Tuesday, 22 September 2020

Heavy emitters want carbon tax clarity as N.B. plan sits in limbo

 https://twitter.com/DavidRayAmos/with_replies




Replying to   @alllibertynews and 49 others 
Content disabled
Reply to Terry Tibbs: Methinks Higgy's Police State now with a majority mandate may begin considering our social media posts acts of sedition in short order N'esy pas? 
 
 

https://davidraymondamos3.blogspot.com/2020/09/heavy-emitters-want-carbon-tax-clarity.html

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 



Replying to   @alllibertynews and 49 others 
Content disabled 
Methinks Higgy et al know that since 2006 I have heard enough from Atlantica spin doctors and the Irving Clan's lawyers at NEB and EUB hearings and of course south of the 49th to last me a lifetime of disdain N'esy Pas?
 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

Heavy emitters want carbon tax clarity as N.B. plan sits in limbo

Ottawa has yet to say if provincial pricing plan for industry meets federal standards

 
Jacques Poitras · CBC News · Posted: Sep 18, 2020 6:16 PM AT
 
 

The federal government has yet to decide if New Brunswick's carbon pricing plan for heavy emitters meets its requirements, leaving industry in the province with financial uncertainty. (Darryl Dyck/The Canadian Press)
 

New Brunswick's large industrial emitters of greenhouse gases are still waiting for word on whether Ottawa will approve the province's carbon tax on their emissions.

The Higgs government first outlined the proposal, called an output-based pricing system, in June 2019. 

Since then, the Trudeau government has been re-elected and has approved the province's consumer carbon tax — but still hasn't said whether the price on industry meets the requirements of the federal climate plan.

"We continue to wait for a response from the federal government," said Vicky Lutes, a spokesperson for the province's Department of Environment and Local Government. "There is no update to provide at this point."

For large emitters, who were supposed to learn sometime this year how much, or whether, they would have to pay, the delay creates financial uncertainty.

"There's a significant amount of uncertainty already with regards to the pandemic and its impact," says Neil Jacobsen, a senior policy consultant for the Atlantica Centre for Energy, a think-tank funded by large energy producers and users. 

Neil Jacobsen, a senior policy consultant for the Atlantica Centre for Energy, says the delay in approval is creating financial uncertainty among large emitters. (CBC)
 

"Our large emitters are dealing with that particular uncertainty, but amplifying it is the uncertainty around the output-priced pricing system, so we're hoping that both levels of government can reach some level of consensus fairly quickly." 

If approved, the provincial system would replace the federal pricing model adopted by the previous provincial Liberal government. 

It would impose a much lighter financial burden on emitters that export most of their products, taxing only 0.84 per cent of emissions in 2019, rising to 10 per cent by 2030.

The federal price applies to 20 per cent of emissions.

'It's been silence'

If the provincial system were adopted, emitters would pay the tax this year on last year's emissions, so they're waiting to learn what if any cost they'll have, Jacobsen said.

There's been no indication from Ottawa when a decision will come. Environment and Climate Change Canada did not respond to a request for comment this week. 

"It's been silence," Jacobsen said. "We're hoping that now with the provincial election behind us, this issue will percolate up a little higher, because there has been a lot of uncertainty." 

He said COVID-19 is probably partly responsible for the delay.

J.D. Irving Ltd. spokesperson Mary Keith said in an email statement that the company supports the plan and hopes it will be approved.


J.D. Irving Ltd.'s pulp and paper mill in west Saint John. (CBC)
 

The Higgs government has argued that large exporters that sell into the U.S. market, such as the Irving Oil Refinery in Saint John and several large forestry mills, can't afford to pass on to customers the extra cost of a big carbon tax.

JDI says its forestry operations are a net "sink" for greenhouse gas emissions because it has already reduced emissions, and its trees absorb millions of tonnes of carbon dioxide, offsetting what its plants produce.

New Brunswick's plan

Under the New Brunswick plan, each industrial facility will have a performance standard to meet. Those that go beyond it will have to pay, while those that stay below it can earn credits that can be sold to the high emitters. 

The plan covers the same industrial sectors as the federal version, applies to the same gases and applies the same price scale of $20 per tonne this year, rising to $50 per tonne in 2022. The difference is the levy applies only to a tiny fraction of emissions. 

