Guest essay by Eric Worrall
Carbon tax legislation, which the opposition estimates will increase household bills by $1000 / year, has just been passed by the Alberta Legislature.
Alberta carbon tax legislation passes, marks first stage of climate-change plan
The new legislation will raise the price of heating bills and gasoline as an incentive to turn to green energy sources.
EDMONTON—Premier Rachel Notley’s government used its majority in the legislature Tuesday to pass legislation that includes a carbon tax and completes the first stage of Alberta’s landmark strategy to combat climate change.
The legislation gives legal teeth to the multibillion-dollar tax that is to take effect Jan. 1 and will raise the price of heating bills and gasoline as an incentive to go green.
It also lowers the small-business tax rate to two per cent from three and establishes an agency to fund energy savings programs.
The final tally was 42-39.
After the results were announced, Notley shook hands with government house leader Brian Mason and exchanged a thumbs-up with Environment Minister Shannon Phillips.
“I’m extremely proud of this piece of legislation and extremely proud of this government’s climate leadership plan,” Notley told the house just prior to the bill’s passage.
…
The carbon levy is to take effect Jan. 1. Gasoline at the pumps will rise by 4.49 cents a litre and diesel will go up 5.35 cents a litre.
The government estimates higher heating and gasoline fees will cost the average family an extra $443 next year.
Opposition members say the government is lowballing that figure.
“This is going to pull at least a thousand dollars from every household in Alberta,” said Wildrose Opposition Leader Brian Jean.
…
The Albertan government is offering rebates to poor people, which may or may not cover the surge in energy costs. If the horrific rise in deaths of elderly people in Britain is any guide, a lot of these rebates will miss the target. Poor people in Britain theoretically receive energy rebates – yet somehow far too many still have to choose between heating and eating.
This disgusting ndp government is doing exactly what all leftist and ndp governments do: killing everything they touch.
They only got in because of backstabbing, lying, and a “Progressive Conservative” party that was filthy riddled with “progressives”. They would NEVER have been elected in Alberta as liberals, so they just joined the Conservative party and hijacked it from within.
So which ridiculous leftist government arm is paying YOU, “seth”?
Just an interested concerned citizen.
And you, which ridiculous neoluddite arm is paying YOU “CodeTech”?
You should be saying, “Just an inexperienced, adolescent who has been brain-washed to parrot drivel.”
Come on folks! This guy (or gal) is way too “clever” to be as naive as you suggest.
Also note how fast he or she can come up with “research” to support a point (even if that study is nonsense, such as Parmesan). Clear access to a huge data base supporting CAGW.
I just hope Seth is being paid well for hijacking these threads.
Please don’t feed the troll.
Opposing government makes one a neo-luddite.
Once again, Seth embarrasses himself.
Seth, you seem to have an incorrect definition of neoluddite.
Neo-Luddism is a leaderless movement of non-affiliated groups who resist modern technologies and dictate a return of some or all technologies to a more primitive level. Neo-Luddites are characterized by one or more of the following practices: passively abandoning the use of technology, harming those who produce technology, advocating simple living, or sabotaging technology. The modern Neo-Luddite movement has connections with the anti-globalization movement, anarcho-primitivism, radical environmentalism and Deep Ecology.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neo-Luddism
phaedo,
If you read Seth’s postings long enough, it becomes quite obvious that he doesn’t understand the things he posts.
He’s got access to a pretty good cross referenced list of articles, charts and talking points.
And is able to cut and paste from this library at will.
Doesn’t mean he’s read, much less understood any of it.
MarkW: ‘If you read Seth’s postings long enough, it becomes quite obvious that he doesn’t understand the things he posts.
He’s got access to a pretty good cross referenced list of articles, charts and talking points.’
My guess is some association with the Sierra Club or some such. Or maybe this is just Seth Borenstein, sneaking on board and posting anonymously.
Well I can tell you this. “Seth” is like all of the fake sockpuppet commenters we get here, with a throwaway email address, and uses a proxy server to hide his/her identity, but I doubt it is Seth Borenstein. Borenstein might have strong opinions, but generally has enough integrity to stand behind what he writes, and to avoid grade school commentary hiding behind a fake name, fake email, and fake IP like this particular Seth.
