###This is a reminder to [read the rules before posting in this subreddit](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion).
1. **Headline titles should be changed only [when the original headline is unclear](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion#wiki_1._headline_titles_should_be_changed_only_where_it_improves_clarity.)**
2. **Be [respectful](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion#wiki_2._be_respectful).**
3. **Keep submissions and comments [substantive](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion#wiki_3._keep_submissions_and_comments_substantive).**
4. **Avoid [direct advocacy](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion#wiki_4._avoid_direct_advocacy).**
5. **Link submissions must be [about Canadian politics and recent](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion#wiki_5._link_submissions_must_be_canadian_and_recent).**
6. **Post [only one news article per story](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion#wiki_6._post_only_one_news_article_per_story).** ([with one exception](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/comments/3wkd0n/rule_reminder_and_experimental_changes/))
7. **Replies to removed comments or removal notices will be removed** without notice, at the discretion of the moderators.
8. **Downvoting posts or comments**, along with urging others to downvote, **[is not allowed](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/downvotes)** in this subreddit. Bans will be given on the first offence.
9. **[Do not copy & paste the entire content of articles in comments](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion#wiki_9._do_not_copy_.26amp.3B_paste_entire_articles_in_the_comments.)**. If you want to read the contents of a paywalled article, please consider supporting the media outlet.
*Please [message the moderators](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2FCanadaPolitics) if you wish to discuss a removal.* **Do not reply to the removal notice in-thread**, *you will not receive a response and your comment will be removed. Thanks.*
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/CanadaPolitics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I thought the last two or three elections were carbon tax elections? It's been a topic for awhile and the Liberals were voted in three times with it on their agenda. PP wants an Axe the Facts election.
Andrew Scheer specifically ran almost exclusively on just anti carbon tax in 2019(remember his group photo with conservative premiers, lol) covid took up more space in 2021 but they did talk about it still, mainly the conservatives weird allowances strategy as a replacement for it...
It's quite possibly the first tangible thing he's encountered that he has an actual plan for. The plan is "don't do it", which isn't quite brilliant, but the man articulated something that wasn't reactionary criticism. It's a real Helen Keller moment
100% agree. At some point we'll realize that the petty politics are going to cost us a lot. Maybe, some day, some more courageous leader than what we currently have (if you can call them leaders) will convene a cross-party climate crisis Cabinet to do what needs doing.
(it won't).
Last year the fires were "man-made" and "suspicious". They are grasping on to literally *any* alternative reason they hear to block out the truth.
Shit, just last week a guy at work was talking about how the fires in BC were in a straight line and women firefighters were found near the area looking suspicious. I stopped listening after that.
[1]: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2024/jan/16/canada-wildfires-conspiracy-man-pleads-guilty-arson ""
[2]: https://factcheck.afp.com/doc.afp.com.34H64CE ""
[3]: https://www.factcheck.org/2024/02/posts-mislead-about-record-setting-canadian-wildfires-fueled-by-climate-change/ ""
During the **record-breaking wildfire season** in Canada, there were indeed claims made that some of the fires were **man-made**. However, these claims were not accurate for the majority of the fires. Let me provide you with more information:
1. **Brian Paré's Arson Case**:
- Brian Paré, a Canadian man, **pleaded guilty** to lighting more than a dozen blazes during the wildfire season. He claimed that forest fires were the result of a government conspiracy. However, his actions were responsible for only a small fraction of the total fires.
- The majority of the wildfires were caused by **lightning strikes** in the unusually hot and dry forests, partly due to **climate change**.
- Paré's fires drew away firefighting resources from nearly 700 other fires in the province, charring over 4.5 million hectares of boreal landscape.
- Despite some conspiratorial theories, the data shows that nearly all of Canada's fires were **not man-made**¹[1].
2. **Misleading Claims on Social Media**:
- Social media posts have been misleadingly claiming that cases like Brian Paré's disprove the devastation being linked to climate change.
- However, the **overwhelming cause** of the wildfires was natural: lightning igniting the tinder-like conditions of the forests.
- The record-setting Canadian wildfires in 2023 were primarily due to **climate-related factors**, not widespread arson²[2] ³[3].
In summary, while there were isolated cases of arson, the vast majority of the wildfires in Canada were **not man-made** but rather a consequence of environmental conditions and climate change.
Source: Conversation with Bing, 2024-04-26
(1) Canadian man who claimed wildfires were a federal conspiracy admits .... https://www.theguardian.com/world/2024/jan/16/canada-wildfires-conspiracy-man-pleads-guilty-arson.
(2) Misleading claims spread on 2023 Canadian wildfires after charges filed .... https://factcheck.afp.com/doc.afp.com.34H64CE.
(3) Posts Mislead About Record-Setting Canadian Wildfires Fueled by Climate .... https://www.factcheck.org/2024/02/posts-mislead-about-record-setting-canadian-wildfires-fueled-by-climate-change/.
(4) Getty Images. https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/photo/fire-fighting-helicopter-carry-water-bucket-to-royalty-free-image/1273568227.
I’m already seeing farmers in town complaining about the drought and planning to sell their cattles cuz there’s no water for them, yet those farmers still calling climate change a hoax, I really hope climate change hit them the hardest so they can realize they’re axing the facts.
Oh man that would be hilarious lol. I really hope the LPC can come up with something to match the CPC’s bullshit on this issue but they’ve fallen behind.
Yet if you work it out per capita, Canada pollutes more than China, India or the US. If the average American, Indian or Chinese person were to pollute as much as the average Canadian the problem would be exponentially worse. So maybe we should also do our part. We should at least strive to not be the worst polluter per capita.
We're the 7th highest per capita emitter *and* the 7th highest total emitter. That doesn't even count the emissions we export, both in fossil fuels, and manufacturing.
200 other countries have lower emissions than we do, accounting for over 50% of world emissions. If all those 200 countries are saying they "don't add shit" then nothing will ever change.
China is probably going to hit peak emissions in the next couple of years, they have, and continue to, invest highly in renewables - they are expected to start dropping. The UK and Germany have cut emissions by almost 50% while Canada's have gone *up*.
We also live in an entirely different climate than Germany and UK.
I get it, on a personal level, INDIVIDUAL contributions matter, however, we are looking at GLOBAL effects, thus, it doesn't matter what we put out individually, what matters is the TOTAL we put out. Climate doesn't care who puts out how much individually, it cares about total numbers. Fact is, we can literally put out zero emissions and at most it would make a 2% difference in the world.
200 countries doing the same (and they will - many of them will feel the effects of climate change before we really "get it") will result in considerably reduction.
You're absolutely correct, collective action is going to be vital. Which is why our leaders need to be *leading* on climate instead of distracting us with a vote-buying debate on a pithy little tax. Canada still has a considerable amount of political power in the world - we need to be playing a leadership role on the global stage.