The New Brunswick system also seeks to avoid hitting NB Power with big carbon-price costs that would lead to higher rate increases,

The plan divides the utility's fuel sources for its generating stations into three different categories and applies the tax differently to each of them.

The province says the plan will reduce "emissions intensity" — the ratio of greenhouse gases relative to what the industrial plant producers — by 10 per cent by 2030. But the actual reduction in emissions will be smaller.

Even so, it would allow the province to reach the Paris climate goal of getting emissions to 30 per cent below 2005 levels. Emissions are already 28 per cent below those levels. 

Consumer tax in play since April

New Brunswick consumers have been paying a provincial carbon tax on gas since April 1 of this year. 

The 6.6-cent-per-litre tax replaced the federal "backstop" tax that had been applied at the pumps.

PC legislation passed earlier this year to implement the tax also reduced the provincial excise tax on gasoline by 4.6 cents, meaning the net cost of the tax to consumers is two cents.

The government's plan is to continue lowering the excise tax every year by the same amount the carbon tax rises — meaning the net impact will remain two cents per litre indefinitely.

That contradicts the logic of the federal plan that a gradually increasing carbon tax will create a greater incentive over time for consumers to burn less fuel. Ottawa approved the model despite that. 

 

  
 
 
 
31 Comments
Commenting is now closed for this story. 
 
 
 
 
 
David Amos 
Content disabled
Methinks Higgy et all know that since 2006 I have heard enough from these Atlantica spin doctors and the Irving Clan's lawyers at Neb and EUB hearings and of course south of the 49th to last me a life of disdain N'esy Pas?  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Tim Trites
okay guys the dirty deed's bean dun

the emission fell within normalized standards 

 
 
David Amos 
Content disabled
Reply to @Tim Trites: Mine is less than normal because of COPD in my old age
 
 
Tim Trites 
Reply to @David Amos:
old age??? u seeem to be looking younger as we speek
 
 
David Amos 
Reply to @Tim Trites: How would you know in light of the fact you refused to check out the video I suggested you surf for?
 
 
David Amos 
Content disabled
Reply to @Tim Trites: Surprise Surprise Surprise Your entire thread in which you made a fool of yourself went "Poof"
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
John Grail
Until they tax all pollution, this is more or less just virtue signalling. 
 
 
Tim Trites
Reply to @John Grail:
more or less...or less or more
 
 
Terry Tibbs
Reply to @John Grail:
Of course.
The very same folks promote moving folks (immigration) from temperate climate areas, where their carbon footprint is low, to northern climate areas to where they can't help but increase their individual carbon footprints 100X.
 
 
David Amos 
Reply to @Terry Tibbs: Good point
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Terry Tibbs
This is funny.
NB has 2 "heavy emitters".
NB Power and the Irvings.
Both self report. So both will pay exactly what they want to pay.
 
 
 
David Amos 
Reply to @Terry Tibbs: BINGO
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Tim Trites
 well i've emitted heavily...but that was usually the morning after the night before 
 
 
Ben Haroldson
Reply to @Tim Trites: We need to investigate vaping as a source of green house gas.
 
 
Tim Trites 
Reply to @Ben Haroldson:
sure sure...just dont try to come to my place to do do your "investigation"
 
 
Toby Tolly
Reply to @Tim Trites: Beano
 
 
David Amos  
Reply to @Tim Trites: Higgy may wish to investigate
 
 
Terry Tibbs 
Reply to @David Amos:
The onlt reason to get his nose up in there is if the last name starts with an I.
 
 
Terry Tibbs 
Reply to @David Amos:
The only reason to get his nose up in there is if the last name begins with an "I".
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
John Pokiok
Don't worry now that Higgs has a full reign over NB he will make sure that big emitters (Irving) pay nothing and peasants pay all business as usual in NB.
 
  
Terry Tibbs
Reply to @John Pokiok:
Anything else suggests a revolution.
 
 
David Amos 
Content disabled
Reply to @Terry Tibbs: Methinks Higgy's Police State now with a majority mandate may begin considering our social media posts acts of sedition in short order N'esy pas?
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

No comments:

Post a Comment