Business
Federal carbon tax a hot issue today
From Resource Works
When it comes to Canada and carbon taxes, times have certainly changed in very little time.
We had wondered how long Ottawa’s national carbon-tax system would last when, after implementing it as a mandatory national scheme, the feds suddenly announced an exemption for home heating oil in Newfoundland and Labrador.
Pressed by NL Premier Andrew Furey, a Liberal, and Liberal MP Ken McDonald, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau announced the exemption last October, saying it would help Atlantic Canadians with the cost of living.
The exemption would last until March 31, 2027. And for NL households that burn oil, the feds said it would mean an average $250 annual savings.
Alberta and Saskatchewan saw the exemption as unmitigated vote-buying politics, and they weren’t alone.
On Jan. 1, 2024, Saskatchewan stopped collecting the federal carbon tax on natural gas used for home heating in that province. Premier Scott Moe declared that this was in response to Ottawa’s “unfair” exemption for Newfoundland and Labrador.
“Trudeau has provided a carbon tax exemption on home heating for families in one part of the country, but not here. It’s unfair, it’s unacceptable.”
Saskatchewan went on to challenge the exemption, in federal court, on constitutional grounds, and won a temporary injunction. Later, pending a final court decision, Saskatchewan and Ottawa agreed that the province would be responsible for “50 percent of the outstanding tax amounts.”
But Ottawa’s carbon tax (oops, sorry, Ottawa likes to call it “carbon pricing” and “carbon pollution pricing”) has now run into new political trouble.
First, national NDP leader Jagmeet Singh, who had voted for the carbon tax, pulled out of a deal supporting Trudeau’s Liberal Party in government.
Singh then went on to slam Trudeau’s approach of exempting fuels in favored geography. And he said the NDP would come up with a system that doesn’t “put the burden on the backs of working people.”
Then, British Columbia Premier David Eby, long a strong supporter of the carbon tax — but facing an election on Oct. 19 — suddenly declared: “I think it’s critical to also recognize that the context and the challenge for British Columbians have changed. A lot of British Columbians are struggling with affordability.
“If the federal government decides to remove the legal backstop requiring us to have a consumer carbon tax in British Columbia, we will end the consumer carbon tax in British Columbia.”
Would Prime Minister Trudeau remove the backstop requirement?
Apparently not. Instead, Environment and Climate Change Canada is looking to run a $7-million “climate literacy and action” advertising campaign to promote the carbon tax and the quarterly rebates that many Canadians receive under it.
And the prime minister, earlier this year, declined to meet the premiers of Alberta, Ontario, Saskatchewan, New Brunswick, and Newfoundland and Labrador on the issue.
“The carbon tax has contributed to increasing stress and financial pain for millions of Canadians,” Alberta Premier Danielle Smith wrote to the prime minister.
Ontario Premier Doug Ford wrote: “While we all have a role in protecting the environment, it cannot be done on the backs of hardworking people.”
But Trudeau turned down the call for a meeting: “We had a meeting on carbon pricing and every single premier came together to work on establishing a pan-Canadian framework on climate change years ago.
“And part of it was that there would be a federal backstop to make sure that pollution wasn’t free anywhere across the country.”
Whether the carbon tax has “worked” or not to reduce pollution is an open question. Supporters say yes. Opponents say no.
A poll late last year found that Canadians were feeling slightly more confident in the carbon tax’s effectiveness at combating climate change — but uncertainty was still high.
But the Liberal government is already getting a message from voters — having lost in two recent by-elections in Manitoba and Quebec, and in an earlier one in a “safe seat” in Ontario (Toronto-St. Paul’s).
In the Quebec one on Monday, the Liberals lost their longtime safe seat of LaSalle—Émard—Verdun to the NDP, by just over 200 votes. It had been a Liberal stronghold for years, won by more than 20 percent of the vote in previous campaigns.
The next federal election will take place on or before October 2025, and Trudeau’s opponents have already been loudly cranking up “Axe the Tax” campaigns.
And that means the carbon tax.
Automotive
Two thirds of Canadians say banning conventional vehicles by 2035 is “unrealistic”
From the Montreal Economic Institute
Seven in 10 Canadians are concerned about the negative impact of cancelled energy projects on Canadian jobs.
More than half of Canadiens are against the federal mandate forcing all new cars sold in Canada to be electric by 2035, shows a new MEI-Ipsos survey released this morning.
“Across the country, Canadians are a lot more hesitant to ban conventional vehicles than their elected representatives in Ottawa are,” said Krystle Wittevrongel, director of research at the MEI. “They have legitimate concerns, most notably with the cost of those cars, and federal and provincial politicians should take note.”
The poll shows that 55 per cent of Canadians disagree with Ottawa’s decision to ban the sale of conventional vehicles by 2035. In every region surveyed, a larger number of respondents were against the ban than in favour of it.
Among Canadians who don’t already own an electric vehicle, slightly fewer than one in four said their next car would be electric.
Key reasons cited for this lukewarm attitude included the high cost of the cars (70 per cent), the lack of charging infrastructure (66 per cent), and their reduced performance in Canada’s cold climate (64 per cent).
Across the country, only 26 per cent of Canadians believe Ottawa’s plan to ban the sale of conventional vehicles is realistic. Meanwhile, 66 per cent maintain that the plan is unrealistic.
