To stop
additional future oil flows we have to demand a universal carbon tax. Until a
proper international agreement has been
reached, demand for oil will keep rising. It will make no difference in the
global greenhouse gas emission whether Canada supplies that extra oil or we let
other countries do it. When eventually our exports dwindle we won’t lose
because by collecting the tax we will get more money for our oil, coal and
natural gas.
Two oil
companies, Shell and Statoil, are among 100 multinationals who are
frustrated with the lack of political action in the UN climate talks. They want
a firm carbon tax agreement so they can plan for the future. They signed an
important carbon price communiqué. The CEO of ExxonMobil is in favour of a
carbon tax. He stated that It would “achieve a uniform and predictable cost for
carbon across the economy”. Study after study has shown that carbon pricing
does not harm the economy and that a revenue neutral carbon tax, like we have
in British Columbia is easy to implement and administer. It has reduced the use
of petroleum products by 17% without loss of GDP. Opposition to carbon pricing
is caused by insufficient reporting on how the money is paid back to businesses
and individuals. People see it as a tax grab rather than a tax shift to make green
energy more competitive. The public only sees the figures which each household
pays directly and indirectly for carbon pricing. It is $1500 per year for one
of the US bills and $ 779 per year for British Columbian households.
After all the money is paid back through income tax reductions, special
grants and other recycled benefits the amounts are $150 per year for the US and
$ 0 per year for the average BC household. Since this is seldom discussed in the
media, the public remains opposed to the carbon tax and neither the US nor the
Canadian Government has been able to establish a national carbon tax.
No tax and high per capita emissions puts Canada in an
awkward position. Environmentalists rank Canada as #58 and the US as #43 out
of 61 countries based on 5 criteria. Denmark, Sweden and Portugal are #1,2 and
3 so it is no wonder the Europeans want
to stop our pipeline expansion. In London the Canadian Prime Minister was met
by 30 protest organisations from both sides of the Atlantic while 6 MPs tabled
a motion to keep Canada’s Alberta oil
out of Europe.
Insufficient
pipeline capacity means that we have to sell our oil at bargain prices, leading
to at least $20 billion per year lost income in Alberta. This results in
substantial lost tax revenue for Canada’s Federal Government. Since we don’t
want to ship more oil by rail we have to look seriously at all pipeline
proposals. There is a lot of technical information about pipelines and marine
transport available on the internet. It is not published in newspapers but is
essential information to form an opinion about the Northern Gateway project.
Enbridge has a very poor operation and maintenance record but as a result of
past disasters some rules have been changed. Enbridge’s proposal exceeds the
requirements. If all the proposed design and operation procedures will be implemented
and monitored it will likely be the safest pipeline on the continent. Many aspects of pipelines and carbon tax can be
found on neilwilhees.blogspot.ca The
observations are backed up by 2 documents containing some 135 pages of text and
tables pasted from identified websites. Part of the information was used to
urge the Federal Government and Enbridge to make far more details available
about the carbon tax and pipeline problems. The material is discussed in 3
Emails to the government with copies to Enbridge. It was followed by 2 more E
mail exchanges with Enbridge related to specific design aspects and earthquake
considerations.
No comments:
Post a Comment