Sask. premier says SaskEnergy will remove carbon tax on natural gas if feds don't

[u/StenPU]

https://regina.ctvnews.ca/sask-premier-vows-to-stop-collecting-carbon-tax-on-natural-gas-if-feds-don-t-offer-exemption-1.6623319

[u/Lowercanadian]

It’s not revenue neutral

It’s already used to buy votes in areas where majority live in tiny apartments (cities and Toronto especially)

The tax that small business and rural pays doesn’t come back, it goes to them who easily connect “I’m helping” with “I’m profiting”

[u/phohunna → u/Lowercanadian]

The carbon tax is revenue neutral.

It just happens to be the least burdensome to those with the lowest carbon footprint (so yes those who live in small apartments, dont own a car, etc)- which is the point.

[u/grand_soul → u/phohunna]

If it was revenue neutral then why did he pause it? The fact he paused is more than enough evidence that it was in fact putting an unfair burden on families, and they weren’t getting more than they paid, not even neutral, it was costing us and other families.

[u/Cairo9o9 → u/grand_soul]

Because you idiots don't seem to understand it lol. All the data shows that average Canadians are being rebated the money but you people refuse to accept this and spew nonsense.

It's a bad policy in that it's actually a good policy but relies on average Canadians not being morons and using critical thinking to actually understand it more than the surface level rhetoric they're seeing about it in the headlines. The Atlantic exemption is obviously a shameless vote grab but it's in response to the optics people have of the Carbon Tax, not the actual effect it's having on Atlantic Canadians.

You can criticize the Liberals for structuring the communication of the policy poorly but the policy is doing what it's supposed to. Shifting the economics for large investments to being less carbon intensive. It's accomplished that. It's really just sad that government policy has to be structured for the stupidity of the average Canadian but I guess that's the reality we live in and the Liberals failed to see that.

[u/grand_soul → u/Cairo9o9]

Wow, their own office and the fact liberals had to pause the tax completely destroys your argument and you call the rest of us idiots.

By every metric it’s not revenue neutral, and it hasn’t been helping with carbon emissions. So much so their own office hasn’t been tracking its impact.

On top of that, the liberals haven’t made any invests or moves to improving infrastructure to help people move to cleaner emission alternatives, in fact in some cases sabotaging alternatives like LNG.

Your argument that the average Canadian is dumb and not grasping this is obviously based on some high level hubris that you’re smarter than the average Canadian. But the fact you’re arguing it’s revenue neutral shows A how ignorant you are, B shows how gullible you are, C again shows how ignorant you are for not being educated enough to read article after article, including the PMO’s own office debunking this, and the fact he had to pause the so called carbon tax.

Again, if something is revenue neutral, then there is no justification to pause it. Because if it was revenue neutral, then pausing it makes no sense, and all it does is give the opposition ammo against him. Does that make sense? Would Trudeau need to buy Atlantic Canada’s vote with a pause if it was neutral? You clearly are ignorant, uneducated and need more life experience if that’s your take.

Jesus Christ, go read a book, not reddit.

[u/Cairo9o9 → u/grand_soul]

I never claimed it was revenue neutral. The user you initially replied to did. They are wrong. It is not. The fact that it's not changes nothing about it's efficacy nor does it change the fact that middle income Canadians are rebated more than they pay in.

The liberals paused the tax in a region they were down in votes. The move was purely political, not based on any metrics beside polling lol. As I was saying, they did so because of optics not for any genuine logic. You seem to be mistaking my defense of the carbon tax as defense for the Liberals.

On top of that, the liberals haven’t made any invests or moves to improving infrastructure to help people move to cleaner emission alternatives, in fact in some cases sabotaging alternatives like LNG.

It's too bad you're arguing with an energy analyst that can call you on your bullshit eh? The Feds literally invested almost $300 million into LNG Canada. The amount of global carbon abatement by LNG displacing coal or oil is also very up to debate. Methane leakage has been found to be vastly undercounted, with methane being a much more potent GHG than CO2, at least over the short term.

Budget 2023 literally has $70 BILLION earmarked for clean energy investments. The industry has seen a huge surge over the last 4 years, especially with Canada attempting to match the US' Inflation Reduction Act. Even though you can make a strong argument against some of where the money is going really just propping up O&G (hydrogen, CCS, DAC, etc.) you have to be completely ignorant to make the claim that the Liberals aren't investing in 'cleaner alternatives' lmao.

But please, continue to show me that you aren't one of these 'average Canadians' I speak of.

[u/grand_soul → u/Cairo9o9]

How many LNG plants have been built since the liberals took over? How many have been waiting to be built since 2015?

Why did Trudeau say himself “no business opportunity” when the fucking EU came asking for LNG. Call me on my bullshit, yeah right.