Unfortunately, as entertaining as Seth is, he/she has made a clear policy violation, and thus goes into the bit-bucket henceforth.
Anthony Watts: I doubt it is Seth Borenstein’
I was sort of kidding about the Seth Borenstein thing.
Although, I’m sure they are kindred souls.
“The bill gives the government measures to search vehicles, property and computer hard drives if (it) can show a reasonable cause that it believes the carbon levy rules are not being followed.”
http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2016/05/25/rachel-notley_n_10134508.html
Seth, professional threadbomber, says:
“Nevertheless, reducing greenhouse emissions, however not green you claim it is, will do a lot to reducing extinction pressure on many species and ecosystems. And Alberta should be congratulated on this legislation by people who are about the environment, no matter what political persuasion.”
Yep. Congratulated for reducing perhaps a tenth of a percent of the global greenhouse emissions, while China and India add many times that amount every month. So, essentially, congratulated for doing nothing but garnering feel-good points and claims of “leadership”. Honestly, Seth, you need to give yourself a shake. You’re pretty snazzy at giving us a shower in your own excrement, but precious little else.
1/10% reduction in global emissions? Such an optimist.
Oooh, wild accusation there from Mike Bromley the Kurd.
Every person who advocates for sensible economic policy that considers future generations must be a professional, because no actual human would have compassion or ethics?
You must live in a scary world Mike.
They’re all around you! Watch out! They’re probably recording!
How do you think all these professionals are funded?
“Every person who advocates for sensible economic policy that considers future generations must be a professional, because no actual human would have compassion or ethics?”
This is the position of every skeptic and every advocate, so it is hardly a good point to make.
Anyone who advocates policies that are proven to kill people, in order to solve a problem that never existed in the first place lacks ethics and compassion.
(That would be you Seth.)
Proven is a big call MarkW. What’s your very best proof that raising some of a Government’s funds by applying a carbon tax instead of income tax kills people?
Science it what it is.
It works. That’s how we have computers and cars and the internet and medicine.
Either you’re wrong about global warming never existing, or hundreds of thousands of scientists have missed what you’ve spotted.
I know which I think is more likely.
Future generations are going to have to pay for this nonsense. Billions waste on a nonexistent problem. Future generations will look back at people like you with contempt for causing higher unemployment, low standard of living, economic recession, and a monumental debt burden.
Dirty lying TROLL.
Proven, as in old people freezing to death because they can’t afford both heat and food.
It’s happened Seth, every winter for the last decade.
I love the way the mind of a troll works.
Since we have computers and cars, therefore global circulation models must be correct.
Sheesh, is there no depths you won’t plumb in order to find new means of embarrassing yourself?
Here you go Seth, you ignorant little child. This is what the ever-increasing hike in fuel prices due to “Green” subsidies for worthless wind and solar power is doing in then UK.
The scandal of Britain’s fuel poverty deaths
Thousands of people die each winter in the UK as a result of being unable to heat their homes. Are we doing enough to help them?
The social cost of fuel poverty is massive, and growing. In the winter of 2012/13, there were 31,000 extra winter deaths in England and Wales, a rise of 29% on the previous year. Around 30-50% of these deaths can be linked to being cold indoors. And not being able to heat your home also takes a huge toll on health in general: those in fuel poverty have higher incidences of asthma, bronchitis, heart and lung disease, kidney disease and mental health problems.
http://www.theguardian.com/big-energy-debate/2014/sep/11/fuel-poverty-scandal-winter-deaths
And for your information, the Guardian is a very Left wing newspaper, heavily slanted towards faux environmentalism.
Oh, and you might find this interesting too.
Europe’s renewables investment hits 10-year low
The reputation of Europe as a renewable energy leader has taken a serious knock as its investment dropped by 21% last year while global figures reached record levels
http://www.climatechangenews.com/2016/06/03/europes-renewables-investment-hits-10-year-low/
Guess what – the Europeans have smelled the coffee, and Germany in particular is building new coal fired power plants.