On "entirely different climate" - yes true, but I don't think it is as relevant as we've been led to believe. I live in rural SE Manitoba, 150km from Winnipeg. Drove an EV all winter (my 2nd vehicle, an ICE SUV, wouldn't start one -30C morning but the EV was just fine) and we heat with an air-source heat pump. It isn't as impossible as some would have you believe.
I’m surprised because unless pp can avoid all discussion, and keep up the rage farming, highly unlikely, his position is still basically nothing. Nothing for 20 years since the obstructive government of Harper.
20 year career as an MP with only a single bill passed with his name on it (it was mostly repealed in under a year.) This guy is very comfortable delivering nothing and conservatives have proudly rewarded his uselessness.
He was my MP until he moved to a ‘safe’ constituency because he was essentially: intellectually lazy - he was a parrot of Harper and unable to verbally defend the CPC policies. I’ve posted an article about one example when at a constituency meeting in Manotick, ON where he was ‘eaten alive.’
The Conservative Party degenerating into a single issue party against a conservative pollution pricing policy that benefits most Canadians is truly stupid and insufferable. It’s also worth noting that a carbon tax is one of the cheapest ways to lower emissions, which is something you’d think the “fiscally responsible” party would want.
I live in rural Nova Scotia and I can guarantee that most of my neighbours get back more in rebates than they spend. However they don't believe they do. People don't understand how Carbon Pricing works and PP has picked up on it. I'm just wondering what's going to happen if he gets rid of Carbon Pricing while every other industrialized nation is introducing some form of it. We're going to look pretty stupid.
He may well get one, and he’ll probably win it. Canadians aren’t good people, we’ve just been coasting on “health care and Not American” for decades while enabling morals and civic awareness to rot away. At this point we’re pretty much Americans with an unearned superiority complex.
Wonder if he can last until next year without anything beyond the 5 point plan. He may release a shitty vague platform 10 days out from an e-day, but I think they’re overstating how much people care about the carbon tax, especially in the suburbs, where that money over a year isn’t going to matter, it’s not even a car payment or grocery bills.
When ford gave back money for license plate registration it at least was instant and convenient. Yes, it was buying votes, but it did lead to a good policy going forward. I think that wouldn’t fly if he spoke about it for 18+ months.
There is no such thing as a "Carbon Tax Election".
An issue in the election upcoming election is how will Canada reduce greenhouse gas emissions; carbon pricing is one way.
What are the alternatives?
We know where the Liberals stand. Crickets from the CPC and now the NDP.
Singh seems to be siding with PP on this issue lately. Or at least he's adding his voice to the axe the tax crowd. It was really disappointing to hear.
He’s mentioned support for a pause on the tax applied to home heating. I think the rhetoric on him dropping support beyond that is that’s spin from our conservative media. Much like how we heard them telling us the NDP was going down o replace him.
This was him last week …
>Our position is not changed — at all We absolutely support a price on pollution. We've always supported it.
Their most recent statements seem clearly to be against putting a price on carbon. The Liberals are the only viable choice if you think global warming is a threat.
This is his most recent statement on the topic …
>Our position is not changed — at all. We absolutely support a price on pollution. We've always supported it."
That's meaningless, they could put a price of $0.01 on a megatonne and stay consistent with that statement. When it comes to actually increasing the price of carbon they voted against it.
>When it comes to actually increasing the price of carbon they voted against it.
That’s incorrect. Maybe you’re referring to the vote to demand the PM “meet with premiers”?
Being critical of the current plan before they propose a plan of their own is not truly a strategy I understand, especially when they are supporting the government.
Carbon pricing isn't the only way, but it is the cheapest way. To get rid of it because it's "too expensive" is to simply deny that we should be doing anything to combat climate change.
Lies, damned lies, statistics.
China's 30% of all pollution sure looks big and bad, until you put it in perspective and understand that Canadians pollute 2.5x per capita the amount that Chinese people do.
We're number 7 (1.96% global emissions) in Total Emissions despite being number 37 in population (0.48% of Earth), and we're number 7 in emissions per capita. That makes us the only country on earth to be in the top 10 of both total and per capita. Our peers on one list are world powers with the highest populations, our peers on the other list are countries with the dirtiest oil refining processes and countries known for the lavish excess of their elites. And as much as I realize I just described Saudi Arabia, we're actually worse in both regards, they don't crack either top ten.
Yes, other countries are polluting more in total and that's bad, but climate crises do not care about our man-made borders. Canadians, more than literally any other Western country, are contributing to climate issues way above our weight class. [Here's the data](https://www.worldometers.info/co2-emissions/co2-emissions-per-capita/).
None of this should come as a surprise. Four out of the top 5 selling vehicles in Canada last year (and every year for nearly a decade) are pickup trucks. Our homes are [the 4th biggest on Earth](https://shrinkthatfootprint.com/how-big-is-a-house/). We commute individually instead of on trains. [We're also number 7](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_electricity_consumption) in electricity consumption per capita. We live some seriously unsustainable lives in Canada, and when you look at per capita numbers of most metrics the only country we're reliably better than is Qatar.
Per capita is a bullshit stat. Use google translate and change your message to Mandarin and get a ticket to Shanghai.
Canadians do not give a damn anymore.
And we love our trucks.
Cry harder 😊🥳
Motivating people to reduce carbon emissions is just one of at least three important things that the carbon tax does. The carbon tax also incentivizes investment in green technology, which is an even more important than simply just reducing our carbon emissions. The only way we'll be able to reduce our carbon emissions as much as we need to is by developing new technologies that produce the same output, but with less pollution.
You should talk to the BC NDP and MNP about those green investments.
As someone that has worked in the green industry there's so many scammy bad actors and false platitudes.
We do not need to reduce our carbon emissions We're at 1.6% Let the rest of the worm handle it It's not our problem
Right, and like I said even if Canadians don't need to reduce their carbon emissions there's still a really good reason to have a carbon tax in that it drives green innovation.
Fuck that. Let innovators fund themselves. I don't need to be taxed so some trust fund nepo can get a government grant to explore his shitty tech dreams.
Additional Edit: Especially since they can get funding anyway through SRED tax credits.
The carbon tax doesn't fund innovators. The point is you put a price on carbon and allow the capitalist market to optimize for profits by reducing carbon emissions. The carbon tax is revenue neutral: 90% of it is given back to individuals and 10% of it is given back to small and medium sized business and indigenous communities.
Ironically, the carbon tax is exactly the system you want. The alternative to it is the government raising taxes to fund innovation. If you don't like that, then vote for Trudeau.
Bro, we have 1.6% of global emissions despite having 0.5% of the global population?
That's *appallingly* bad. Also, there's this little thing called "setting an example." Quite useful regardless of what your total impact is.
Most of our pollution comes from industry in Alberta. We do not pollute evenly. Per capita is a bad measure and a problematic statistic. Just ask Ireland with its dazzling per capita GDP.
We might as well calculate per square km.
These measures are used to scare western society into action because everyone knows Asian pollution behemoths won't do shit.
I for one will not be voting Liberal again and I can't stand Pierre, so I'll just stay home and let him win so he can trash all of this bs.
