those are proof of climate change.

[furrowtickler]

Hmmm , the “Our country is warming faster than everywhere on the plant” tactic again