You know these enviro mental wackos have lost their minds, when they rally against a possible couple degree increase in temps…in the land of permafrost. NUTZ!!
The joke on Alberta is that the oil boom brought legions of unemployed socialist voters from Eastern Canada to work there. I guess these new voters, numbed by nanny governments, didn’t get it. The unhappy part is that even a new conservative gov will find it tough to turn down tax revenue.
Exactly!
Advisors to Public Health England (PHE) warned of a “strong and flashing” warning light, and said trends over the last four years suggest the rise in deaths may now be the highest since World War Two.
They said the elderly were now bearing the brunt of a growing crisis in the NHS and cuts to social care, with women suffering the most.
Hmmm.
Aw c’mon Brandon, neither of those graphs you’ve presented mean anything and you’re smart enough to know it. Total number of deaths? What’s the overall age of the population. Did England have its own baby boom like the US? That could account for the curve in the top graph, couldn’t it? And, Crude Death Rate per 1,000 Living? Vehicular accidents? Suicide rate changes? Population trending older or younger? And, hate to be a party pooper but ultimately the crude death rate per 1,000 living is, well, 1,000.
Now it’s time for me to go:
Hmmm.
World to end, women and minorities to be hurt the worst.
I could just as easily claim, and with probably more justification, that the increase in total deaths has to do with the recent increases in energy causing the elderly poor to freeze to death because they can’t afford to keep the heat on.
Has the bureaucracy now already gotten too large – has it lost sight of where money actually comes from?
I always thought it came from, in the broadest sense, obtaining some resource or other and adding value to it and selling it on to someone else – who may add more value or simply consume it.
This measure is therefore requiring the greater overall use of ‘resources’ in order to create, support and maintain another legion of non-producers within ours/theirs/whoever’s society.
And our present leaders seem entirely oblivious to that, they think its just some game they’re playing – handing out thumbs ups and applause etc etc.
This blindness can only ever lead to disaster where there are so few actual producers that the whole house of cards collapses under its own weight. it has happened before, many times and we can all recount instantly a few examples.
BUT, the Romans knew nothing of the Inca, who knew little of the Maya who knew nothing of the Himyar or they of the Rapa Nui etc. Get my drift? They were all local extinctions.
Now however, we are headed into a global civilisation and effectively, at some point, there will be a single person ‘in charge’
Now, what if that person was ‘having a bad hair day’, chief adviser assumed he knew so-and-so and his adviser assumed this that or the other about settled science and his adviser was on leave and their adviser was ill in bed and his chief scientist had put a decimal point in the wrong place or a cosmic ray had zapped though a memory chip and altered some data? What then?
The guy in charge thus makes The Wrong Decision and because he’s in charge of everybody, we all go down the pan.
It would be hysterically funny if not so heart rendingly sad
Has the bureaucracy now already gotten too large – has it lost sight of where money actually comes from?
Yes.
Marxism – which is the dominant political and economic philosophy today, disguised well though it is, examines a world in which production just ‘happens’ and the only variable is how the cake is sliced.
This is characteristic of a ‘feminised’ society, where all the argument is about wealth distribution, and none is about wealth creation.
It can only exist in a rapidly expanding economic system. Once production flattens out due to resource depletion and other effects, Marxism becomes a wasteful exercise in squabbling over a smaller cake each year.
And some of the derived economics – e.g. Keynesian – become invalid as today’s debt cannot be serviced by tomorrow’s far larger economy, as economic growth stalls.
Misguided attempts to solve this by importing larger populations in the hope of creating a larger economy, don’t work either. If production is limited by external factors other than labour shortages, it merely compounds the problem.
Western society of the 21st century is running into the inevitable conclusions of actually believing that – or at least following the diktats of – an emotional narrative based on stupid assumptions (Marxism) – no matter how politically successful and attractive to the hoi polloi it may be.
Like Christianity, Marxism puts the pleb in his place, and defines his existence. With Christianity, his virtue as a good citizen is rewarded in an after life, in Marxism, his political correctness is rewarded after a global revolution. In Christianity, his utter inability to be anything other than cannon fodder in someone else’s Game of Thrones, is justified as part of some Higher Purpose. In Marxism, his utter inability to be other than what he is is ascribed to oppression by those who clearly are not as he is. This doctrine comforts, distorts and twists the pleb into a creature of hate and resentment against the very processes and social norms that allow him to exists.