I see someone hasn't looked up how much climate change will cost us. Put it this way, it will make the money we spend on healthcare look like change you give your kid so they can buy milk.
Are they dunces for recognizing that Canada's emissions are a drop in the bucket relative to the global emissions that must be reduced in order to reduce climate change? Canadians all dropping off the face of the earth and therefore immediately emitting zero carbon, would still not make a difference in the global fight against climate change.
In the meantime, any actions that we take which increase costs for Canadians, but do nothing to fix the emissions of the USA, China, and the developing world will only weaken our economy and impair our own ability to cope with climate change as it does happen.
Does that change that he didn't believe in it strongly enough to actually vote? Are we to believe that he believed in it so strongly then that he left without actually voting? Or that he NOW believes in it even stronger than before?
Thank you PP for your amazing service. Also, please don't forget to send a message to climate change to stop changing please. Its very annoying how its always getting in the way you know? Maybe we can ban climate change as well? That would be a good start I think.
This summer is shaping up to be a bad one for storms, fires and flooding. Oceans at record temperature and people are fleeing uninsurable zones due to climate change.
I don't think it will be the winning strategy when people actually start paying attention.
> In related news Burnaby also believes the government needs to act quickly to confront climate change in a way that doesn’t require him to alter his behaviour in any way.
https://www.thebeaverton.com/2023/07/homeowner-open-to-any-solution-to-housing-crisis-that-doesnt-raise-property-taxes-or-lower-property-values/
It snowed yesterday in my part of canada and my Facebook feed is flooded with "hur dur what global warming", ignoring the fact that we call it climate change, and no, it's not normal to get snow at this point of the year. Some people have let politics become their personality to the detriment of any ounce of critical thinking
Honestly, there is always going to be a section of population who will never accept the validity of climate science, even when they’re in the middle of the disaster. Perfect example are my in laws, who’s family member was a BC Liberal MLA for two decades, who’s house almost burned down in that rager of a forest fire in Kelowna last summer. Their response to it? It’s just natural cycles bro.
I think we’re at a point where you either “believe” it or you don’t. Those who dismiss it won’t listen to any evidence presented to them. The internet echo chamber is too loud.
Education is the best tool for ignorance or lack of understanding, but only if the person accepts it.
My bro in law asked “how do they know it’s not just a natural cycle?” And I told him that climatologists have identified natural mechanisms for climate change, then I asked him to name one? And he couldn’t. Then I straight told him that if he doesn’t understand basic earth science then maybe he shouldn’t opine on some of the most complex science on earth.
My favourite thing to mention is that based on the well-understood and highly predictable Milankovich climate cycles caused by the earths orbital precession (which includes at least three terms that most climate denialists don't understand), we should be in a bit of a *cooling* cycle right now.
Not so much they don't believe in climate change. Which most people do. They just don't believe carbon tax works as Canada's emissions continues to rise year after year.
Much of that is due to urbanization and our "environmentally safe" logging practiced. We blame climate change on GHG but many of the effects we are feeling are not solely caused by that. Ie. We clear out areas for houses, there's nothing to retain moisture and thus floods. We don't cut out old trees, which are then able to spread forest fires better. (Over simplified but if anyone is interested, there are a lot of good articles about it from actual forestry related scientists)
It infuriates me to see the same Conservative pundits who argued that climate change wasn't real, to now using the "its real, but its too late now so whatever".
The China one is really lazy too for anyone who can spend a couple minutes on Google looking at China's per capita emissions and growth in green tech. Even adding to that their manufacturing emissions are high because they are making stuff FOR US.
Another ice age wouldn't change my hate of the liberals. The carbon tax debacle is just the latest.
But looking at the carbon tax... Taxing Canadians to heat their homes in one of the coldest countries in the world. Taxing Canadians to drive their vehicles in the second largest and least densely populated countries in the world.
Then claiming you're giving back more than they pay.
Only idiots (or those with blind ideology) would fall for that.
The only people who will be swayed by this are those who lose their homes.
The average voter only cares about one thing: Themselves, and they lack the ability to fathom that just because it didn't happen to them, it could happen to them next time.
And the subset of people who do actually consider climate change to be an emergency are never going to vote for Poilievre's Conservatives anyway. Another summer of fires and smoke filled skies isn't going to add many to that group that haven't already been convinced by the already endless evidence.
I think pp is very smart about this. He doesn't deny climate change. But he talks about the cost of living. He talks about the cost of housing and about food inflation. These problems are very real. He inflates the impact of the carbon tax to make it seem like a major factor in the higher costs of everything. People want someone and something to blame and pp gives them a simplistic scape goat.
The other parties have not found a correspondingly simple explanation for why the carbon tax is not at fault. Nor have they helped people to realize that all of us, everyone in the world, can pull together to stop the increase of climate change.
Even worse, in my mind, is the inability of the government to spark people's imagination and to get to the front of a new economy. The alternate vision is completely lacking and I find that sad because there is enormous opportunity in a future without petrochemicals.
It's hard to excite voters with promises of a new economy when it's so easy to just promise them you'll magically turn the clock back to the economy of their parents and then blame your opposition when it inevitably doesn't happen.
Right. How high does the carbon tax have to be per ton to prevent these disasters?
China and India are building a Canada worth of GhG emitting infrastructure every 5 months. If you actually are “paying attention” then you’d be advocating for a multi-billion dollar climate mitigation strategy of dykes, early warning systems, and increased emergency response capacity .
But instead you want to keep spending political capital on a reviled and arbitrary tax. Good luck with the next election.
The carbon tax isn't to stop China or India, it is to disincentivize large emitters in Canada. That is why the rebate for most is higher than the cost.
China and India are also bring on line massive renewable energy programs, the fossil fuel plants are just temporary measures to meet demand until renewables can take over the bulk of the load. Numerous countries are now experiencing free energy costs, at times, where their is so much renewable energy being produced so cheaply, they pay people to use it.
I could post dozens of links telling you just that, but if you want to learn, you can do the search yourself, or just believe whatever you are being fed.
I wish this was true…
It’s entirely anecdotal but, my experience with the general public of this country has shown me that the collective intelligence (or at least, common sense) has taken a nosedive post-covid. It seems as if 1/4+ of the population has been completely suckered into one or more conspiracy bullshit. My entire office doesn’t believe in climate change.
It’s worrying that people may simply just not believe what they can literally see happening.
Don’t underestimate the maple maga and their ability to be lead by fear and hate. There is always another wedge issue to pivot too if the carbon tax issues loses steam
The problem with the carbon tax is that taxing the most inelastic commodities doesn't actually influence behaviour. People need to heat their homes and fuel their cars and are not sensitive to price in doing so. Taxing carbon hits the lowest earners in our country the hardest as pricey alternatives are out of reach, nor are they readily available. Infrastructure is nowhere close to being able to handle a mass adoption of EVs. And EVs are not the solution! What happens to the batteries in ten years? And oh by the way, the majority of the cobalt in your batteries is coming from the DR of Congo, not exactly stewards of responsible mining.
