Carbon Tax
News item: Government says no to carbon tax.
While I consider the imposition of a carbon tax or a "cap and trade" system to be totally unnecessary given that it is clear global temperatures are not increasing in lock step with CO2 emissions, the political pressure to introduce one or the other may become insurmountable. But either proposal would be extremely damaging to an economy that seems to be headed for a slowdown anyway, without the extra burden of a hefty carbon tax.
There may be a solution that the Canadian government should consider: How about a carbon tax that would actually work?
Well, Mr Baird?
Watch the Great Global Warming Swindle
3 comments:
good stuff
So “most economists who have written on carbon-dioxide emissions have concluded that an emissions tax is preferable to a cap-and-trade system.”
Then another 500 or so scientists are saying that the science is not settled and does not support the conclusion that warming cycles are caused by man made CO2.
http://www.taxpayer.com/main/index.php
Given the costs to Canadian economy, we should have reservations about proceeding with measures that are costly to implement and unwieldy to manage like cap & trade per the EU scheme and the associated Kyoto mechanism.
In the Christian Science Monitor, Dec. 3, 2007 edition -"Let policy follow science: Tie a carbon tax to actual warming"
http://www.csmonitor.com/2007/1203/p09s02-coop.html
prof. McKitrick points out that “over the next few years, we will acquire new information that might overturn current beliefs about greenhouse warming. To lock into a policy path that ignores future information makes no sense.” “Climate policy needs to shift from static to dynamic thinking. This requires tying policy to actual greenhouse warming. Anything else is like taking a shot in the dark..”
The 2007 Federal Budget made reference to some carbon emissions trading scheme. http://www.budget.gc.ca/2007/themes/bkcmae.html
Carbon offsets or emission reduction credits (not to be confused with permits under proposed cap & trade regulations) are already being traded. These are purchased voluntarily for “green” washing or being forced on industry by government. The Federal government has purchased offsets so bureaucrats can fly to all these “save the planet” conferences without increasing CO2 emissions.
*********“On July 12, 2006, the Montreal Exchange and the Chicago Climate Exchange announced the establishment of the Montreal Climate Exchange, which would allow for a GHG emissions trading market to emerge in Canada. However, the absence of a concrete emissions trading framework in the proposed Clean Air Act is likely to present a major setback for the Montreal Exchange. Industry continues to express interest in emissions trading both internationally and domestically. For example, in 2004 TransAlta completed a deal with Agricola Super Ltd. in Chile to purchase 1.74 million tons of GHG emissions. Furthermore, several companies are voluntarily investing in credits to help reduce GHG emissions for certain projects. For example, the companies involved in the Athabasca oil sands project have taken advantage of offsets opportunities. Companies are also looking at emissions trading and joint investments in developing countries to help reduce their GHG emissions.
At a provincial level, the Alberta government has required new coal-fired generators to effectively reduce the intensity of GHG emissions to the same level as those emitted by natural gas combined-cycle plants. As a result, new coal-fired generators are required to purchase offsets to meet the government-imposed requirements, and there are no geographical, jurisdictional or sectoral restrictions on offsets. In addition, Ontario established an emissions trading scheme for NOx and SO2 in December of 2001. The Ontario Emissions Trading Regulation sets stringent emission caps on NOx and SO2 in order to reduce air pollution through a combination of “cap-and-trade” and “baseline-andcredit” features of the regulation.
An emissions trading market, albeit a voluntary market, already seems to be emerging in Canada. As more and more Canadian investors and industrial sectors continue to participate in emissions trading, domestic support seems to be growing for the establishment of a Canadian system that is compatible with emissions trading systems already existing in other countries. ************
http://www.lexpert.ca/500/rd.php?area=H2a
Per the 2004 Trans Alta & Agricola Super Ltd. de Chile deal for 1.75 million tonnes of certified emission reduction credits… Agricola Super Limitada (Agrosuper) has installed innovative technology to reduce the GHG emissions of their industrial pork operations. TransAlta plans to use the credits in the period from 2008 to 2012, as part of Canada’s anticipated climate change program. The deal is a first for a Canadian company under Kyoto’s Clean Development Mechanism program, whereby companies in nations with emission reduction obligations can buy credits from companies in the developing world that have created projects to cut their GHG emissions. “”””
$9 million goes to Chile. Members of the Chinese central committee get to have pork for supper and Alberta consumers pick up the tab. And is the air in Alberta any cleaner? Do we have factory pig farms in Canada emitting GHGS? Did we forget to include the GHGs from ships to China and back? Is the emission reduction technology per these Kyoto mechanisms being properly maintained and not allowed to break down. NOT.
Recall, PM Harper doesn't support these socialist plots that send our hard earned dollars$ out of the country. Too bad about Alberta being run by socialists who have been doing just that!
Since the planet is cooling off again and the latest science doesn’t support the theory of man-made carbon warming, one would think we have more pressing needs to spend the money on.
However, one must wonder how all these interests who have positioned themselves in the carbon trading market will respond to the advances of science. Are these business interests pushing the government into adopting policy that is not based on good economics and the best scientific evidence going forward?
$9 million for 1.75 million tonnes!!
That’s only $5 per tonne.
What a Bargain!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Cheap EU trading scam credits have been going for $11.
Alberta socialists should be pleased.
http://www.wsws.org/articles/2007/jun2007/carb-j11.shtml
Post a Comment