And if by means of rare privilege, amoral behaviour or just plain luck he acquires wealth, he will immediately support the nearest and most convenient left wing Cause, as a means of virtue signalling that despite now being completely privileged, and definitely one of the people he warned you about, he is really one of the good guys after all.
However this is, in the final analysis, all completely as irrelevant as working out the accommodation precedence in the Titanic’s lifeboats. Reality, as in ‘whatever is the case’ is supremely indifferent to what we may misguidedly consider it to be. All the Marxist theory in the world is no use to you if there is no food in the refrigerator and anyway the electricity is off.
The world is changing, rapidly. That which will survive is that which is most able to discard dysfunctional ideology and deal pragmatically with issues of survival.
We are about, as a Western society, to test the relative importance of moral high ground versus plain survival.
And if the ‘virtue signalling’ moral high ground gets swamped by a rising tide of counter ideological third world greed and envy, perhaps the actual high ground of technologically competent and highly organised ‘strength signalling’ is where we want to be.
Not because its right, but because it works, and ensures surviaval.
“This is characteristic of a ‘feminised’ society, where all the argument is about wealth distribution, and none is about wealth creation.”
You’re not wrong and all the signs are there-
http://atimes.com/2016/06/last-weeks-jobs-report-was-the-new-normal-not-a-blip/
Pretty similar in sclerotic Oz where we’re facing an early Federal election whereby the choice is all about how much lead in the saddlebags the grandkids will have to carry from the infantilism and mindboggling economic ignorance of the current generation. The Marxists have found the answer to what happens when you run out of other people’s savings. Just print some more.
Comical to watch them getting all huffy when the industrious Chinese cash their copious IOUs in for Oz real estate, driving exorbitant asset prices ever higher. The fallacy of composition that we can all a borrower rather than a lender be, completely eludes them.
Civil servants rarely have any money sense. A couple of years ago I heard of a rugby club that built an extension to the club house, that the president (an ex high level civil servant)tried to sign a tender for without letting the club members know beforehand. He thought he was getting a good deal, and assumed he had the authority, he certainly had the experience.. It was decided to do the job in house using local builders and club members. They did it for just over a third of the original tender. Sometime afterwards it came out that the reason it went over a third was because the club members that worked on the job were paid double their normal daily rate !. This (Ex) president had been signing off big government contracts for years……….
The guy in charge thus makes The Wrong Decision and because he’s in charge of everybody, we all go down the pan.
==============
A great argument against centralized government. When the Jing makes a mistake, everyone suffers. If the government is global and the mistake is big enough, civilization fails.
When a private sector company makes a mistake, it’s competitors step in to take advantage of it, and the consumer does not suffer.
When government makes a mistake, taxes are raised to pay for the clean up and government goes on, now even bigger than before.
+ 1,000,000.
The only upside of a Carbon Tax is that it is quickly repealed…never to be re-introduced.
The political suicide of Green Labor in Australia being a textbook example of this process.
Only to be replaced with an ETS starting July 1st, the day before the federal election.
More for Gummint, less for citizen who can be bothered getting out of bed in the morning.
Eric, are you sure about energy rebates for the poor in UK? I live there and no of no such deal.
Drat!
“… know of no such deal”
Just what Canadians need! Higher heating prices! And all in an attempt to make the place colder!
Not logical! But ideological!
Most of the assistants to the Alberta socialist government are imports from Ontario. They are all ideologues.
You need more propaganda too, right? I understand that some that this Act amends the Climate Change and Emissions Management Act to broaden the accepted use and purpose of the Climate Change and Emissions Management Fund to encompass’ education initiatives and outreach programs’.
Its all here “as an incentive to go green.”
It really just needs to say “as an incentive to buy our cronies products, who in turn line our pockets.”
