Metals mines association, accounting for most federal enviro assessments, OK with Bil

[Hamloc]

Taxes are used to pay for education, healthcare, infrastructure, roads, a justice system, social programs, OAS, GIS, the military, subsidies to agriculture............ the list is long.

Just because you don't believe there is climate change, or that carbon dioxide is a pollutant in excess if it changes the climate, doesn't make a carbon tax any different than all the other taxes you and I pay. It's one tool to fight climate change. Energy already has numerous taxes applied.

Scheer, Moe, and Kenney want to use regulations to reduce carbon emmisions (another form of tax) which also have costs that consumers and business will pay for.

Scheer, Moe, and Kenney want to do as little as possible and let taxpayers pay for the all the damage from climate change and the cost of mitigation.

Their goal is to protect the interests of the oil industry and socialize the costs of climate change. In effect privatize the profit and socialize the harmful effects!

Many people want all the benefits and protection of living in a developed country but don't want to pay for it. They are wannabe free riders.

So Chuck2 you apparently have a problem with reading comprehension. So 20% of C02 emission reductions are going to come from the carbon tax under the Liberal plan according to the environment minister, where do you think the other 80% is coming from? Very simple, regulation! So really whether you look at the Liberal or Conservative plan it will come down to regulation except I believe the Conservative plan includes tax incentives for implementing or creating so called green technology which sounds like a good idea to me. The Liberal's prefer giving money to their buddies like the Weston's! While I realize it is pointless to try and bring common sense into this discussion, at least I tried. Enjoy your day.

[AlbertaFarmer5]

Chuck, has it occurred to you that there would be a lot less orphaned and abandoned wells if the companies that owned them didn't keep going bankrupt because we have no pipelines or infrastructure, and we keep adding layers and layers of regulations and bureaucracy on them while they are down?

[samhill]

Taxes are used to pay for education, healthcare, infrastructure, roads, a justice system, social programs, OAS, GIS, the military, subsidies to agriculture............ the list is long.

Chuck, carbon tax is used for 300 million to the Clinton foundation or x million to indigenous peoples or
X million or billion to the United Nations.

You kid your friends and I’ll kid mine, let’s not kid each other.

[AlbertaFarmer5]

Could you possibly post some examples of how successfully the rest of the world is weaning itself off of oil or fossil fuels and leaving us behind? The only place I have seen it happening is in the imagination of some very out of touch politicians making absurd promises for dates far exceeding their tenure.

Your silence speaks volumes.

[chuckChuck]

You guys need to face the fact that the oil industry wants to do as little as possible to fight climate change or clean up the environmental damage they cause because it is bad for their bottom line. Everything they don't have to do is more profit. So they fight every measure to force them to cleanup big or small.

The oil industry made a lot of money during the boom and did not clean up any more of its mess during the high prices.

Just ask many Alberta and Saskatchewan land owners who are forced to accept the oil industries intrusion onto their private property how interested the oil industry is in listening to landowner concerns about H2S, gas flaring, water well contamination, soil degradation, salt water and oil spills.

Some of the oil companies are doing a better job on these issues but some are awful bullies who don't care and won't fix the basic problems.

The oil industries problems stem from lower world prices and a drop in demand from the US. Both issues are beyond the control of the Federal or Provincial governments. The bottleneck in transportation is making the problem worse. But a lot of oil is still being produced and getting to market. Maybe the industry should try to match supply with demand and infrastructure capacity?

Enbridge line 3 - 760K BPD replacement is being held up by Minnesota permits not Canadian issues.
Trudeau just approved Transmountain. The tanker ban is for northern BC coast not the southern coast. Trudeau is at risk because he is trying to support the oil industry while at the same time appeal to those who are worried about climate change. Scheer will have to do the same. Scheer believes in the science of human caused climate change as well. So that issue is not going away regardless of what you think.

Progress is slow on pipelines, but until the oil industry accepts that climate change is serious and real and starts investing in cleaner production and alternatives, the oil industry is going to get a rough ride.

