CanuckInUSA 0 #1 February 21, 2008 This story is actually a few days old now. But since this web site is dominated by Americans and the American media rarely covers very many stories outside of it's own borders, I guess no one has picked up on this yet. Anyway the province of British Columbia (western Canada for all those geographically challenged people) have brought in North America's first carbon tax in an effort to tackle it's own greenhouse gas emissions. You can read more about the tax here. To be fair to both sides of this story let me present (briefly) the basic ideas behind the tax even though I do not think it will have the effect the politicians and environmentalists want. The carbon tax is added to gasoline purchases on top of the existing taxes the provincial government already taxes consumers. This year it will only be in the two cents per liter range but within the next four years it is supposed to jump up to about seven cents per liter (and who knows how much higher it could go). The idea here is to make driving more expensive and make people think about alternates before they fill up. It is supposed to be a revenue neutral tax since the provincial government says they will be cutting taxes in other areas. But come on let's get real, governments cutting taxes? You know any tax cuts will be temporary. BC is holding the Winter Olympics two years from now in Vancouver/Whistler and the costs for the these Olympics is rising almost daily, I doubt the good people of BC will be getting too many tax breaks. Anyway I can see the tax working for some private citizens driving their cars in and around Vancouver, but it will not make people living in rural parts of the province stop driving and it also effects businesses and you know the businesses will only pass these new expenses on to the customer and it will make BC businesses less competitive to other businesses in Western Canada and the Northwest of the USA. BC has set an ambitious plan to cut their greenhouse gas emissions back to 1990 levels by 2010. Now you have to start somewhere if you want to have a government that does something besides just make promises like many governments seem to do. Personally I do not think it will make that much of a difference. It will just make living and doing business in BC that much more expensive than what it already is. But you have to start somewhere if you want to make a difference (there is no doubt humans have done damage to this planet) and here is a rare example of a government actually trying to do something. Agree with their policies or don't agree, it is rare these days to see government do something besides just talking. So do you think new BC's carbon tax work? and will other provinces/states follow BC? Try not to worry about the things you have no control over Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
CanuckInUSA 0 #2 February 21, 2008 LOL ... my title of this thread was messed up ... Carbon NOT caron ... Try not to worry about the things you have no control over Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Andrewwhyte 1 #3 February 21, 2008 I do believe that eventually this type of tax will make a difference, but not overnight and not alone. 2c/l will not really do much to the pocket when you consider that Greater Vancouver already pays 10c/l in public transit surcharges. The tax and the publicity surrounding the tax are just part of the ongoing education of the population that they have to change. As for it not changing rural behavior, it will but it will just take longer in the same way rural Canadians have been slower to give up cigarettes. I think the premier is on acid if he thinks they will achieve their GHG goals. What I really think he plans is that when the Olympics roll around he will be able to brag that BC is leading the north American class at GHG reductions. That may or may not happen; we'll have to see how Cali makes out. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
lawrocket 3 #4 February 21, 2008 Not being familiar with BC, what affects this is the availability of public transportation. Is BC like New York or DC? Or is it like Los Angeles, where there is NO hub and spoke setup to the city? Also, note that this is the sort of tax that can affect the poor at far greater rates. My wife is hotter than your wife. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
CanuckInUSA 0 #5 February 21, 2008 The actual city of Vancouver is not that bad when it comes to public transportation and a considerable amount of people do currently use it. But the further away you get from Vancouver (especially when you must cross some of the many bridges) the more public transportation becomes less viable. But once you leave the Vancouver metro area, public transportation is not a good option and the majority of the province land mass is mountainous, rural and sparsely populated. A lot of families can not afford the real estate of Vancouver, so they moved to the suburbs. But they work in the Vancouver area. This carbon tax will not effect the people in Vancouver nearly as much as it will effect the people living in the burbs. Let me put it this way. The cities of Vancouver and Victoria are pretty much driven