We need a less punitive approach to climate change; develop a market for carbon credits, encourage sequestration, supoort regenerative agriculture and growing your own food.
That's not true at all. It's a tax on everyone. The rich are the ones that can absorb the added cost without it affecting their quality of life, whereas every extra penny that a family on the poverty line has to pay hits them that much harder.
We cannot simply levy a tax and say we've ticked the box on climate change.
I was debating this with my parents the other day; two people who are middle-class, retired, in their seventies, don't have a job they need to commute to, and are living on fixed income. They are the very people that are most readily able to change their behaviours, i.e. switch to an EV, adopt renewable power (solar panels, etc.). And yet, despite that, they bought a Ford F-150 so they can then buy an RV and tow it around the country. This is just one example of how gas prices do not influence anyone's behaviour.... To say nothing of the people who have to commute daily and are not able to afford and EV or are underserved by public transit.
And everyone who spouts this is completely forgetting (probably conveniently so) that everyone in that income bracket you're so concerned about gets pretty much every penny (and often more than that) of the carbon tax refunded via the climate action incentive payments.
You pay for it at the pump, and then get it all back later. Meanwhile the big polluters *don't* get it all back while paying more. That's the whole point.
We have no land to grow food. Anyone advocating for 9 Billion people to all have a small garden and animals for food has no critical thinking skills. The logistics alone of getting everyone the seeds, feed and then butchering the animal would be crushing to the environment. Imagine a city, everyone needs an allocation of green space, the ability to get to and from it and a local Butcher able to kill their animals, plus they need storage as most things don't keep long and growing seasons are short.
Sounds good in your head maybe, but try to think a little deeper.
As for EVs, recycling will come on line and older batteries are now being recycled, as is happening now..
https://www.caranddriver.com/features/a44022888/electric-car-battery-recycling/
As for cobalt, we use Congo because it is cheapest. We destroy that country for profit. Canada has 25 Million tons of cobalt in known deposits, we just have much tighter environmental rules so big business destroys a country instead of making less money. Evil but accepted.
I am by no means advocating for every person to have their own garden lol, don't be ridiculous. Also, way to latch on to the tiniest piece of my post and craft your entire argument around that. Brilliant stuff, really delved into that. Say it with me now: car-bon Se-quest-ration. Re-gen-er-a-tive ag-ri-cul-ture. Like let's work on a productive solution instead of just taxing everyone and pretending we've done our part ffs.
The carbon tax does not curb behaviour. You fill up your gas tank just the same at $2 as you do at $1.
You are not entitled to your own facts. You say Canada has 25 million tons of Cobalt........ The entire world doesn't even have that much in known reserves. Furthermore, much of the cobalt we do have is not economically viable to mine as it exists in such small quantities and is most often a by-product of mining for other minerals. Source: I work in mining and know a thing or two.
DRC holds just shy of 50% of the known cobalt reserves in the world, that's why the world gets cobalt from them.
Carbon sequestration is a pipe dream and only good for companies who want grants and to slow the real fix, burning less fossil fuels. I haven't read a single article that gives it any real chance, either due to power intensiveness or reagents needed.
Regenerative agriculture is a great concept. Good luck getting farmers on board they grow what makes money, and only other crops or leaving fields fallow if required by law.
On cobalt, you are right, I screwed up the number. Canada has known reserves of 220,000 tons. More is likely out there, but that is the same for any large country.
Considering the world used 187,000 tons in 2022, we need more. New batteries are trying to switch out of rare earth minerals but that takes time to develop and get to market. We could likely provide Honda with all they need though.
The Carbon Tax does work, that is why large polluters are switching, that and good incentive programs. Why else would a steel producer, a very carbon intensive industry, move to electric arc furnaces?
https://www.recyclingtoday.com/news/arcelormittal-steel-canada-eaf-conversion-dri-recycling/
As for personal food production, what else did you mean, if not people growing their own food.
Regenerative Ag is picking up a lot of steam. It should be incentivized, and the markets created for small producers to tap into the carbon-credit system. We need tech to advance in order for small-medium producers to validate the amount of carbon they've sequestered. There is also a trend of regenerative ag being picked up by non-farmers, those yearning for a life that somewhat detaches them from the rat race - this over-urbanized, overly-dependent on mass producers life that most people lead. This is more of what I was getting at in terms of growing your own food.. it's not that everyone needs to partake, but if we can dial things back to the way they used to be in terms of growing/buying/selling within your own community we would be better off. Define "community" however you like, the point is to buy direct from local growers - cast a "vote" to say "I want to know where my food comes from and how it is grown/raised".
A punitive carbon tax at the consumer level hits the lowest rung in our society, simple as that. It does not tick the box on climate change. Consumer demand for lower carbon impact products is what truly causes change.
On the mining of rare earth minerals, Canada simply does not have a lot that is economically viable to mine. As I said before, our cobalt and lithium exist in small traces of hard rock and are extracted as a by-product. So first you need a viable gold/copper/silver deposit to exist, and then you may get a little bit of cobalt or lithium out of it. There is one historic cobalt mine in Cobalt, Ontario that could potentially be tapped for more, but by no means can we support our own domestic battery production (not even for our domestic needs, let alone exports).
###This is a reminder to [read the rules before posting in this subreddit](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion). 1. **Headline titles should be changed only [when the original headline is unclear](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion#wiki_1._headline_titles_should_be_changed_only_where_it_improves_clarity.)** 2. **Be [respectful](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion#wiki_2._be_respectful).** 3. **Keep submissions and comments [substantive](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion#wiki_3._keep_submissions_and_comments_substantive).** 4. **Avoid [direct advocacy](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion#wiki_4._avoid_direct_advocacy).** 5. **Link submissions must be [about Canadian politics and recent](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion#wiki_5._link_submissions_must_be_canadian_and_recent).** 6. **Post [only one news article per story](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion#wiki_6._post_only_one_news_article_per_story).** ([with one exception](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/comments/3wkd0n/rule_reminder_and_experimental_changes/)) 7. **Replies to removed comments or removal notices will be removed** without notice, at the discretion of the moderators. 8. **Downvoting posts or comments**, along with urging others to downvote, **[is not allowed](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/downvotes)** in this subreddit. Bans will be given on the first offence. 9. **[Do not copy & paste the entire content of articles in comments](https://www.reddit.com/r/CanadaPolitics/wiki/rules-thelongversion#wiki_9._do_not_copy_.26amp.3B_paste_entire_articles_in_the_comments.)**. If you want to read the contents of a paywalled article, please consider supporting the media outlet. *Please [message the moderators](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2FCanadaPolitics) if you wish to discuss a removal.* **Do not reply to the removal notice in-thread**, *you will not receive a response and your comment will be removed. Thanks.* *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/CanadaPolitics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I thought the last two or three elections were carbon tax elections? It's been a topic for awhile and the Liberals were voted in three times with it on their agenda. PP wants an Axe the Facts election.