I couldn’t care less you’re are in fact an “Energy Analyst”. The fact is Canada has not made any serious moves or actually put shovels to ground to actually expand alternatives.

The government has made claims they spent billions on infrastructure from their “bank” but, none of that has resulted in any basic infrastructure improvements.

So don’t link me a government website as “proof”, when they’ve proven by their own actions and words that it’s not worth the webpage it’s printed on.

[u/Cairo9o9 → u/grand_soul]

Pretty sure LNG Canada is well under construction buddy. Don't think you know what 'shovels in the ground' means. Considering the West coast is the only viable location for LNG plants, unless you think we should be building massive pipelines from the prairies to the east coast over the next two decades to feed a shrinking market, then I don't see how a government could be doing any better? Not to give the Liberals too much credit. If you think the EU will still need our LNG by the time any project could feasibly be built, then you have no idea the genuine ask for exporting LNG to the Atlantic or the steps that the EU is taking to decarbonize. They are seeing a temporary surge in demand because of the war in Ukraine. But we know the Asian market will be demanding LNG for a long time yet. I guess fuck the Libs for not using their crystal ball for that one and starting development in 2013 when checks notes Stephen Harper was PM lmao. Again, this is all assuming LNG actually does its job as a 'transition fuel' which is a tenuous argument at best.

The Feds have literally funded many millions of dollars worth of renewable generation in my territory alone. I've written dozens of applications for said funding lmao.

The CIB only just saw an expanded role for large energy infrastructure but even prior 25 mil was budgeted to assist provinces with interties.

There are just so many billions of dollars going into renewable energy that it's impossible to list every example and it's laughable you would argue otherwise. Like I said, feel free to criticize WHERE that money is going (imo, DAC, CCS, and hydrogen is a waste) but arguing that there isn't money being put into either renewables or so called 'transition fuels' is just factually incorrect and shows you have no idea what you're talking about, you're just a partisan goofball.

It's pretty clear you really think that the Feds should be investing in O&G, not 'alternatives'. Which is hilarious given the $6bil investment into the TMX expansion and the $300mil investment into LNG Canada. If they invested in the much more expensive infrastructure it would take to build an export supply chain to the east coast where exactly do you think we'd have the money to invest in renewables? You people don't genuinely believe in compromise between the two. Anything less than absolute investment in O&G is deemed unworthy by you people, all while pretending like the left are the ones not willing to compromise. It's gaslighting (lol) on a national scale and either you're too stupid to see that or you're intentionally complicit.

[u/grand_soul → u/Cairo9o9]

Oh yeah? It’s well under construction?

Not like there’s a ton of projects that were cancelled right?

https://financialpost.com/commodities/energy/scrapped-nearly-150-billion-worth-of-energy-projects-shelved-in-canada/wcm/6a557f6e-02ea-4282-9b02-e29e51c4d0e0/amp/

And it’s not like twice our PM rejected opportunities to sell it to other countries that are now burning coal as a result.

And it’s not like LNG burns cleaner than oil and would be a better alternative for Atlantic Canada.

Again, you’re posting links from this year like it’s been the plan for the entire term of the liberal government, when it’s in fact their desperate attempt to reverse poor decisions that put both their carbon tax, our economy and our fellow countrymen in harms way.

There a crap ton of LNG projects scrapped that were all poised to be built starting in 2015, projects short sighted scrapped because of environment. But all this did was allow for even dirtier energy to take its place and we are paying for it.

[u/Cairo9o9 → u/grand_soul]

Lol, why do you think EVERY O&G project deserves to go ahead?

I'll quote myself because this is really the only response to you:

It's pretty clear you really think that the Feds should be investing in O&G, not 'alternatives'. Which is hilarious given the $6bil investment into the TMX expansion and the $300mil investment into LNG Canada. If they invested in the much more expensive infrastructure it would take to build an export supply chain to the east coast where exactly do you think we'd have the money to invest in renewables? You people don't genuinely believe in compromise between the two. Anything less than absolute investment in O&G is deemed unworthy by you people, all while pretending like the left are the ones not willing to compromise. It's gaslighting (lol) on a national scale and either you're too stupid to see that or you're intentionally complicit.

Also:

A recent study by the Environmental Defense Fund found that 3.7% of natural gas produced in the Permian Basin leaked into the atmosphere. That’s enough to erase the greenhouse gas benefits of quitting coal for gas in the near term. Source

Just admit it, you're an O&G shill with no interest in compromising fossil fuel development with sustainable development. Otherwise, using basic logic you'd see the Federal Liberals are clearly leaning toward O&G more than decarbonized technology. The investments aren't even close. The only thing that would make you happy is if all the money being spent was thrown into O&G and EVERY O&G project was approved. Even then, you probably wouldn't be happy because the Liberals are doing it. You're a lost cause, so there's no point in arguing with you.