by a socialist mindset (people living in the cities with easier access to public transportation) and the rural areas are pretty much more conservative but lack the political power to counteract the socialist agendas of the big cities. Try not to worry about the things you have no control over Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Andrewwhyte 1 #6 February 21, 2008 QuoteNot being familiar with BC, what affects this is the availability of public transportation. Is BC like New York or DC? Or is it like Los Angeles, where there is NO hub and spoke setup to the city? Also, note that this is the sort of tax that can affect the poor at far greater rates. BC is considerably larger than Texas so it's tough to compare it to a city. The Greater Metropolitan area of Vancouver contains more than half the people so those comparisons work. The city of Vancouver itself is the most dense in the country and has a decent, but not great transit system. The downtown core is a growing, desirable highrise district that contains about 5% of the region's residents in Manhatten-like density The suburbs are very low density with the added disadvantage of being a long narrow band with the central city being at one end. The reason is because the mountains, ocean and US border all force development up the valley. Essentially the urbanites are very public transit, walking, cycling friendly; the suburbanites, not so much. The inner city, like San Francisco is not freeway friendly so the commuters burn a lot of fuel not moving. Basically traffic is fucked all day long; much more so than you would expect for that size of city (2.1M). Outside Greater Vancouver and Greater Victoria public transit is virtually non existant, definitely only for the poor if at all. Northern Mountain conditions lend themselves to larger vehicles with larger engines. The premier is definitely aiming at the urban and sub-urban crowd with this policy as it is unlikely to resonate well with the killin' trees, diggin' coal, pumpin' oil crowd. A new tax on fishing boat fuel isn't going to make him a lot of friends up the island, but then again they tend to over estimate their clout anyway. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
lawrocket 3 #7 February 21, 2008 Quote BC is considerably larger than Texas so it's tough to compare it to a city. Don't I look like a dumb ass. Yes, I know. My wife is hotter than your wife. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
base428 1 #8 February 21, 2008 A better alternative would be to offer large tax credits to anyone driving a plug-in hybrid electric vehicle (PHEV) or extended range electric vehicle (EREV) such as the upcoming 2010 Chevy Volt. It's too bad your government wants to penalize you and make $ in the process rather than effectively promoting new technologies or offering tax credits for driving the above new vehicles.(c)2010 Vertical Visions. No unauthorized duplication permitted. <==For the media only Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,148 #9 February 21, 2008 On the whole I'd prefer credits, which have shown thaty they work very effectively with SO2 emissions. The acid rain problems that were killing lakes in the eastern US and Canada 20 years ago have almost disappeared without the need for anything except free-market trading of pollution credits. One idea from the Nixon/Ford/Reagan area that actually worked. Second, the Earth can support some level of carbon usage. What is needed is sustainable use, not no use at all.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
shropshire 0 #10 February 21, 2008 Nope, I don't personaly believe that it will work. Global Warming (IMHO) is natural and not man-made. This and other taxes like it are window shopping and a money making opportunity for Green Companies and governments. (.)Y(.) Chivalry is not dead; it only sleeps for want of work to do. - Jerome K Jerome Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
shropshire 0 #11 February 21, 2008 How much 'greener' are these vehicles over their total life-cycle? What is the 'cost' to generate the fuel? What is the polution impact of 'end-of-life' batteries? (Are they toxic?). (.)Y(.) Chivalry is not dead; it only sleeps for want of work to do. - Jerome K Jerome Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
CanuckInUSA 0 #12 February 21, 2008 QuoteThis and other taxes like it are window shopping Andrew kind of hit the nail on the head earlier. This is Premiere Campbell's scheme to show off to the world during the up and coming Winter Olympics and the BC urbanites (with all their political power) who support Campbell with their easier access to public transit are all too happy to jump on the Carbon Tax bandwagon. With all that said though ... it is interesting to actually see a government doing something instead of blowing hot air. LOL ... the provincial government of Alberta, the province next door to BC, the richest province in Canada with some of the largest oil reserves in the world (mixed in sand) is promising to the public that it will clean up it's polution by the year 2050. Plus they are promising they will create new hospitals and medical schools 20 years from now while we have major issues