Alberta Politics Thread

[transplant99]

Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch

At the end of the day the next election will be a fight to recind the carbon tax and probably implement a stable PST in its place.

I put as much stock in NDP estimates and math as predictions for an Oilers Stanley Cup.

I think a MASSIVE issue will be the decision to close all coal fired electricity plants as well.

It may be the single dumbest thing she has done yet since it wont make a lick of difference in regards to emissions. The cheap electricity will just be someone elses to use while Albertans pay through the nose. A resource mined and sold by Albertans that we will only allow others to burn. It flies in the face of anything close to common sense.....like most NDP policy.

[CaptainCrunch]

Yeah, I agree Transplant, the coal fired shutdown will end up shadowing the disaster in Ontario in terms of energy costs to the consumers where they've ended up doubling and tripling their utilities bill.

[Mr.Coffee]

Originally Posted by transplant99

I think a MASSIVE issue will be the decision to close all coal fired electricity plants as well.

It may be the single dumbest thing she has done yet since it wont make a lick of difference in regards to emissions. The cheap electricity will just be someone elses to use while Albertans pay through the nose. A resource mined and sold by Albertans that we will only allow others to burn. It flies in the face of anything close to common sense.....like most NDP policy.

I'm not sure I follow what you're talking about, would you mind expanding? I was under the impression natural gas was cleaner burning and based on AECO these days is extremely cheap. I am thinking it's more to prop up the oil and gas industry here?

[Mr.Coffee]

Everybody I talk to, and I mean everybody, thinks the carbon tax revenue going into general revenue is a terrible idea. Not the carbon tax in and of itself, as BC seems to be getting some fame for how it's implemented its' carbon tax which I fully admit I don't understand well enough at all. Some people feel that the carbon tax makes sense, although I personally am not settled on it yet.

I don't understand also though, why the AB government can't just say whoops one quick change to what we've rolled out, we will set aside the carbon tax money for specific, transparent green initiatives (if that's really what it's about). Would anyone be offended by that? I can't see anyone being upset about a slight change in direction there?

[cal_guy]

Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch

I put as much stock in NDP estimates and math as predictions for an Oilers Stanley Cup.

Then don't go out a calculate your own, here's mine.

In 2011 Alberta households consumed an average of 105GJ of natural gas.(The NDP estimate was 135GJ for a couple with 2 children) In 2017 1 GJ of natural gas will have a levy $1.011/GJ and $1.517/GJ from 2018 onwards. So the average Albertan households will pay a levy of $106.16 in 2017 and $159.29 in 2018 for natural gas.

Alberta annual gasoline usage is estimated at about 1667L per person, and households had 2.6 people in 2011 so the average household 4334L per year(NDP estimated 4500L for couple with 2 children) which equals $194.61 in 2017 and 291.69. Combined it's $300.76 in 2017 and $450.98 in 2018.(NDP's estimates are $338 and $508)

Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch

Yeah, I agree Transplant, the coal fired shutdown will end up shadowing the disaster in Ontario in terms of energy costs to the consumers where they've ended up doubling and tripling their utilities bill.

Nearly all of our coal plant were already slated for decommissioning over the next decade due to federal legislation. Those plants have very poor pollution controls.

[Ironhorse]

Originally Posted by IliketoPuck

And that is the risk you take for working in an industry that has higher economic risks and rewards.

Originally Posted by IliketoPuck

At the risk of this devolving into "teacher's need to take a pay cut" or "teacher's work REALLY hard" thread version 5.0, (at which point I will stop participating, as the direction of the discussion is inevitable)

And that is the risk you take for working in an industry that is know for its union containing some naive, out of touch, and sometimes incompetent individuals.

[Bend it like Bourgeois]

Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch

At the end of the day the next election will be a fight to recind the carbon tax and probably implement a stable PST in its place.

I put as much stock in NDP estimates and math as predictions for an Oilers Stanley Cup.

Eh the carbon tax isn't going anywhere I don't think. At best someone will campaign to make it revenue neutral and throw in a few offsets. And we'll still get a PST.