“Canadians understand that 2035 is sooner than Ottawa thinks, and nothing indicates electric vehicle adoption rates are going to follow what federal lawmakers anticipated,” notes Ms. Wittevrongel. “Concerns with their high cost, the lack of charging infrastructure and their poor performance in our cold climate remain strong.”
The survey also found Canadians were troubled by the effects that federal legislation has had in stalling or cancelling energy projects.
Seven in 10 respondents were concerned by the negative impact on Canadian jobs arising from the cancellation of tens of billions of dollars in energy projects due to regulatory hurdles.
Slightly more than three in four Canadians (76 per cent) say the federal government’s environmental impact assessment project takes too long, with only nine per cent taking the opposite view.
“Canadians understand that our energy industry plays a key role in Canada’s economy, and that lengthy approval delays from regulators have a negative impact on a project’s chances of happening,” explains Ms. Wittevrongel. “They are looking for leadership in Ottawa and in the provinces to cut down on bureaucratic hurdles and shorten the time it takes to get shovels in the ground.”
A sample of 1,190 Canadians 18 years of age and older was polled between September 18th and 22nd, 2024. The results are accurate to within ± 3.3 percentage points, 19 times out of 20.
The results of the MEI-Ipsos poll are available here: https://www.iedm.org/wp-
The MEI is an independent public policy think tank with offices in Montreal and Calgary. Through its publications, media appearances, and advisory services to policymakers, the MEI stimulates public policy debate and reforms based on sound economics and entrepreneurship.
Alberta
Alberta rail hub doubling in size to transport plastic from major new carbon-neutral plant
Haulage bridge at Cando Rail & Terminals’ Sturgeon Terminal in Alberta’s Industrial Heartland, near Edmonton. Photo courtesy Cando Rail & Terminals
From the Canadian Energy Centre
By Will Gibson
Cando Rail & Terminals to invest $200 million to support Dow’s Path2Zero petrochemical complex
A major rail hub in Alberta’s Industrial Heartland will double in size to support a new carbon-neutral plastic production facility, turning the terminal into the largest of its kind in the country.
Cando Rail & Terminals will invest $200 million at its Sturgeon Terminal after securing Dow Chemical as an anchor tenant for its expanded terminal, which will support the planned $8.9 billion Path2Zero petrochemical complex being built in the region northeast of Edmonton.
“Half of the terminal expansion will be dedicated to the Dow project and handle the products produced at the Path2Zero complex,” says Steve Bromley, Cando’s chief commercial officer.
By incorporating carbon capture and storage, the complex, which began construction this spring, is expected to be the world’s first to produce polyethylene with net zero scope 1 and 2 emissions.
The widely used plastic’s journey to global markets will begin by rail.
“Dow stores their polyethylene in covered railcars while waiting to sell it,” Bromley says.
“When buyers purchase it, we will build unit trains and those cars will go to the Port of Prince Rupert and eventually be shipped to their customers in Asia.”
A “unit train” is a single train where all the cars carry the same commodity to the same destination.
The expanded Cando terminal will have the capacity to prepare 12,000-foot unit trains – or trains that are more than three-and-a-half kilometers long.
Construction will start on the expansion in 2025 at a 320-acre site west of Cando’s existing terminal, which 20 industrial customers use to stage and store railcars as well as assemble unit trains.
Bromley, a former CP Rail executive who joined Cando in 2013, says the other half of the terminal’s capacity not used by the Dow facility will be sold to other major projects in the region.
The announcement is the latest in a series of investments for Cando to grow its operations in Alberta that will see the company spend more than $500 million by 2027.
The company, which is majority owned by the Alberta Investment Management Corporation previously spent $100 million to acquire a 1,700-railcar facility in Lethbridge along with $150 million to build its existing Sturgeon terminal.
“Alberta is important to us – we have 300 active employees in this province and handle 900,000 railcars annually here,” Bromley says.
“But we are looking for opportunities across North America, both in Canada and the United States as well.”
Cando released the news of the Sturgeon Terminal expansion at the Alberta Industrial Heartland Association’s annual conference on Sept. 19.
“This is an investment in critical infrastructure that underpins additional growth in the region,” says Mark Plamondon, the association’s executive director.
The announcement came as the association marked its 25th anniversary at the event, which Plamondon saw as fitting.
“Dow’s Path2Zero came to the region because of the competitive advantages gained by clustering heavy industry. Competitive advantages are built from infrastructure that’s already here, such as the Alberta Carbon Trunk Line, which transports and stores carbon dioxide for industry,” he says.
“Having that level of integration can turn inputs into one operation into outputs for another. Competitive advantages for one become advantages for others. Cando’s investment will attract others just as Dow’s Path2Zero was a pull for additional investment.”
-
Alberta1 day ago
Chris Scott and Rebecca Ingram attempting Class Action Lawsuit against Province for COVID restrictions
-
MAiD2 days ago
Disability groups files legal challenge against Canada’s euthanasia regime
-
Brownstone Institute1 day ago
The FOIA Lady Pleads the Fifth
-
Brownstone Institute1 day ago
John Kerry and the Circuitous Assault on Free Speech
-
Alberta1 day ago
Danielle Smith delivers on promise to protect gender-confused children in Alberta
-
COVID-192 days ago
Will We Fall For The Same Old PCR Tricks Again?
-
Economy21 hours ago
Taxpayer watchdog warns Canadians to fight against ‘guaranteed income schemes’
-
Also Interesting2 days ago
Best Ways to Legalise Your Stay in Portugal: Startup Visa vs. D7 Visa