The market for oil is going to start declining at some point as the whole world is going to transition to lower carbon future. Harper saw it coming by 2100. We will still have fossil energy during the transition to cleaner energy sources. Its not one or the other during the transition, its all forms of energy and the massive number of jobs that are created as we transition.

Alot of what comes from Moe and Kenney is just overheated political rhetoric in advance of the Federal election. Voters in Quebec and Ontario have very different concerns and don't really care about the oil industry and are more worried about flooding, climate change and their own industries and jobs.

Doug Ford is very unpopular in just over a year in power. He will likely not survive the next election and may drag Scheer down with him. So Moe and Kenney better be prepared to work with who ever is Prime Minister.

[AlbertaFarmer5]

You guys need to face the fact that the oil industry wants to do as little as possible to fight climate change or clean up the environmental damage they cause because it is bad for their bottom line. Everything they don't have to do is more profit. So they fight every measure to force them to cleanup big or small.

The oil industry made a lot of money during the boom and did not clean up any more of its mess during the high prices.

Just ask many Alberta and Saskatchewan land owners who are forced to accept the oil industries intrusion onto their private property how interested the oil industry is in listening to landowner concerns about H2S, gas flaring, water well contamination, soil degradation, salt water and oil spills.

Some of the oil companies are doing a better job on these issues but some are awful bullies who don't care and won't fix the basic problems.

The oil industries problems stem from lower world prices and a drop in demand from the US. Both issues are beyond the control of the Federal or Provincial governments. The bottleneck in transportation is making the problem worse. But a lot of oil is still being produced and getting to market. Maybe the industry should try to match supply with demand and infrastructure capacity?

Enbridge line 3 - 760K BPD replacement is being held up by Minnesota permits not Canadian issues.
Trudeau just approved Transmountain. The tanker ban is for northern BC coast not the southern coast. Trudeau is at risk because he is trying to support the oil industry while at the same time appeal to those who are worried about climate change. Scheer will have to do the same. Scheer believes in the science of human caused climate change as well. So that issue is not going away regardless of what you think.

Progress is slow on pipelines, but until the oil industry accepts that climate change is serious and real and starts investing in cleaner production and alternatives, the oil industry is going to get a rough ride.

The market for oil is going to start declining at some point as the whole world is going to transition to lower carbon future. Harper saw it coming by 2100. We will still have fossil energy during the transition to cleaner energy sources. Its not one or the other during the transition, its all forms of energy and the massive number of jobs that are created as we transition.

Alot of what comes from Moe and Kenney is just overheated political rhetoric in advance of the Federal election. Voters in Quebec and Ontario have very different concerns and don't really care about the oil industry. Doug Ford is very unpopular in just over a year in power. He will likely not survive the next election and may drag Scheer down with him.

It is obvious you have come to your opinions without ever having dealt with an oil company or been involved with any of the concerns you brought up. There is no point in discussing this any further with someone as ignorant as yourself.

[tweety]

Chuck Chuck, very simple question. How has the carbon tax so far improved the environment? For example, on my farm i still use the same energy, still run the dryer, still run the grain vac and burn exactly the same amount of fossil fuels.

Scheers proposal of scrapping the carbon tax and forcing large polluters to incorporate technology to reduce emissions seems like something that would make a difference - reducing pollution.

If for example all of our farms were considered heavy polluters and required us to reduce emissions by say 15%, or have a limit per bushel of grain production, wouldn't that spur innovation and actually reduce emissions?

Carbon tax is like a 100$ speeding ticket to a millionaire. Pointless. But take away his license, now he'll slow down.

[chuckChuck]

It is obvious you have come to your opinions without ever having dealt with an oil company or been involved with any of the concerns you brought up. There is no point in discussing this any further with someone as ignorant as yourself.

Like most of your speculation you are wrong.

I deal with oil wells and facilities on rented and owned land 365 days a year.