The Topp and Notley plan is to pre-spend so much money that future tax hikes are impossible to avoid. It's clever politics really. We'll have 100b in debt, 60b in spending, and a 10-15b spending gap. Their opponents will be forced to campaign on tax hikes and deficits, because they've widened the gap so far that no amount of spending cuts can ever make it up.

[Slava]

Originally Posted by cal_guy

The rebates are a means-testing program so it piggybacks off the income tax system, so implementation costs of the rebates will be tiny.

yeah I don't doubt that part, but there is still a cost to collect the tax and administer that system right? I mean I suppose you could consider that as not being a cost to issue the cheques for the income redistribution side of things, but its certainly a cost of the program no matter how you want to break it down.

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally Posted by cal_guy

Then don't go out a calculate your own, here's mine.

In 2011 Alberta households consumed an average of 105GJ of natural gas.(The NDP estimate was 135GJ for a couple with 2 children) In 2017 1 GJ of natural gas will have a levy $1.011/GJ and $1.517/GJ from 2018 onwards. So the average Albertan households will pay a levy of $106.16 in 2017 and $159.29 in 2018 for natural gas.

Alberta annual gasoline usage is estimated at about 1667L per person, and households had 2.6 people in 2011 so the average household 4334L per year(NDP estimated 4500L for couple with 2 children) which equals $194.61 in 2017 and 291.69. Combined it's $300.76 in 2017 and $450.98 in 2018.(NDP's estimates are $338 and $508)



Nearly all of our coal plant were already slated for decommissioning over the next decade due to federal legislation. Those plants have very poor pollution controls.

Ok but what about the other cost effects that are going to hit people. This is generally going to effect consumer prices, anything that needs gas or transport or utilities is going to increase as well.

I'm curious to the source of your numbers as well, just as a single person with a pretty environmentally friendly car, and not driving a ton (Work and back which is probably about 30 kms a day, and some other add ons, I'm probably consuming about 2100 litres of gas in a year. (roughly 40 litres in a week x 52 which is 2080, its probably a bit less then that on reflection, but its still probably 1800 litres of gas for a single person without kids.

[Fuzz]

Originally Posted by cal_guy

Then don't go out a calculate your own, here's mine.

In 2011 Alberta households consumed an average of 105GJ of natural gas.(The NDP estimate was 135GJ for a couple with 2 children) In 2017 1 GJ of natural gas will have a levy $1.011/GJ and $1.517/GJ from 2018 onwards. So the average Albertan households will pay a levy of $106.16 in 2017 and $159.29 in 2018 for natural gas.

Alberta annual gasoline usage is estimated at about 1667L per person, and households had 2.6 people in 2011 so the average household 4334L per year(NDP estimated 4500L for couple with 2 children) which equals $194.61 in 2017 and 291.69. Combined it's $300.76 in 2017 and $450.98 in 2018.(NDP's estimates are $338 and $508)



Nearly all of our coal plant were already slated for decommissioning over the next decade due to federal legislation. Those plants have very poor pollution controls.

You are forgetting increased electricity costs. Most comes from fossil fuels that will also be taxed.

[chemgear]

^ Of course. People don't think that it's "just" going to be natural gas and gasoline that they use directly. Please tell me that nobody is that naive.

[LanceUppercut]

Originally Posted by chemgear

^ Of course. People don't think that it's "just" going to be natural gas and gasoline that they use directly. Please tell me that nobody is that naive.

Lots of people are. They are the ones who elected this ####show of a government.

[cal_guy]

Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch

Ok but what about the other cost effects that are going to hit people. This is generally going to effect consumer prices, anything that needs gas or transport or utilities is going to increase as well.

I'm curious to the source of your numbers as well, just as a single person with a pretty environmentally friendly car, and not driving a ton (Work and back which is probably about 30 kms a day, and some other add ons, I'm probably consuming about 2100 litres of gas in a year. (roughly 40 litres in a week x 52 which is 2080, its probably a bit less then that on reflection, but its still probably 1800 litres of gas for a single person without kids.

2011 Household and the environment: Energy Use
http://www.statcan.gc.ca/access_acce...013002-eng.pdf

Fuel use relative to population
http://www.transportation.alberta.ca...n/Fuel-Use.pdf

Originally Posted by chemgear

^ Of course. People don't think that it's "just" going to be natural gas and gasoline that they use directly. Please tell me that nobody is that naive.