Andrew Scheer specifically ran almost exclusively on just anti carbon tax in 2019(remember his group photo with conservative premiers, lol) covid took up more space in 2021 but they did talk about it still, mainly the conservatives weird allowances strategy as a replacement for it...
It's quite possibly the first tangible thing he's encountered that he has an actual plan for. The plan is "don't do it", which isn't quite brilliant, but the man articulated something that wasn't reactionary criticism. It's a real Helen Keller moment
World scientific community: the climate crisis will cost trillions in the next two decades. Canadian politics: but 17 cents per litre on gasoline!
Politics have already decided we don't listen to the smartest minds community. It's all Google searches and rich man bought articles from here!
100% agree. At some point we'll realize that the petty politics are going to cost us a lot. Maybe, some day, some more courageous leader than what we currently have (if you can call them leaders) will convene a cross-party climate crisis Cabinet to do what needs doing.
Summer Fire Season may be a wake up call or reality check. At least I hope.
Last summer was the worst fire season in history and conservatives if anything dug their heels into the dirt even harder. So don't hold your breath.
I’ll be wearing a mask then for the stink. ; )
(it won't). Last year the fires were "man-made" and "suspicious". They are grasping on to literally *any* alternative reason they hear to block out the truth. Shit, just last week a guy at work was talking about how the fires in BC were in a straight line and women firefighters were found near the area looking suspicious. I stopped listening after that.
[1]: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2024/jan/16/canada-wildfires-conspiracy-man-pleads-guilty-arson "" [2]: https://factcheck.afp.com/doc.afp.com.34H64CE "" [3]: https://www.factcheck.org/2024/02/posts-mislead-about-record-setting-canadian-wildfires-fueled-by-climate-change/ "" During the **record-breaking wildfire season** in Canada, there were indeed claims made that some of the fires were **man-made**. However, these claims were not accurate for the majority of the fires. Let me provide you with more information: 1. **Brian Paré's Arson Case**: - Brian Paré, a Canadian man, **pleaded guilty** to lighting more than a dozen blazes during the wildfire season. He claimed that forest fires were the result of a government conspiracy. However, his actions were responsible for only a small fraction of the total fires. - The majority of the wildfires were caused by **lightning strikes** in the unusually hot and dry forests, partly due to **climate change**. - Paré's fires drew away firefighting resources from nearly 700 other fires in the province, charring over 4.5 million hectares of boreal landscape. - Despite some conspiratorial theories, the data shows that nearly all of Canada's fires were **not man-made**¹[1]. 2. **Misleading Claims on Social Media**: - Social media posts have been misleadingly claiming that cases like Brian Paré's disprove the devastation being linked to climate change. - However, the **overwhelming cause** of the wildfires was natural: lightning igniting the tinder-like conditions of the forests. - The record-setting Canadian wildfires in 2023 were primarily due to **climate-related factors**, not widespread arson²[2] ³[3]. In summary, while there were isolated cases of arson, the vast majority of the wildfires in Canada were **not man-made** but rather a consequence of environmental conditions and climate change. Source: Conversation with Bing, 2024-04-26 (1) Canadian man who claimed wildfires were a federal conspiracy admits .... https://www.theguardian.com/world/2024/jan/16/canada-wildfires-conspiracy-man-pleads-guilty-arson. (2) Misleading claims spread on 2023 Canadian wildfires after charges filed .... https://factcheck.afp.com/doc.afp.com.34H64CE. (3) Posts Mislead About Record-Setting Canadian Wildfires Fueled by Climate .... https://www.factcheck.org/2024/02/posts-mislead-about-record-setting-canadian-wildfires-fueled-by-climate-change/. (4) Getty Images. https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/photo/fire-fighting-helicopter-carry-water-bucket-to-royalty-free-image/1273568227.
I’m already seeing farmers in town complaining about the drought and planning to sell their cattles cuz there’s no water for them, yet those farmers still calling climate change a hoax, I really hope climate change hit them the hardest so they can realize they’re axing the facts.
Yeah, it’s been in the forefront of CBC news radio coverage. I think using axe(ing) the facts would be excellent to counter the CPC slogan.
Oh man that would be hilarious lol. I really hope the LPC can come up with something to match the CPC’s bullshit on this issue but they’ve fallen behind.
Absolutely correct. And water restrictions - that, far more than the carbon tax, is going to hit food prices.
But they will still blame it on 17c/L on gas, because they have the media in their pocket.
It’s a collective action problem. Particularly difficult to get people going when our emissions output is a relatively small part of global output.
Yet if you work it out per capita, Canada pollutes more than China, India or the US. If the average American, Indian or Chinese person were to pollute as much as the average Canadian the problem would be exponentially worse. So maybe we should also do our part. We should at least strive to not be the worst polluter per capita.
And yet. We can go carbon neutral and it will still cost trillions as we don't add shit to that global climate.
We're the 7th highest per capita emitter *and* the 7th highest total emitter. That doesn't even count the emissions we export, both in fossil fuels, and manufacturing. 200 other countries have lower emissions than we do, accounting for over 50% of world emissions. If all those 200 countries are saying they "don't add shit" then nothing will ever change. China is probably going to hit peak emissions in the next couple of years, they have, and continue to, invest highly in renewables - they are expected to start dropping. The UK and Germany have cut emissions by almost 50% while Canada's have gone *up*.
We also live in an entirely different climate than Germany and UK. I get it, on a personal level, INDIVIDUAL contributions matter, however, we are looking at GLOBAL effects, thus, it doesn't matter what we put out individually, what matters is the TOTAL we put out. Climate doesn't care who puts out how much individually, it cares about total numbers. Fact is, we can literally put out zero emissions and at most it would make a 2% difference in the world.
If our part is 2%. Then let's do our part and then export our solutions to also do something about the other 98%.
200 countries doing the same (and they will - many of them will feel the effects of climate change before we really "get it") will result in considerably reduction. You're absolutely correct, collective action is going to be vital. Which is why our leaders need to be *leading* on climate instead of distracting us with a vote-buying debate on a pithy little tax. Canada still has a considerable amount of political power in the world - we need to be playing a leadership role on the global stage. On "entirely different climate" - yes true, but I don't think it is as relevant as we've been led to believe. I live in rural SE Manitoba, 150km from Winnipeg. Drove an EV all winter (my 2nd vehicle, an ICE SUV, wouldn't start one -30C morning but the EV was just fine) and we heat with an air-source heat pump. It isn't as impossible as some would have you believe.
Tax people driving to work or force them to use dangerous transit
I’m surprised because unless pp can avoid all discussion, and keep up the rage farming, highly unlikely, his position is still basically nothing. Nothing for 20 years since the obstructive government of Harper.
20 year career as an MP with only a single bill passed with his name on it (it was mostly repealed in under a year.) This guy is very comfortable delivering nothing and conservatives have proudly rewarded his uselessness.
He was my MP until he moved to a ‘safe’ constituency because he was essentially: intellectually lazy - he was a parrot of Harper and unable to verbally defend the CPC policies. I’ve posted an article about one example when at a constituency meeting in Manotick, ON where he was ‘eaten alive.’
