It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
originally posted by: fernalley
a reply to: Phage
We have a new socialist NDP government. The rebate is based on your prior years income. Low income get full rebate. OIL has gone up as OPEC is cutting production So we pay more at pumps and carbon taxPart of the carbon tax (levy)is to obtain social license as we host the notorious oil sands. We had the honor of hosting Jane Fonda today to do her Greenpeace thing as well earlier that other actor Leonardo who accused our chinook winds as proof of Climate Change. Tides foundation is pretty active here too.
Armed with an iPhone to record the event, Picard asked the 79-year-old actress and activist if she was aware that First Nations businesses in the region have invested many millions of their own dollars in the oilsands.
But Picard was quickly shut down by people travelling with Fonda, who said they did not have time to address his questions.
originally posted by: Phage
The law of supply and demand implies that increased costs decrease demand so yes, the tax may reduce emissions. Will it? I dunno.
What is Alberta going to do with the revenue?
Were you informed of the 90,000 square kilometres of protected boreal forest in Alberta, or the fact that in the last 40 years, less than 0.02% of Canada’s boreal forest has been disturbed by oil sands mining, or that our oil sands count for a shade over one tenth of one percent of global greenhouse gas emissions?
By the way – how much forest is protected in Los Angeles?
You urged Alberta to embrace renewable energy. We agree. Developing renewables is one of the best ways to reduce our environmental footprint. Just FYI, though, the companies who run those mines you flew over? They're the ones actually building renewable energy.
Suncor, the single largest synthetic crude oil producer in Alberta’s oil sands, operates five wind farms in Canada - with plans to build two more - generating a total of nearly 200 megawatts.
Enbridge, a pipeline company and proponent for the Line 3 project, just invested $200 million in a 103 megawatt wind farm. The company is now invested in nearly 2,200 megawatts of renewable power generation, enough to supply electricity to about 700,000 Canadian homes.
A “progressive” tax is one where the wealthier you are the higher percentage of tax you pay. On the other hand, I’ve said before that a tax on energy, the so-called “carbon tax”, is one of the most regressive taxes available. It is the reverse of progressive, it hits the poor the hardest. This is because poor people spend a larger percentage of their income on energy than do rich people.
originally posted by: snowspirit
Just got the gas bill. Can't upload pics with iPad, but (approximated):
$32 - operating charges
21 - transport rate
17 - carbon levy
6 - gst (goods and services tax)
64 - gas used
$64 in gas used, $76 in other charges 🙄
originally posted by: D8Tee
a reply to: Nickn3
Early consensus is No.... Surely someone must think it's a good idea?
originally posted by: infolurker
a reply to: D8Tee
You have hit the nail on the head..... The whole reason for the "climate change" push is to implement the "Carbon Credit Trading Scam".
Everyone get's to pay so that middleman traders get rich (and those fueling the system).
It is THE SOLUTION just waiting for a problem to implement.
But no. It is a scam and anyone paying attention knows it.