With Alberta and Ontario putting in a gas tax, the purpose of which is to reduce GHG emissions, it seems like this will be easy to see if it works. How much gas was consumed in 2016 by Albertans and Ontarians vs 2017. Naturally there will be a noticeable drop right? If that doesn`t work, I suggest they raise the tax until they can actually see a significant reduction and a forced switch to EVs
Lucky folks, being able to take this noble cause and run it in the noses of other, more wealthy Provinces!
Vikings are polishing the dragon’s heads on their ships
Greenland sets melt records in 2015 consistent with ‘Arctic amplification’
http://phys.org/news/2016-06-greenland-arctic-amplification.html
morons
This will do nothing to fight the boogeyman climate change. It’s a cash grab and will be repealed when the Dippers are turfed for good next election.
The new legislation will raise the price of heating bills and gasoline as an incentive to turn to green energy sources.
=======================
Simple question. Where can the average person in Alberta actually buy these green energy sources?
Are they available to be delivered to your home? NO.
Are they available at the store? NO.
How about at the gas pump? NO.
The only “green” energy sources available are custom build solutions, with payback times in the range of 20 years, which is the best case replacement time. In other words, by the time you get finished paying for the “green” solution, you have to replace it. You never make any profit and the very best you can hope for is to break even.
No company would ever invest in a scheme with such poor investment payback. Which means the only way it can happen is if the government diverts resources from heath-care, pensions, and infrastructure such as roads and bridges to subsidize “green” energy.
And for what purpose? Is Alberta too warm? Isn’t Alberta in point of fact one of the coldest places on earth where people live? Isn’t Alberta one of those places where winter temperatures routinely reach -40C (-40F), where people die of exposure in wintertime if they are stranded outside? Where for large parts of the year, the only thing that grows on the ground is ice?
I would note that Canadians seem more intelligently political than most Americans, but they seem to have many of the same problems. Hillary Clinton is running on many of the same silly proposals, but they are not yet a major issue in the US elections. Just think, we Americans could have the same problems as Canada and Australia! If we really try we can emulate the EU! Just be ignorant or fanatic enough to vote Democratic.
Canadians seem more intelligently political than most Americans
==================
Easy to disprove with a single word. Trudeau.
Actually, the easiest way to disprove it with one word is “subjects.”
Canadians seem more intelligently political than most Americans
=================
You might think so but it simply isn’t Trudeau.
“If the horrific rise in deaths of elderly people in Britain is any guide, a lot of these rebates will miss the target.”
Rebates missing the target is the target, actually. You don’t need death panels if you simply kill off the weak through judicious use of blackouts during heat waves or cold snaps. They know well what they are doing: they are reducing health care costs.
Oh, DNFTT. Everyone is letting one person control the entire discussion.
Looks like Seth has succeeded in hi-jacking another thread.
They’ve graduated from population control schemes, including selective child policy of planning regimes.
Andy:
Wanna bet?
https://www.ec.gc.ca/indicateurs-indicators/default.asp?lang=en&n=18F3BB9C-1
Worth noting AB is Canada’s worst emitter – it needs to bring them down.
BC has significant emissions of its own
From your link:
“Greenhouse gas emissions are reported in carbon dioxide equivalents (CO2 eq), determined by multiplying the amount of emissions of a particular gas by the global warming potential (GWP) of that gas.”
So it’s a made up number, not an actual one.
Are you saying CO2 eq isn’t a useful unit for comparison?
Are you saying CO2 eq isn’t a useful unit for comparison?
Yes, it’s an equivalent number based on the some made up GWP (global warming potential). It’s not actual CO2 emissions. One could argue the GWP of CO2 is zero based on the eighteen year pause.
Yes Reg, it is a made up number, like everything else in climate science. There are many fools who believe this sort of nonsense.
MarkW:
In Ontario. it costs $2.50 to charge your EV(pilot programme):
http://www.gotransit.com/public/en/travelling/faq.aspx
In BC, generally free at public charging stations:
http://www.mto.gov.on.ca/english/vehicles/electric/charging-electric-vehicle.shtml
In both cases, ~$2.00 to charge your EV at home overnight.
How will road tax be covered? What effect will BC’s carbon tax have on temperature if there is supposed to be an effect on temperature?
John are you a urban dweller? I have urban dwellers are generally ignorant how the world works.