Sask Does No Carbon Tax/ Creates own Idea.

Commodity Marketing

Tools

Sask Does No Carbon Tax/ Creates own Idea.

SASKFARMER3's Avatar Dec 5, 2017 | 07:10 1 No carbon tax in Saskatchewan's climate change strategy.
The Saskatchewan government has introduced a climate-change strategy that inches toward a price on carbon emissions, but leaves large parts of its economy untouched. And it doesn't include a carbon tax, which Environment Minister Dustin Duncan was happy to point out Monday.
"I believe it will achieve as much, if not more than, a carbon tax ever would," Duncan said after introducing the plan.
It calls for performance standards on facilities that emit more than 25,000 tonnes annually of carbon dioxide equivalent. Facilities that exceed their limit will have to pay.
They will be able to buy carbon offsets from farmers or foresters, a carbon credit from another company with emissions under its allotment or pay into a provincial fund.
"We want to see the economy continue to grow and, for some industries, that means that their emissions will grow. It's not a cap-and-trade program where we're capping absolutely the amount of emissions."
Duncan said standards will recognize investments companies have already made to reduce their emissions, something the energy industry has been lobbying for.
The document contains no goals or targets and doesn't include estimates of how much greenhouse gas emissions are expected to be reduced. There is an undated pledge to have SaskPower, a Crown-owned utility, generate half its electricity from renewables.
"They're going to great pains to say they're not doing carbon pricing and then implementing a policy which, everywhere else it's implemented, is called carbon pricing," said University of Alberta energy economist Andrew Leach.
The biggest hole in Saskatchewan's plan is its limited scope, said Leach.
"They're not touching their transportation, home heating, commercial and industrial energy use at all with this policy," he said and added that Alberta, British Columbia, Ontario and Quebec all have more inclusive plans.
Leach also noted the government hasn't specified how high the emissions standards will be. Too high, he said, and carbon becomes worthless and few emissions will be cut.
Federal Environment Minister Catherine McKenna said the plan is a good step toward carbon pricing.
"Saskatchewan's new plan proposes a performance standard for heavy industry that includes a carbon market. Momentum for carbon pricing is growing," she said, but added it will have to be wider to satisfy Ottawa.
"Based on what's in today's plan, Saskatchewan's price likely wouldn't hit our standard, because it applies only to heavy industry instead of being economy-wide," she said.
Brad Herald of the Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers welcomed Saskatchewan's plan, saying "There's a great range of compliance options for us there."
He declined to say whether Saskatchewan's plan is more favourable to industry than Alberta's, which includes a carbon tax.
"Both are legitimate," he said.
The Agricultural Producers of Saskatchewan also praised the plan. It leaves agriculture, the source of about one-quarter of the province's emissions, largely exempt.
"We also strongly reject the imposition of a carbon tax on our sector," said association president Todd Lewis.
Erin Flanagan of the Pembina Institute, a clean energy think-tank, said Saskatchewan's plan is an improvement over previous positions.
"It's still not a credible approach to climate change," she said. "They are last to the party, but it's good they are moving forward with some pieces of an approach."
Flanagan said it's tough to know how much difference the plan will make.
"The fact they haven't said what these [carbon] prices will be makes it difficult to know what kind of impact this is going to have. Saskatchewan doesn't have an economy-wide [reduction] target."
Saskatchewan has remained opposed to the federal government's insistence that all provinces must have a price on carbon in place by 2018.
Duncan said Monday's plan doesn't change that.
"We're prepared to defend our position. If that means go to court, so be it."


So again only one province has any Brains and stands up to the useless idiot in ottawa.

Why crush farmers etc. But thats the Liberal Way.

We live in a country where you need to heat your home 6 months out of a year or freeze to death. Real simple lets tax the shit out of home heating like the liberals want.

Now enter Chuck and Grassy to show us why the plan won't work. Reply With Quote
SASKFARMER3's Avatar Dec 5, 2017 | 08:05 2 I for one am proud of my province for standing up to a totally idiotic Carbon Tax on Everything in a country that basically doesn't even come close to being a polluting nation. Reply With Quote
Dec 5, 2017 | 08:14 3 Where is the farmers share of their contribution to sequestering by minimum till farming?