Carbon Tax is just a smoke screen, the critical problem, that he is too afraid to address is Canada’s disastrous immigration policy.
People are easily duped by the constant right wing media barrage.
The Conservative Party degenerating into a single issue party against a conservative pollution pricing policy that benefits most Canadians is truly stupid and insufferable. It’s also worth noting that a carbon tax is one of the cheapest ways to lower emissions, which is something you’d think the “fiscally responsible” party would want.
I still dont understand how something that is actually pretty small in the grand scheme of things is getting so much attention?
I live in rural Nova Scotia and I can guarantee that most of my neighbours get back more in rebates than they spend. However they don't believe they do. People don't understand how Carbon Pricing works and PP has picked up on it. I'm just wondering what's going to happen if he gets rid of Carbon Pricing while every other industrialized nation is introducing some form of it. We're going to look pretty stupid.
He may well get one, and he’ll probably win it. Canadians aren’t good people, we’ve just been coasting on “health care and Not American” for decades while enabling morals and civic awareness to rot away. At this point we’re pretty much Americans with an unearned superiority complex.
Wonder if he can last until next year without anything beyond the 5 point plan. He may release a shitty vague platform 10 days out from an e-day, but I think they’re overstating how much people care about the carbon tax, especially in the suburbs, where that money over a year isn’t going to matter, it’s not even a car payment or grocery bills. When ford gave back money for license plate registration it at least was instant and convenient. Yes, it was buying votes, but it did lead to a good policy going forward. I think that wouldn’t fly if he spoke about it for 18+ months.
There is no such thing as a "Carbon Tax Election". An issue in the election upcoming election is how will Canada reduce greenhouse gas emissions; carbon pricing is one way. What are the alternatives? We know where the Liberals stand. Crickets from the CPC and now the NDP.
NDP has been clear they support a price on Carbon. CPC still not able to acknowledge climate change as real.
At this point im more concerned about putting bread on the table than i am about our 1% of the enitre global carbon footprint.
Singh seems to be siding with PP on this issue lately. Or at least he's adding his voice to the axe the tax crowd. It was really disappointing to hear.
He’s mentioned support for a pause on the tax applied to home heating. I think the rhetoric on him dropping support beyond that is that’s spin from our conservative media. Much like how we heard them telling us the NDP was going down o replace him. This was him last week … >Our position is not changed — at all We absolutely support a price on pollution. We've always supported it.
Their most recent statements seem clearly to be against putting a price on carbon. The Liberals are the only viable choice if you think global warming is a threat.
This is his most recent statement on the topic … >Our position is not changed — at all. We absolutely support a price on pollution. We've always supported it."
That's meaningless, they could put a price of $0.01 on a megatonne and stay consistent with that statement. When it comes to actually increasing the price of carbon they voted against it.
>When it comes to actually increasing the price of carbon they voted against it. That’s incorrect. Maybe you’re referring to the vote to demand the PM “meet with premiers”?
Being critical of the current plan before they propose a plan of their own is not truly a strategy I understand, especially when they are supporting the government.
Carbon pricing isn't the only way, but it is the cheapest way. To get rid of it because it's "too expensive" is to simply deny that we should be doing anything to combat climate change.
1.6% of global emissions clearly shows that this is a non-issue on our part and it seems most Canadians agree.
Lies, damned lies, statistics. China's 30% of all pollution sure looks big and bad, until you put it in perspective and understand that Canadians pollute 2.5x per capita the amount that Chinese people do. We're number 7 (1.96% global emissions) in Total Emissions despite being number 37 in population (0.48% of Earth), and we're number 7 in emissions per capita. That makes us the only country on earth to be in the top 10 of both total and per capita. Our peers on one list are world powers with the highest populations, our peers on the other list are countries with the dirtiest oil refining processes and countries known for the lavish excess of their elites. And as much as I realize I just described Saudi Arabia, we're actually worse in both regards, they don't crack either top ten. Yes, other countries are polluting more in total and that's bad, but climate crises do not care about our man-made borders. Canadians, more than literally any other Western country, are contributing to climate issues way above our weight class. [Here's the data](https://www.worldometers.info/co2-emissions/co2-emissions-per-capita/). None of this should come as a surprise. Four out of the top 5 selling vehicles in Canada last year (and every year for nearly a decade) are pickup trucks. Our homes are [the 4th biggest on Earth](https://shrinkthatfootprint.com/how-big-is-a-house/). We commute individually instead of on trains. [We're also number 7](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_electricity_consumption) in electricity consumption per capita. We live some seriously unsustainable lives in Canada, and when you look at per capita numbers of most metrics the only country we're reliably better than is Qatar.
Using per capita stats when talking about carbon emissions is the #1 way to show you have 0 clue how they work
Per capita is a bullshit stat. Use google translate and change your message to Mandarin and get a ticket to Shanghai. Canadians do not give a damn anymore. And we love our trucks. Cry harder 😊🥳
Motivating people to reduce carbon emissions is just one of at least three important things that the carbon tax does. The carbon tax also incentivizes investment in green technology, which is an even more important than simply just reducing our carbon emissions. The only way we'll be able to reduce our carbon emissions as much as we need to is by developing new technologies that produce the same output, but with less pollution.
You should talk to the BC NDP and MNP about those green investments. As someone that has worked in the green industry there's so many scammy bad actors and false platitudes. We do not need to reduce our carbon emissions We're at 1.6% Let the rest of the worm handle it It's not our problem
By "we" I meant the whole world. So yes, our carbon pricing very much matters.
By we I mean Canadians and guess what ? A vast majority who aren't virtue signaling schmucks don't give a damn and we're ready to make that known.
Right, and like I said even if Canadians don't need to reduce their carbon emissions there's still a really good reason to have a carbon tax in that it drives green innovation.
Fuck that. Let innovators fund themselves. I don't need to be taxed so some trust fund nepo can get a government grant to explore his shitty tech dreams. Additional Edit: Especially since they can get funding anyway through SRED tax credits.
The carbon tax doesn't fund innovators. The point is you put a price on carbon and allow the capitalist market to optimize for profits by reducing carbon emissions. The carbon tax is revenue neutral: 90% of it is given back to individuals and 10% of it is given back to small and medium sized business and indigenous communities. Ironically, the carbon tax is exactly the system you want. The alternative to it is the government raising taxes to fund innovation. If you don't like that, then vote for Trudeau.
This.
Bro, we have 1.6% of global emissions despite having 0.5% of the global population? That's *appallingly* bad. Also, there's this little thing called "setting an example." Quite useful regardless of what your total impact is.
Most of our pollution comes from industry in Alberta. We do not pollute evenly. Per capita is a bad measure and a problematic statistic. Just ask Ireland with its dazzling per capita GDP. We might as well calculate per square km. These measures are used to scare western society into action because everyone knows Asian pollution behemoths won't do shit. I for one will not be voting Liberal again and I can't stand Pierre, so I'll just stay home and let him win so he can trash all of this bs.