with our healthcare in Alberta today (LOL like a cancer patient can wait 20 years for empty promises of new doctors and new hospitals). No it is interesting to see a government trying to do something for a change. Try not to worry about the things you have no control over Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,118 #13 February 21, 2008 > A better alternative would be to offer large tax credits to anyone driving a >plug-in hybrid electric vehicle (PHEV) or extended range electric vehicle >(EREV) such as the upcoming 2010 Chevy Volt. Not a bad plan, but . . . >It's too bad your government wants to penalize you . . . The tax credits would be seen as penalizing the owners of traditional cars to help the "snooty elite" buy nerdy cars. >rather than effectively promoting new technologies or offering tax credits >for driving the above new vehicles. Tax credits and tax penalties are effectively the same thing - a modification of the tax structure to drive desired societal behavior. The PHEV owner will benefit from both the carbon tax and the PHEV credit; the Expedition owner will be penalized by both. "Tax credits" sounds better than "carbon tax" but that's just window dressing. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jcd11235 0 #14 February 21, 2008 QuoteGlobal Warming (IMHO) is natural and not man-made. It's not really a subjective topic. Thus, public opinion won't affect reality. State of KnowledgeMath tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rehmwa 2 #15 February 21, 2008 Yes it will work - they will achieve the mission of collecting more money from everybody ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
countzero 7 #16 February 22, 2008 QuoteNope, I don't personaly believe that it will work. Global Warming (IMHO) is natural and not man-made. This and other taxes like it are window shopping and a money making opportunity for Green Companies and governments. Amen!!!diamonds are a dawgs best friend Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kelpdiver 2 #17 February 22, 2008 so will they be adding to the ferry costs too? If the result of the extra is to discourage people from taking a weekend trip to Sechult, that's too bad. I think you want to cut down on the daily use, but still enjoy the areas in the greater Vancouver area. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Andrewwhyte 1 #18 February 22, 2008 Quoteso will they be adding to the ferry costs too? If the result of the extra is to discourage people from taking a weekend trip to Sechult, that's too bad. I think you want to cut down on the daily use, but still enjoy the areas in the greater Vancouver area. For a pollution tax to work it has to be universally applied. Presumably the extra cost for the ferry will encourage burning biodeisel in the engines or the introduction of sail assist technology. The key is to not let the politics determine consumption, but to make the intrusion into the economy as acute an incursion as possible. The free market should still determine what is efficient and what people want; just with the caveat that adding carbon to the atmosphere is a bad(a negative good) that must be paid for like all other goods. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TrophyHusband 0 #19 February 23, 2008 QuoteThe idea here is to make driving more expensive and make people think about alternates before they fill up. what alternative? the number of people who actually have an alternative (public transportation), that will actually make the switch is likely to be very small. "Your scrotum is quite nice" - Skymama www.kjandmegan.com Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TrophyHusband 0 #20 February 23, 2008 QuoteA better alternative would be to offer large tax credits to anyone driving a plug-in hybrid electric vehicle (PHEV) or extended range electric vehicle (EREV) such as the upcoming 2010 Chevy Volt. It's too bad your government wants to penalize you and make $ in the process rather than effectively promoting new technologies or offering tax credits for driving the above new vehicles. th eproblem with the hybrids is that above sea level, gas mileage drops, going up hill, mileage drops, and when its cold, mileage drops. most of the population in bc lives at sea level, but there's no getting around the other two problems. "Your scrotum is quite nice" - Skymama www.kjandmegan.com Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,148 #21 February 23, 2008 QuoteQuoteA better alternative would be to offer large tax credits to anyone driving a plug-in hybrid electric vehicle (PHEV) or extended range electric vehicle (EREV) such as the upcoming 2010 Chevy Volt. It's too bad your government wants to penalize you and make $ in the process rather than effectively promoting new technologies or offering tax credits for driving the above new vehicles. th eproblem with the hybrids is that above sea level, gas mileage drops, going up hill, mileage drops, and when its cold, mileage drops. most of the population in bc lives at sea level, but there's no getting around the other two problems. Non hybrids' mileage drops going uphill and in cold weather too.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