Why is no one voicing concerns over the following

1. Carbon sequestering
2. Import taxes from India
3. Railway movement
4. Level playing field on inputs Reply With Quote
Dec 5, 2017 | 08:26 4 You've been buffaloed saskfarmer. Our province can't implement any more federal tax because they've been carbon taxing us here to pay for the oil patch long ago. Don't you see they're giving oil companies the path to charge more for their own carbon tax strategies which will never be implemented or monitored. Another money grab for the ones that bought the sask party off and own and the rest of us will pay for.

I bet the federal tax as stupid as it is would cost us less than this plan.

And bucket is correct why isn't our Sask party making such a big stand as this regarding all those issues for agriculture that bucket has listed? Reply With Quote
Dec 5, 2017 | 08:32 5 And it begs the question obviously the sask party believes carbon is causing global warming right?

If they really had balls they wouldn't charge the federal tax and they wouldn't have been charging theirs either which is essentially what they admitted is that we ve been. Paying a carbon tax for years. Reply With Quote
Dec 5, 2017 | 08:40 6 Our power bills pay for the CCS.... I think we are taxed enough....

All my issues above require government involvement.....no one is even acknowledging them.... Reply With Quote
Dec 5, 2017 | 08:46 7 This is why the sask party needs someone from outside to represent those of us that don't feel we should be paying carbon taxes at all.

The more I look at this. This is more Ndp than the Ndp. Unbelievable!!! Reply With Quote
Dec 5, 2017 | 09:51 8 The good news Nutcase will be gone in Alberta during 2019.

We should have an ally again after that. Reply With Quote
SASKFARMER3's Avatar Dec 5, 2017 | 11:00 9 Yes nutcase should be gone and the provincial NDP has nothing in its tool chest except we’re all doomed they will gut health care and put old people out on the street.

So yes maybe sock boy has some one actually challenging his bullshit instead of falling in it. Reply With Quote
Dec 5, 2017 | 11:23 10 This is from the Current Government of Saskatchewan and clarifies their position on the science and what is causing global climate change.

https://www.saskatchewan.ca/business/environmental-protection-and-sustainability/climate-change-policy

"About climate change

Climate change is a long-term shift in temperature and weather patterns. Since the industrial age, the burning of fossil fuels has resulted in increased concentrations of carbon dioxide, methane and nitrous oxide in our atmosphere. These emissions are some of the greenhouse gases (GHGs) that contribute to increasing global temperatures.

Countries are coming together to recognize that human activity and industry contribute to an increasing concentration of GHGs in the atmosphere and are adopting various strategies to deal with the implications of climate change.

Saskatchewan acknowledges the science-based reality of climate change and joined other provinces and the Government of Canada at the Conference of the Parties on Climate Change (COP 21) in Paris in December 2015. An international agreement involving 195 countries was struck with a plan to limit climate-related increases in temperature to two degrees Celsius through continued GHG reductions. Canada’s stated goal is to reduce GHG emissions by 30 per cent below 2005 levels by 2030." Reply With Quote
Dec 5, 2017 | 11:31 11 They re not challenging anything they're just the ones taxiing us instead of him which means we're going to pay for all the so called environmental changes to those companies that sell all that oil which those costs would have been distributed across the nation but now we pay them all.
Which they won't ever do so it's just a tax we re paying for their debt.

Do they believe in carbon causing global warming or not? Hahahaha Reply With Quote
Dec 5, 2017 | 11:33 12 On the question of whether Saskatchewan's new emissions reduction plan is going to accomplish what they want or whether it will be accepted by the rest of Canada and the federal government I think it is too early to say. Reply With Quote
SASKFARMER3's Avatar Dec 5, 2017 | 14:08 13 Sask NDP

Has a plan

Reply With Quote
Dec 5, 2017 | 17:14 14 Performance standards mentioned in the Sask. plan. I like that.

Here is another performance standard called the Canadian standard of living. Since we are all in this together, we have a target of GHG emissions of 30% below 2005 level by 2030. That level in 2005 was 738 megatonnes emitted equating to a floor of 517 megatonnes by 2030 to meet our world commitment.