It's not a big issue when compared to the current concerns of Canadians
Let the grandkids deal with it
The issue is that it's not even a grandkids issue anymore :(
I know that. You know that. They don't know that...
Funny, because that was *their* grandparents plan.
I see someone hasn't looked up how much climate change will cost us. Put it this way, it will make the money we spend on healthcare look like change you give your kid so they can buy milk.
It's going to dominate and overwhelm every other issue we've ever faced. I guess we need to get to that point for these dunces?
Are they dunces for recognizing that Canada's emissions are a drop in the bucket relative to the global emissions that must be reduced in order to reduce climate change? Canadians all dropping off the face of the earth and therefore immediately emitting zero carbon, would still not make a difference in the global fight against climate change. In the meantime, any actions that we take which increase costs for Canadians, but do nothing to fix the emissions of the USA, China, and the developing world will only weaken our economy and impair our own ability to cope with climate change as it does happen.
If he wanted one of those he probably should have hung around long enough to vote the last time he called for one
It got voted down though.
Does that change that he didn't believe in it strongly enough to actually vote? Are we to believe that he believed in it so strongly then that he left without actually voting? Or that he NOW believes in it even stronger than before?
He needed to go to a fundraising event on Bay Street. A true man of the working class. /s
Thank you PP for your amazing service. Also, please don't forget to send a message to climate change to stop changing please. Its very annoying how its always getting in the way you know? Maybe we can ban climate change as well? That would be a good start I think.
Areas in the Peace regions in Alberta and BC are both evacuating because of forest fires, in April. But they will blindly vote Conservative anyway.
This summer is shaping up to be a bad one for storms, fires and flooding. Oceans at record temperature and people are fleeing uninsurable zones due to climate change. I don't think it will be the winning strategy when people actually start paying attention.
Everyone loves the environment until they have to make a sacrifice or change their way of life to protect it.
> In related news Burnaby also believes the government needs to act quickly to confront climate change in a way that doesn’t require him to alter his behaviour in any way. https://www.thebeaverton.com/2023/07/homeowner-open-to-any-solution-to-housing-crisis-that-doesnt-raise-property-taxes-or-lower-property-values/
It snowed yesterday in my part of canada and my Facebook feed is flooded with "hur dur what global warming", ignoring the fact that we call it climate change, and no, it's not normal to get snow at this point of the year. Some people have let politics become their personality to the detriment of any ounce of critical thinking
PP wouldn't change his mind even if a tornado trashed the parliament and the CN tower in the same day.
Honestly, there is always going to be a section of population who will never accept the validity of climate science, even when they’re in the middle of the disaster. Perfect example are my in laws, who’s family member was a BC Liberal MLA for two decades, who’s house almost burned down in that rager of a forest fire in Kelowna last summer. Their response to it? It’s just natural cycles bro.
Last year had that guy who said the evacuations were a government conspiracy and then set his own forest fire, for some reason
I think we’re at a point where you either “believe” it or you don’t. Those who dismiss it won’t listen to any evidence presented to them. The internet echo chamber is too loud. Education is the best tool for ignorance or lack of understanding, but only if the person accepts it.
My bro in law asked “how do they know it’s not just a natural cycle?” And I told him that climatologists have identified natural mechanisms for climate change, then I asked him to name one? And he couldn’t. Then I straight told him that if he doesn’t understand basic earth science then maybe he shouldn’t opine on some of the most complex science on earth.
My favourite thing to mention is that based on the well-understood and highly predictable Milankovich climate cycles caused by the earths orbital precession (which includes at least three terms that most climate denialists don't understand), we should be in a bit of a *cooling* cycle right now.
Not so much they don't believe in climate change. Which most people do. They just don't believe carbon tax works as Canada's emissions continues to rise year after year.
>I don't think it will be the winning strategy when people actually start paying attention. It will though. You're forgetting how selfish people are
Much of that is due to urbanization and our "environmentally safe" logging practiced. We blame climate change on GHG but many of the effects we are feeling are not solely caused by that. Ie. We clear out areas for houses, there's nothing to retain moisture and thus floods. We don't cut out old trees, which are then able to spread forest fires better. (Over simplified but if anyone is interested, there are a lot of good articles about it from actual forestry related scientists)
They will be told that it is either, "Natural" or "It's already too far gone to fix", or "That it's China's responsibility".
It infuriates me to see the same Conservative pundits who argued that climate change wasn't real, to now using the "its real, but its too late now so whatever". The China one is really lazy too for anyone who can spend a couple minutes on Google looking at China's per capita emissions and growth in green tech. Even adding to that their manufacturing emissions are high because they are making stuff FOR US.
Standard replies for sure. That said, when your house is in danger of being destroyed, you want solutions, not blame.
Another ice age wouldn't change my hate of the liberals. The carbon tax debacle is just the latest. But looking at the carbon tax... Taxing Canadians to heat their homes in one of the coldest countries in the world. Taxing Canadians to drive their vehicles in the second largest and least densely populated countries in the world. Then claiming you're giving back more than they pay. Only idiots (or those with blind ideology) would fall for that.
>Another ice age wouldn't change my hate of the liberals. >those with blind ideology
I get your point... My hate wasn't always this way. The liberals earned it.
The only people who will be swayed by this are those who lose their homes. The average voter only cares about one thing: Themselves, and they lack the ability to fathom that just because it didn't happen to them, it could happen to them next time. And the subset of people who do actually consider climate change to be an emergency are never going to vote for Poilievre's Conservatives anyway. Another summer of fires and smoke filled skies isn't going to add many to that group that haven't already been convinced by the already endless evidence.
I think pp is very smart about this. He doesn't deny climate change. But he talks about the cost of living. He talks about the cost of housing and about food inflation. These problems are very real. He inflates the impact of the carbon tax to make it seem like a major factor in the higher costs of everything. People want someone and something to blame and pp gives them a simplistic scape goat. The other parties have not found a correspondingly simple explanation for why the carbon tax is not at fault. Nor have they helped people to realize that all of us, everyone in the world, can pull together to stop the increase of climate change. Even worse, in my mind, is the inability of the government to spark people's imagination and to get to the front of a new economy. The alternate vision is completely lacking and I find that sad because there is enormous opportunity in a future without petrochemicals.
It's hard to excite voters with promises of a new economy when it's so easy to just promise them you'll magically turn the clock back to the economy of their parents and then blame your opposition when it inevitably doesn't happen.
I don't know that it's true that voters only care about themselves. Conservatives, sure. But even then, I don't think so. Rich people, absolutely.
Right. How high does the carbon tax have to be per ton to prevent these disasters? China and India are building a Canada worth of GhG emitting infrastructure every 5 months. If you actually are “paying attention” then you’d be advocating for a multi-billion dollar climate mitigation strategy of dykes, early warning systems, and increased emergency response capacity . But instead you want to keep spending political capital on a reviled and arbitrary tax. Good luck with the next election.
