Where are our farm groups?

[burnt]

The issue is, what will the carbon tax of $50/tonne actually achieve.................
Ontario is experiencing increases in their power generation costs after "going green". (Maybe Burnt can fill us in?)............. .

Clipped to save space cuz it seemed like the green thing to do, LOL! Your entire post was excellent.

Kinda tough to find info about generation costs, but they have jumped sharply as a result of the switch to "renewables".

The new Natural gas generating plants are super clean and expensive, making them look expensive compared to renewables.

HOWEVER, when we factor in that a big part of these costs are a result of needing extra, baseload capacity to offset the unreliability of renewables, then it balances out and makes the renewables look very costly and basically useless since they contribute such a small percentage of our demand.

In fact, to try to justify renewables takes such a huge leap that those who promote it must either be benefiting financially, or be so abjectly stupid. Useful idiots, Stalin called them.

Here's the litmus test - if anyone think renewables are such a great idea, are they using them as their sole electricity source? If not, why not?

If answer includes "cost", then I ask why they would expect me to pay for something that they say is unaffordable for themselves?

The chart linked below gives the staggering figures about Ontario's electricity rates:


[URL="http://www.ontario-hydro.com/historical-rpp-rates"]http://www.ontario-hydro.com/historical-rpp-rates[/URL]

The rise in costs has far outdistanced the projections from just 3 years ago - the 1st news link below from 2013 tells us to expect a 42% increase in our bills, but the 2nd link, from 2016, tells us that the increase was actually 72%.

[URL="http://www.torontosun.com/2013/12/02/ontario-hydro-rates-to-rise-42-in-5-years"]http://www.torontosun.com/2013/12/02/ontario-hydro-rates-to-rise-42-in-5-years[/URL]

[URL="http://www.torontosun.com/2016/02/29/ontario-electricity-rates-fastest-rising-in-north-america"]http://www.torontosun.com/2016/02/29/ontario-electricity-rates-fastest-rising-in-north-america[/URL]

Finally, this:

[URL="https://www.youtube.com/embed/BC1l4geSTP8"]https://www.youtube.com/embed/BC1l4geSTP8[/URL]

[malleefarmer]

Carbon tax dead in water. Electricity were second most expensive in world we have huge deposits of uranium which with modern safe methods can make cheapest but no govt here will touch it my belief Canada has a lot of uranium and same issue

[blackpowder]

It is obvious we are doomed to repeat.

[Oliver88]

Thanks for the information Burnt.
Australia at least learned a lesson and did axe the tax while Ontario is after more financial pain and misery.

It's crazy that the initial goal of the Green's in Australia was to have a reduction of carbon molecules from 1:5,700,000 to 1:6,000,000.

The billions in a tax recycling scheme to accomplish......nothing but more government bureaucrats.

[Braveheart]

Burnt, isn't part of the problem with ON hydro rates the incorrect proportioning between rural and urban? Without some subsidization from urban, rural rates have skyrocketed leaving many rural residents struggling with their accounts, correct or no?

[Braveheart]

So, if you are a group that calls yourself a farm group and you don't oppose a carbon tax, should you continue to all yourself a farm group? A carbon tax will hurt agriculture, no doubt. All the he exemptions in the world won't make up for the economic chaos about to be unleashed.

We transport everything. Transportation costs will rise. We burn fuel to produce our products, and we're already running engines that have never worked as well as pre tier whatever/EGR bs. We heat barns for some livestock classes, power milking machines and feed mills. While there may be rebates or exemptions for these operations, the administration for said exemptions will only add more cost to a by now crippled economy.

Re financing a shift to renewables, how far in the future is N fixing wheat? Renewable plant nutrition used to be manure, green or otherwise. The problem is, it takes a lot of energy to plow down green manure, or spread the other kind. Renewable talk is Suzuki speak for screw over the corporate world.

I could go on but the point is if you're a farm group, stick up for farmers. Is there climate change, shifting poles, or a Castro in Ottawa? Maybe yes to all, maybe no to all and it doesn't matter in the context of defending farmers against a tax burden whose implications we can't begin to quantify.

Where are the farm groups? The answer my friend, is blowin in the wind . . . tower. Unless you truly are a farm group.

[Hamloc]

Burnt, thank you very much for your info from someone who has actually lived through and is living with the result of ideologically driven green energy. I find it amusing but also shocking that Canadians believe the same man who made life so unaffordable in Ontario, that being Gerald Butts, will get a different result in the rest of Canada with the same policies. The only political leader in Canada coming to our defence is Premier Brad Wall!

[grassfarmer]

So, if you are a group that calls yourself a farm group and you don't oppose a carbon tax, should you continue to all yourself a farm group?

Substitute "climate change" for carbon tax and the same applies. Climate change is a greater risk to agriculture than a carbon tax, time to get your heads out of the sand and face reality.

[Braveheart]

If you're a farm group, you can't definitively say for sure that climate change will affect agriculture. For sure you can't have any effect on the worlds big emitters in India and China. But, as a farm group you know, for a fact, that the carbon tax will affect farm economics negatively. As a farm group you represent those farmers to the end, never surrendering.

They're not climate groups. They're farm groups. They must fight the tax.

Re climate change threatening agriculture, we'll do what we've always done, and that's adapt. Some will fail and some that can adapt will prosper. That's the nature of the business. Every time the government involves itself in saving us from ourselves, we usually end up with the opposite of the intended effect.

[tweety]

Wait till they ban fertilizer. then we will understand hurt in agriculture when food is imported from the highly subsidized US.

[mustardman]

Wait till they ban fertilizer. then we will understand hurt in agriculture when food is imported from the highly subsidized US.

They mite Not Ban fertilizer but they would probably BAN you from Broadcasting it out anytime of year as when it converts to NH3 its 310 times worse greenhouse than C02

[farmaholic]

****in nuts..... broadcasting fertilizer, Oh but use the stable smart stuff, at what cost? I thought we moved away from that practice. They're selling "floaters" again. Full circle.

More passes....equals???

[Guest]

****in nuts..... broadcasting fertilizer, Oh but use the stable smart stuff, at what cost? I thought we moved away from that practice. They're selling "floaters" again. Full circle.

More passes....equals???

well , lots of it's done here , nh3 in the fall that is, so that the ground will dry out in the spring . just not this fall

[mustardman]

well , lots of it's done here , nh3 in the fall that is, so that the ground will dry out in the spring . just not this fall

Your Putting IT IN the ground ,big difference. Lots of guys here are now laying it on Top with floaters....
Frickin ridiculous as you can Lose so much in volatilization

[stonepicker]

They mite Not Ban fertilizer but they would probably BAN you from Broadcasting it out anytime of year as when it converts to NH3 its 310 times worse greenhouse than C02

The atmosphere is 78% nitrogen, nh3 is 82% nitrogen, but it's 310 times worse than co2 as a greenhouse gas? That's amazing! Amazing bullshit me thinks.