Many of my friends and neighbors work in the oil patch and some of those have or are installing solar systems. They are all a bunch of socialist, environmentalists climate change activists I guess. LOL

Tell us about your vast experience in dealing with oil companies?

[chuckChuck]

Chuck Chuck, very simple question. How has the carbon tax so far improved the environment? For example, on my farm i still use the same energy, still run the dryer, still run the grain vac and burn exactly the same amount of fossil fuels.

Scheers proposal of scrapping the carbon tax and forcing large polluters to incorporate technology to reduce emissions seems like something that would make a difference - reducing pollution.

If for example all of our farms were considered heavy polluters and required us to reduce emissions by say 15%, or have a limit per bushel of grain production, wouldn't that spur innovation and actually reduce emissions?

Carbon tax is like a 100$ speeding ticket to a millionaire. Pointless. But take away his license, now he'll slow down.

Its pretty simple. When prices go up consumption goes down. If you want to test the theory look at what happened when gas prices hit 1.50 per litre in 2008. People were not buying gas guzzling pickup trucks to buy their groceries.

In reality we will need both carbon taxes and regulations. Preston Manning favours carbon taxes because it leaves more choice in the hands of consumers and the marketplace to decide how they will reduce emissions. Ironically it seems like current Conservatives favour more regulations and government intervention and red tape.

Agriculture is exempt from carbon taxes on fuel. Fertilizer will fall under a different program to reduce emissions.

Incentives to innovate would be a better approach in agriculture. Payments for best practices would work.

But the elephant in the room is nitrous oxide. One tonne of nitrous oxide is equivalent to 298 tonnes of carbon dioxide.

So look for programs, practices, and regulations to reduce nitrous oxide in the future.

[tweety]

Its pretty simple. When prices go up consumption goes down. If you want to test the theory look at what happened when gas prices hit 1.50 per litre in 2008. People were not buying gas guzzling pickup trucks to buy their groceries.

In reality we will need both carbon taxes and regulations. Preston Manning favours carbon taxes because it leaves more choice in the hands of consumers and the marketplace to decide how they will reduce emissions. Ironically it seems like current Conservatives favour more regulations and government intervention and red tape.

Agriculture is exempt from carbon taxes on fuel. Fertilizer will fall under a different program to reduce emissions.

Incentives to innovate would be a better approach in agriculture. Payments for best practices would work.

But the elephant in the room is nitrous oxide. One tonne of nitrous oxide is equivalent to 298 tonnes of carbon dioxide.

So look for programs, practices, and regulations to reduce nitrous oxide in the future.

You don't need tax, you need reductions. For a farm, or any business, those reductions will not come from tax. Obviously the current tax has done nothing, but everyone knew that all along including yourself. Reduction isn't the goal, more government income has been the goal all along.

[chuckChuck]

BC has had a long term carbon tax and they have used it to reduce other forms of taxation and now have some of the lowest income tax rates in the country and a strong economy.

The federal program returns most of the carbon tax in a tax credits.

If you reduce carbon emissions then you will pay less tax and still get the credit.

The current carbon tax will have a relatively small impact on most farmers unless they start taxing nitrous oxide.

Becoming more efficient and using less fossil energy is the way of the future. Industries that don't change or won't change will be left behind.

The holistic resource management folks have always asked why cattle ranchers needed to use a bale processor and burn a lot of diesel to feed cows when the cows could feed themselves with controlled bale grazing in many areas? You still see a lot of bale processors running all winter long. Maybe there is s good reason but maybe not. I don't know.

[AlbertaFarmer5]

Becoming more efficient and using less fossil energy is the way of the future. Industries that don't change or won't change will be left behind.

Do you mind telling us how an Aluminum smelter, or steel plant is going to cut its energy usage, to give two examples. But they still have to compete with producers from other jurisdictions who don't punish industries with carbon taxes. And we won't suddenly quit using steel and aluminum, so we will import cheaper products from countries who weren't dumb enough to join the cult. Have a bunch more unemployed citizens, and the lost tax base that goes with them and the industry, and the net effect on carbon will be zero.