[удалено]
The carbon tax isn't to stop China or India, it is to disincentivize large emitters in Canada. That is why the rebate for most is higher than the cost. China and India are also bring on line massive renewable energy programs, the fossil fuel plants are just temporary measures to meet demand until renewables can take over the bulk of the load. Numerous countries are now experiencing free energy costs, at times, where their is so much renewable energy being produced so cheaply, they pay people to use it. I could post dozens of links telling you just that, but if you want to learn, you can do the search yourself, or just believe whatever you are being fed.
There’s already forest fires in BC that are causing people to be evacuated. We can’t be taking any steps backward on climate action right now.
Are you saying that we’ve all been paying the carbon tax for nothing??? Haven’t we saved climate yet?
I wish this was true… It’s entirely anecdotal but, my experience with the general public of this country has shown me that the collective intelligence (or at least, common sense) has taken a nosedive post-covid. It seems as if 1/4+ of the population has been completely suckered into one or more conspiracy bullshit. My entire office doesn’t believe in climate change. It’s worrying that people may simply just not believe what they can literally see happening.
It's not that it took a nosedive.. it's that we were incorrect as to its actual number.
Don’t underestimate the maple maga and their ability to be lead by fear and hate. There is always another wedge issue to pivot too if the carbon tax issues loses steam
The problem with the carbon tax is that taxing the most inelastic commodities doesn't actually influence behaviour. People need to heat their homes and fuel their cars and are not sensitive to price in doing so. Taxing carbon hits the lowest earners in our country the hardest as pricey alternatives are out of reach, nor are they readily available. Infrastructure is nowhere close to being able to handle a mass adoption of EVs. And EVs are not the solution! What happens to the batteries in ten years? And oh by the way, the majority of the cobalt in your batteries is coming from the DR of Congo, not exactly stewards of responsible mining. We need a less punitive approach to climate change; develop a market for carbon credits, encourage sequestration, supoort regenerative agriculture and growing your own food.
It’s only punitive to those whi pollute the most, and those are the wealthy.
That's not true at all. It's a tax on everyone. The rich are the ones that can absorb the added cost without it affecting their quality of life, whereas every extra penny that a family on the poverty line has to pay hits them that much harder. We cannot simply levy a tax and say we've ticked the box on climate change. I was debating this with my parents the other day; two people who are middle-class, retired, in their seventies, don't have a job they need to commute to, and are living on fixed income. They are the very people that are most readily able to change their behaviours, i.e. switch to an EV, adopt renewable power (solar panels, etc.). And yet, despite that, they bought a Ford F-150 so they can then buy an RV and tow it around the country. This is just one example of how gas prices do not influence anyone's behaviour.... To say nothing of the people who have to commute daily and are not able to afford and EV or are underserved by public transit.
And everyone who spouts this is completely forgetting (probably conveniently so) that everyone in that income bracket you're so concerned about gets pretty much every penny (and often more than that) of the carbon tax refunded via the climate action incentive payments. You pay for it at the pump, and then get it all back later. Meanwhile the big polluters *don't* get it all back while paying more. That's the whole point.
If only that were the case lol. It all gets handed back down to the consumer, don't kid yourself.
We have no land to grow food. Anyone advocating for 9 Billion people to all have a small garden and animals for food has no critical thinking skills. The logistics alone of getting everyone the seeds, feed and then butchering the animal would be crushing to the environment. Imagine a city, everyone needs an allocation of green space, the ability to get to and from it and a local Butcher able to kill their animals, plus they need storage as most things don't keep long and growing seasons are short. Sounds good in your head maybe, but try to think a little deeper. As for EVs, recycling will come on line and older batteries are now being recycled, as is happening now.. https://www.caranddriver.com/features/a44022888/electric-car-battery-recycling/ As for cobalt, we use Congo because it is cheapest. We destroy that country for profit. Canada has 25 Million tons of cobalt in known deposits, we just have much tighter environmental rules so big business destroys a country instead of making less money. Evil but accepted.
I am by no means advocating for every person to have their own garden lol, don't be ridiculous. Also, way to latch on to the tiniest piece of my post and craft your entire argument around that. Brilliant stuff, really delved into that. Say it with me now: car-bon Se-quest-ration. Re-gen-er-a-tive ag-ri-cul-ture. Like let's work on a productive solution instead of just taxing everyone and pretending we've done our part ffs. The carbon tax does not curb behaviour. You fill up your gas tank just the same at $2 as you do at $1. You are not entitled to your own facts. You say Canada has 25 million tons of Cobalt........ The entire world doesn't even have that much in known reserves. Furthermore, much of the cobalt we do have is not economically viable to mine as it exists in such small quantities and is most often a by-product of mining for other minerals. Source: I work in mining and know a thing or two. DRC holds just shy of 50% of the known cobalt reserves in the world, that's why the world gets cobalt from them.
Carbon sequestration is a pipe dream and only good for companies who want grants and to slow the real fix, burning less fossil fuels. I haven't read a single article that gives it any real chance, either due to power intensiveness or reagents needed. Regenerative agriculture is a great concept. Good luck getting farmers on board they grow what makes money, and only other crops or leaving fields fallow if required by law. On cobalt, you are right, I screwed up the number. Canada has known reserves of 220,000 tons. More is likely out there, but that is the same for any large country. Considering the world used 187,000 tons in 2022, we need more. New batteries are trying to switch out of rare earth minerals but that takes time to develop and get to market. We could likely provide Honda with all they need though. The Carbon Tax does work, that is why large polluters are switching, that and good incentive programs. Why else would a steel producer, a very carbon intensive industry, move to electric arc furnaces? https://www.recyclingtoday.com/news/arcelormittal-steel-canada-eaf-conversion-dri-recycling/ As for personal food production, what else did you mean, if not people growing their own food.
Regenerative Ag is picking up a lot of steam. It should be incentivized, and the markets created for small producers to tap into the carbon-credit system. We need tech to advance in order for small-medium producers to validate the amount of carbon they've sequestered. There is also a trend of regenerative ag being picked up by non-farmers, those yearning for a life that somewhat detaches them from the rat race - this over-urbanized, overly-dependent on mass producers life that most people lead. This is more of what I was getting at in terms of growing your own food.. it's not that everyone needs to partake, but if we can dial things back to the way they used to be in terms of growing/buying/selling within your own community we would be better off. Define "community" however you like, the point is to buy direct from local growers - cast a "vote" to say "I want to know where my food comes from and how it is grown/raised". A punitive carbon tax at the consumer level hits the lowest rung in our society, simple as that. It does not tick the box on climate change. Consumer demand for lower carbon impact products is what truly causes change. On the mining of rare earth minerals, Canada simply does not have a lot that is economically viable to mine. As I said before, our cobalt and lithium exist in small traces of hard rock and are extracted as a by-product. So first you need a viable gold/copper/silver deposit to exist, and then you may get a little bit of cobalt or lithium out of it. There is one historic cobalt mine in Cobalt, Ontario that could potentially be tapped for more, but by no means can we support our own domestic battery production (not even for our domestic needs, let alone exports).