Industry should bear cost of transitioning off fossil fuels
Re: Carbon taxes will get economy off fossil fuels and onto renewables, Opinion, Aug. 2.
The massive transformation required to progress from fossil fuels requires capital investment way beyond what can be borne by our long-suffering taxpayers. But there are appropriate sources for that kind of money: Banks. Banks will extend credit to creditworthy projects and investors will tend to invest to the extent that a healthy net-revenue stream can be projected. The revenue (or savings) stream, in turn, is constrained by the price of the competition, i.e. fossil fuels.
Voila! Raise the price of fossil fuels sufficiently and all the conservation and alternative-energy schemes we need to end our dependence on fossil fuels become self-financing. Industry, not taxpayers does the heavy lifting — as it should be.
Alana Lajoie-O’Malley acknowledges that for a carbon price to change behaviour to the extent necessary it will have to be substantially higher than the prices we see out there today. I couldn’t agree more and would add that long-term commitment is required. So let’s have firm, cast-in-concrete commitments to keep raising carbon prices predictably and indefinitely (i.e., until no more fossil fuel is being burned.)
— John Stephenson, Toronto
Carbon tax not the answer
Alana Lajoie-O’Malley speaks about carbon taxes as if it’s free money. What’s more, there is scant evidence that a carbon tax appreciably lowers CO2 emissions. If there were any conclusive statistics to prove it they would be widely quoted by the people who take her view. Using carbon taxes to support green energy is just another subsidy. No matter who is being charged the carbon tax, whether it be industry, government or individuals, it’s ultimately the taxpayer who foots the bill. Currently there are few solar- or wind-farm installations that are able to support themselves without subsidies.
Part of what is creating financial problems for those industries is a lack of consistent power production. I’ve read about wind-farm production as low as eight-per-cent efficiency. When those power sources aren’t producing there has to be backup generation to supply the shortfall — namely the old, reliable generation we had before green energy.
So not only are we paying to subsidize the new energy, we are also still paying for the old standby.
In any case, no matter how efficient green energy becomes, it’s ultimately doomed to fail. The underlying problem with rising CO2 emissions is overpopulation.
— Charles Lopez, Vancouver
Time for dam accountability
Re: B.C. won’t lay charges in tailings-dam failure, Aug. 3.
How often has the public heard a list of excuses why charges aren’t laid against companies who have caused millions of dollars in damage that you and I are left to pay? The Mount Polley tailings dam is a classic. Could it simply be that someone employed by our government failed to do their job? Was it the failure of our lawyers who created the contract? Was it the failure of the MLA of the day who signed the agreement? And in situations like this, we the public always wonder if someone was paid off. The three-year limit on placing charges is an unacceptable excuse. Interesting that 16 so-called “officers” and a bunch of federal investigators couldn’t meet the deadline, but still want to continue. Millions spent and not one nickel recovered.
— Brian Robinson, Coquitlam
Housing supply must increase
Re: Foreign-buyers tax in the spotlight, Aug. 3. When will we ever learn that it isn’t foreigners who are causing this housing bubble? It’s our own greed. The only solution to this problem is to increase supply, particularly of affordable housing, and in that governments at all levels have a part to play.
— Bill Richardson, West Vancouver