The CAGC is a trade association representing companies that do seismic work in the Canadian Energy Upstream Oil and Gas Industry - www.cagc.ca
Governments shouldn't count on predictable response to carbon taxes
Written By: Stewart Muir Published: Affordable Energy (www.affordableenergy.ca)
The night before British Columbia’s carbon-dioxide emissions tax was implemented in February 2008, I was surprised to see lineups at gas stations. Some motorists apparently believed that the end of affordable gasoline was nigh and they better fill up, because at midnight they’d start paying an extra 2.5 cents a litre.
The world didn’t end, and over the next year, B.C. recorded a small drop in the amount of gasoline sold for road-transport use. From 1,107 litres a person in 2007, consumption fell by four per cent.
Since this coincided with the 2007-2009 “great” global recession, there has always been some question whether it was carbon pricing or alternatively a reduction in general economic activity, that accounted for the drop. B.C. registered barely any economic growth in 2008. In 2009, its economy shrank.
Ten years later, it’s often claimed that the B.C. carbon tax has brought about a long-term, 10-per-cent decline in fuel consumption. That’s simply not true. In fact, consumption of gasoline and diesel went up — not down — on a per-capita basis from 2008 to 2017. The most striking correlation was how closely the consumption of liquid road fuels (mostly gas and diesel) tracked the ups and downs of the economy.
As Canada prepares to embark on a much broader carbon-pricing adventure, once again we’re locked in a numbers game. Those experts squabbling over who has the most elegant economic model have gotten way ahead of themselves. A most basic question is being overlooked: Will a carbon tax cause fewer hydrocarbons to be combusted or won’t it?
The major overlooked fuel story of recent years has been how consumers reacted to ever-increasing efficiency from technology.
In 2007, before B.C.’s carbon tax came in, the Honda Civic was the country’s most popular new car. In those days, for every sedan or hatchback sold in B.C., one truck or SUV was sold.
Then something unexpected happened.
As the global economy emerged from recession, buyers suddenly wanted more pickup trucks and SUVs. By the summer of 2018, the ratio was 2.7 new SUVs and light trucks for every new car. It’s the same trend across Canada. Today, the Ford F-150 is the country’s most popular “light” vehicle.
The most economical Ford F-150 available in 2007 ran on a 4.2-litre engine that produced 25 per cent more CO2 emissions than the average vehicle. One decade later, Ford’s basic model today has a 2.7-litre engine that’s smaller than the average light vehicle engine and delivers just slightly-below-average GHG performance. Greenhouse gas emissions from consumer vehicles available to B.C. buyers fell 17 per cent in the decade to 2017, in part because engine size generally decreased.
Further innovations meant that a new Toyota Camry for sale last year burned 8.3 per cent less gasoline than a 2007 model with the same sized engine.
It turns out that as more performance (energy) is squeezed from a litre of gasoline, people tend to rationalize the purchase of a bigger vehicles. Whether or not there is a $20, $30 0r $50 a tonne carbon tax to pay — on top of all of the other fuel taxes — seemed not to be much of a consideration over the past decade.
The long-faced carbon experts may wish to treat these trends as a sideshow, but the behaviour of wily consumers under low-dose carbon pricing looks more like the main stage.
Governments can flip a switch on carbon taxes, but will that produce the intended result? It didn’t in B.C. We’ll see what happens elsewhere. But for most families, commuting and home heating are part of daily life, not a luxury.
Meanwhile, any talk of proven measures — more innovation by the Canadian oil and gas sector, improvements to traditional vehicles (now predicted to double today’s fuel economy by 2040), and zero-CO2 nuclear energy — is deemed to be politically dangerous, drawing accusations about having no plan, or worse.
Such is the parlous state of the Canadian energy debate in 2018. We are on track to soon repeat, at a national scale, the lacklustre British Columbia experience of carbon pricing.
— Stewart Muir, founder and executive director of Resource Works, was business editor and deputy managing editor of The Vancouver Sun when British Columbia implemented its carbon tax. He writes for Canadians for Affordable Energy.
Published: The Economist A T 107 METRES , the three carbon-fibre blades of a Haliade-X marine wind turbine are longer than the wingspan of any airliner ever made. The generator which transforms their rotation—over 300km an hour at the tip—into power requires over 100 powerful magnets made of exotic metals and untold lengths of coiled-up copper. The blades, generator and associated gubbins, weighing around 900 tonnes all-in, have to be installed on a pylon so tall that the blade-tips reach almost as high above the waves as the pinnacle of the Transamerica Pyramid rises over the 600 block of San Francisco’s Montgomery Street. In May, President Joe Biden’s administration announced the approval of Vineyard Wind, a wind farm off the coast of Massachusetts which will require GE , an American industrial giant, to supply 60 of these airliner-skyscraper-stick-insect hybrids. With a planned capacity of 800 megawatts ( MW ) Vineyard Wind would on its own increase America’s offshore
By: Brian Wm. Schulte PG and Henry Lyatsky Prelude The interpretation and opinions expressed here are the authors' ideas on related science that interests us and affects us. Some members have quite different interpretations of this science and the editorial committee actively welcomes other articles from other perspectives on this and other interesting topics “We all know that human activities are changing the atmosphere in unexpected and in unprecedented ways.” George H.W. Bush “To be absolutely certain about something, one must know everything or nothing about it.” Henry Kissinger Many feel passionate about climate change, and they may feel that the climate concerns discussed in this paper are either overblown or understated. Some may feel that climate change due to man-made greenhouse gases (GHGs) is not a valid scientific hypothesis at all, while others may think the world is facing an existential and imminent climate catastrophe. We find no scientifi
Executive Summary The world is currently facing simultaneous energy and climate crises. There is considerable scientific consensus that the impacts of a changing climate are having significant human costs as well as adverse impacts on biodiversity. And broad agreement exists that we must put in place strong measures to mitigate and adapt to the effects of climate change. At the same time, some climate policy responses have had significant negative effects on energy security, threatening the global economic recovery from the COVID-19 pandemic and putting out future economic security at risk. Sadly, the pace, logistics, and costs of the transition from fossil fuels to low or zero carbon sources of energy are still hotly debated. This is because reliable and affordable energy is fundamental to our modern economic, political, and social systems, as well as to human well-being, and fossil fuels are still the most reliable and affordable sources of that energy. Energy transitions take