The climate report advocated giving electricity generators and output based credit on a as-good-as-best gas basis. So a advanced combined cycle natural gas power plant would end up paying no net carbon tax, a biomass or wind power would end up getting money back, while coal plants would end up paying. A rough back of the envelope calculation an Alberta household would pay about $110 for 17GJ of coal power and $33 for 11GJ of natural gas if there are not allocation credits.

[Bend it like Bourgeois]

Originally Posted by cal_guy

The climate report advocated giving electricity generators and output based credit on a as-good-as-best gas basis. So a advanced combined cycle natural gas power plant would end up paying no net carbon tax, a biomass or wind power would end up getting money back, while coal plants would end up paying. A rough back of the envelope calculation an Alberta household would pay about $110 for 17GJ of coal power and $33 for 11GJ of natural gas if there are not allocation credits.

Honest question, so how does that impact a typical household bill? Generation is fixed and regulated, so whatever the total cost is will be divided up and added to all our bills I am guessing. Maybe $100 a house?

[Resolute 14]

Originally Posted by Mr.Coffee

Everybody I talk to, and I mean everybody, thinks the carbon tax revenue going into general revenue is a terrible idea. Not the carbon tax in and of itself, as BC seems to be getting some fame for how it's implemented its' carbon tax which I fully admit I don't understand well enough at all. Some people feel that the carbon tax makes sense, although I personally am not settled on it yet.

I don't understand also though, why the AB government can't just say whoops one quick change to what we've rolled out, we will set aside the carbon tax money for specific, transparent green initiatives (if that's really what it's about). Would anyone be offended by that? I can't see anyone being upset about a slight change in direction there?

Because if Notley has shown one thing, it is that she is obstinate as all hell. She would have to be pressured into it (a la being forced to fill in many of the blanks in Bill 6 that she previously expected us to simply trust her on), but the carbon sales tax represents a catch-22 for its opponents. Anyone who is against it full stop can't really argue in favour of forcing Notley into making it revenue neutral because doing so would be a tacit admisson that the tax itself is going to stay. So she'll never end up taking enough heat on it to do it right.

[puckedoff]

Originally Posted by Mr.Coffee

I don't understand also though, why the AB government can't just say whoops one quick change to what we've rolled out, we will set aside the carbon tax money for specific, transparent green initiatives (if that's really what it's about).

They can't make it revenue neutral due to the $6bn... $10bn?!... $12bn!?... deficit we are in. While a true carbon tax would be revenue neutral, if you make your tax grab neutral it is no longer a tax grab.

Originally Posted by Resolute 14

Because if Notley has shown one thing, it is that she is obstinate as all hell. She would have to be pressured into it (a la being forced to fill in many of the blanks in Bill 6 that she previously expected us to simply trust her on).

I disagree, Notley and the NDP were dead set on increasing royalties but once they took a better look at it and got the facts they changed their minds and made the right call. I do agree it is tougher to change course on their carbon tax though.

[northcrunk]

Has this bill been released somewhere online so we can read? I'm hearing there is sections in the legislation dealing with incarceration for non-compliance and the government giving themselves the power to inspect anywhere that uses fuel (other than a dwelling, they would need a warrant) including garages at their own discretion without a warrant. If this is true Locke's signature called it, they really are communists.

[troutman]

nm

[Slava]

Originally Posted by northcrunk

Has this bill been released somewhere online so we can read? I'm hearing there is sections in the legislation dealing with incarceration for non-compliance and the government giving themselves the power to inspect anywhere that uses fuel (other than a dwelling, they would need a warrant) including garages at their own discretion without a warrant. If this is true Locke's signature called it, they really are communists.

Come on. I don't love the legislation,, but that's just fear-mongering. There are enough legitimate questions about the plan, nevermind the police-state accusations.

[llwhiteoutll]

Just wait until the part where O&G companies are taxed on NG used at their facilities. That will be passed right on to the consumer.

I dont think people realize this tax will drive up the price of everything from a Tim Hortons coffee to a car and any service from a business, not just their personal utilities.

Also, their income cut off for rebates is a bit low. Seriously doubt that 60%+ will see a rebate at the current level.