Fairness says we should not have to pay through carbon taxes for this first 517 megatonnes. Reply With Quote
Dec 5, 2017 | 19:56 15 Saskatchewan already has a $2billion clean coal carbon tax Reply With Quote
Dec 5, 2017 | 20:36 16 Yes and now there is going to be even more that only we will pay for not distributed across the country. This could be dumber than dumb. Reply With Quote
iceman's Avatar Dec 6, 2017 | 14:04 17 For f#*k sake SF3

The PST being added to crop, hail, life insurance is a greater cost to saskadelusional farmers than the carbon tax is to the albertastan farmers.

You seem to do some math great but when it comes to any involving the sask party it all NEW MATH with you. 2+2=5

Take the rose colour glasses off before you run into a "Wall"

Iceman Out Reply With Quote
Dec 6, 2017 | 14:36 18
Quote Originally Posted by stubblejumper View Post
Saskatchewan already has a $2billion clean coal carbon tax
The point of SaskPower doing that was to keep our coal industry going....and it will be while nutcase is shutting Alberta's down. Reply With Quote
Dec 6, 2017 | 14:45 19 At least sask is doing something about pollution,not that I think co2 is affecting climate but there is nothing wronge with clean technology. What has sock boys carbon tax done other than tax people. Everyone is still driving and using power and heating their homes and buying things made from oil byproducts and our leaders are still travelling the world for no reason other than a nice holiday that which carbon taxes are helping to pay for. So can anyone show some proof of lower co2 levels from a carbon tax. Reply With Quote
iceman's Avatar Dec 6, 2017 | 19:07 20
Quote Originally Posted by Oliver88 View Post
The point of SaskPower doing that was to keep our coal industry going....and it will be while nutcase is shutting Alberta's down.
Typical Bradley fit and finish on a good idea. End up costing billions but hey it's just taxpayer money so it's not like the real stuff.


Iceman Out Reply With Quote
Dec 7, 2017 | 07:08 21 Our taxes have to pay for Walls carbon projects.thus a province made carbon tax Reply With Quote
Dec 7, 2017 | 07:10 22 Reply With Quote
Dec 7, 2017 | 09:41 23 http://www.saskatchewan.ca/government/news-and-media/2017/december/04/climate-change-strategy
"The climate change strategy includes developing and implementing sector-specific output-based performance standards on large emitting facilities, such as those in oil and gas, and mining. These standards will be developed in consultation with industry throughout 2018 and will recognize actions already taken by industry to reduce emissions.

Flexible compliance options for industry will be developed that will include:

Making improvements at facilities to reduce emissions intensity;
Purchasing a carbon offset, representing a reduction in GHG emissions;
Using best performance credits;
Utilizing a market mechanism outlined in the Paris Accord, such as an internationally transferred mitigation outcome; and
Paying into a technology fund.



The offset system will create additional value for actions that result in carbon sequestration or reduced emissions, especially from agricultural soils, wetlands and forests. While agricultural producers will not be covered under any standard, they will benefit from being eligible to participate in the new offset program." Reply With Quote
Dec 7, 2017 | 09:48 24 Saskatchewan is not going to implement an economy wide carbon tax but the above mentioned transfers of carbon credits All require putting a price on carbon emissions for heavy industry. Otherwise how can you use the following mechanisms?

"Purchasing a carbon offset, representing a reduction in GHG emissions;

"Using best performance credits;"Utilizing a market mechanism outlined in the Paris Accord, such as an internationally transferred mitigation outcome;

Paying into a technology fund. Reply With Quote
Dec 7, 2017 | 21:19 25 Are all of the new candidates on board with this? Reply With Quote
Dec 7, 2017 | 22:06 26 Why the hell should we pay to get rid of our carbon, our livelyhood depends on it. Reply With Quote
Dec 7, 2017 | 22:58 27 Exactly we already are broke partly due to rhe sequestration flop.

why would you sequester something you don't believe is harming the environment in the first place? Wacko!! Reply With Quote
farmaholic's Avatar Dec 7, 2017 | 23:01 28
Quote Originally Posted by the big wheel View Post
Exactly we already are broke partly due to rhe sequestration flop.

why would you sequester something you don't believe is harming the environment in the first place? Wacko!!
Sell the technology to other suckers.

Or have someone steal it who has access to it and sell it for gain? Reply With Quote