"It is widely conceded that Stéphane Dion is taking a major risk trying to sell a carbon tax when gasoline prices are climbing," says Susan Riley; says just about every rep of every media outlet in the country.A major risk. When prices are climbing.
What are we waiting for exactly? A price freefall? Ten cents a litre? The glory days of cheap, drinkable petroleum? Get over it, folks. This is about as low as oil's ever going to get, and that's precisely the problem.
From this week's article in The Independent:
The world uses about 87 million barrels of oil a day, about a quarter of it in the US. Saudi Arabia is the only country thought to have the capacity to pump oil faster. Meanwhile, China is in the throes of an industrial revolution that demands ever greater supplies of crude, yet global production has stagnated for two years. The Saudi government rejected a recent appeal from Mr Bush to increase production, saying there were no oil shortages at present. Economists worry, though, that shortages are around the corner, as mature oilfields wind down.
The Paris-based International Energy Agency (IEA) said yesterday that it might have overestimated the capacity of oil-producing nations to open new fields to keep up with growing demand over the next decade. Global production, which the IEA previously reckoned could reach 116 million barrels a day by 2030, might not even make 100 million.
If supply/demand are that out-of-balance today, there will never be a more opportune time to discourage the use of dirty energy and encourage alternatives. This is it.
Not only is carbon dirty, it's also inducing price increases and rampant inflation. Merrill Lynch economists wrote in a note to clients that,
"for the first time in our memory, inflation, not growth, is the primary macro driver at the global level. The inflation shock has already happened. What matters now is how persistent it is, and how markets and policy-makers react. At a global level, this begs for an accident that will awaken markets and policy makers to the risks."
The contrast in Canada couldn't be more poignant. We have a PM that ignores the aforementioned risks and calls cheap oil an economic "fundamental" that benefits the country, while Dion, May and to some extent Layton each express how critical a carbon price is to sound economic stewardship.
Environmentally, Elizabeth May has called the carbon tax a "litmus test" for whether parties are serious about the environment. She's added her voice to a chorus of others, including David Suzuki and throngs of economists around the world that applaud the scheme. Moreover, "Thomas d'Aquino, president of the Canadian Council of Chief Executives, has said that Canada's provincial and territorial leaders should commit to a coordinated nationwide strategy to address the risks of climate change, and supports a carbon tax. Jack Mintz, economist and former head of the C.D. Howe Institute, also supports a carbon tax."
Jack Layton proposes a model on the plagued European cap-and-trade system while Natural Resources Minister Gary Lunn says, and I quote, "The leader of the Liberal party wants to propose a carbon tax on the price of gasoline and drive the price of gasoline north of $2.25 and higher, that is going to hurt hardworking people who are trying to get to work."
Hardworking workers trying to get to work to work for a living might also want to leave their children with a planet. (Perpetuating this kind of laughable hyperbole will enable every reasonably-minded Canadian with a half-decent bullshit detector to see how thoroughly engaged our government is in divisive, small-minded politicking of the worst kind.)
Like Layton, Dion also suggested a cap-and-trade system during his leadership bid, and my sense is that he realizes that the time necessary to implement and refine such a system has all but slipped away. There is room to apply and tweak the measure in a limited way, but the fact that a carbon tax can be implemented immediately cuts to the heart of the issue. Liberal MP David McGuinty says,
"There's no choice anymore. If Mr. Dion was a spineless person who understood the climate change crisis, the severity of it, the speed with which this is actually increasing—which is what the science is telling us—if he wanted to play politics with this, he'd do nothing, which is exactly what the government is doing. Mr. Dion, in fairness has taken a big step and he has ignited a debate in Canadian society that is actually taking hold, and so this is the time because we're facing a climate change crisis. That's why this is important to do it now."
My fear is that Canadians either don't sense the danger, or are too skeptical of the Liberal brand, or both. Frankly, we don't have a choice. Layton and May are not going to lead governing parties in the next election, and "playing" politics with this issue isn't an option.
Labels: carbon taxes, economy, Stephane Dion
3 Comments:
Carbon tax.. I am all for it.
Carbon credit trading, completely against it. Why? because it does not necessarily promote decreasing emissions, just finding companies who do not pollute as much. It is a way for corporations to make themselves look good wihout actually doing anything. I think a pure carbon tax, while unpopular, is the best idea, with a specific stipulation that all the profits go to R & D for alternative fuel sources or specific canadian environmental projects.
We really need to have a national strategy to reduce dependence on fossil fuel. The Swedish government set a national goal of moving the country off fossil fuels by 2020. The drumbeats about Peak Oil (and peak resources) are getting louder and will impact business and the consumer at some point.
I think that a Liberal initiative that emphasizes something more holistic would be a better sell than something that will be perceived as merely making gas more expensive. Having a plan to address the coming economic realities, which must include vastly increased funding for public transportation and rail, conversion to alternative energies, both on a macro and micro scale, and other incentives to balance any carbon taxes is the way to go.
But I fear that we are too myopic to make it happen until it is too late.
That's fascinating, and props to the Swedish government its vision. I also love what Iceland is doing to create the world's first hydrogen-based transportation network, and I think it's something that some provinces could achieve if they were as astute. But I certainly share your fear, Dan.
Post a Comment
<< Home