[AlbertaFarmer5]

Like most of your speculation you are wrong.

I deal with oil wells and facilities on rented and owned land 365 days a year.

Many of my friends and neighbors work in the oil patch and some of those have or are installing solar systems. They are all a bunch of socialist, environmentalists climate change activists I guess. LOL

Tell us about your vast experience in dealing with oil companies?

OK, I'll respond once more. Since you are having that much trouble with H2S releases, oil spills, contamination, etc. I highly recommend you call the relevant energy regulator. Not sure which province you claim your imaginary farm is in, but if it is Alberta, then call the AER, if it is a national pipeline, call the NEB, and explain the transgressions. Those fine folks have a very poor sense of humour about such matters and since they have nothing better to do since thanks to the policies of your government there is no new activity going on, so they are well overstaffed and underworked, they will have a large team of white hard hats on your farm to inspect the damages before you even get off the phone. When they inspect the unreported oil spills, H2S leaks etc. the fines, penalties and clean up costs are sure to bankrupt whatever energy company or contractor was negligent enough to have not reported it and completed all prescribed remediation procedures in the first place. Keep in mind that after you have successfully bankrupted them, the surface lease cheques will cease to come in( but being a good hypocrite, I'm sure you have been refusing to cash them all along anyways). And you will be stuck with some orphan wells of your own, so you can learn first hand about that procedure as well.

Please let us know what the results are. If you could share some relevant details, such as location, the energy company, and the nature of the issue, we could likely help you out as well. Seriously, this type of activity is giving the entire industry a bad name, and needs to be addressed. I've never met a company brazen enough to think they could get away with that, but there is a first time for everything.

[AlbertaFarmer5]

OK, I'll respond once more. Since you are having that much trouble with H2S releases, oil spills, contamination, etc. I highly recommend you call the relevant energy regulator. Not sure which province you claim your imaginary farm is in, but if it is Alberta, then call the AER, if it is a national pipeline, call the NEB, and explain the transgressions. Those fine folks have a very poor sense of humour about such matters and since they have nothing better to do since thanks to the policies of your government there is no new activity going on, so they are well overstaffed and underworked, they will have a large team of white hard hats on your farm to inspect the damages before you even get off the phone. When they inspect the unreported oil spills, H2S leaks etc. the fines, penalties and clean up costs are sure to bankrupt whatever energy company or contractor was negligent enough to have not reported it and completed all prescribed remediation procedures in the first place. Keep in mind that after you have successfully bankrupted them, the surface lease cheques will cease to come in( but being a good hypocrite, I'm sure you have been refusing to cash them all along anyways). And you will be stuck with some orphan wells of your own, so you can learn first hand about that procedure as well.

Please let us know what the results are. If you could share some relevant details, such as location, the energy company, and the nature of the issue, we could likely help you out as well. Seriously, this type of activity is giving the entire industry a bad name, and needs to be addressed. I've never met a company brazen enough to think they could get away with that, but there is a first time for everything.

I didn't hear back from you on this very serious issue, just checking to see what you learned when you reported all of the transgressions you were listing?

[chuckChuck]

To busy to go in to detail.

Saskatchewan has lots of issues. I don't know as much about Alberta but in both provinces there have been media reports over the years about problems landowners and residents have had with flaring, H2S, facility leaks. Sickness, cattle deaths, worker deaths

The biggest issue is all the abandoned, orphaned and suspended wells. Who is going to clean them up?

The surface casing runs through aquifers that provide water to many towns and farms. What happens if the surface casing corrodes and leaks saltwater and hydrocarbons into a freshwater aquifer? Nobody will be able to clean that up.

Take a look at NOAA's satellite image of the night time sky tonight in western North Dakota. There are hundreds of gas flares lighting of the sky that make it look like a very populated area. That is an incredible amount of air pollution and a wasted resource. It is still happening across the oilfields of western Canada as well.

https://www.star.nesdis.noaa.gov/GOES/conus.php?sat=G16