Carbon Tax: U.S. can’t afford Canada’s mistake

Among the punitive solutions bandied about by those seeking to “address climate change” as quickly as possible is the placement of a tax on carbon emissions. Our friends north of the border are giving us a chance to preview how that might work out for the United States.

Canada plans to implement a “price on carbon dioxide pollution” (a tax), that will reach a peak of $50 per metric ton by 2022. The Financial Post has done the math on what that will cost Canadians, and it is not pretty.

Households in British Columbia will pay an extra $603 (Canadian dollars) per year — the lowest, while those in Nova Scotia will pay $1,120 — the highest. The average Canadian household will be paying another $853 per year.

And that is just the beginning. Most “experts” contend the price must go even higher to lower carbon emissions to a level that will satisfy them (though, in truth, what they mean is to lower carbon emission levels to a degree that will counterbalance the enormous amounts of carbon that will continue to be released by China, India, and the developing world.)

In Canada, that might someday mean an additional “price” of $100 per metric ton, sending the household cost in a place like Nova Scotia to an astounding additional $2,240 per year.

So, if a $50 (American dollars) per ton tax was added in the United States, some households here in the Mid-Ohio Valley could absorb an extra $853 per year — though even for those folks, $2,240 would begin to be a bit painful. And, yes, we know there are a few households who would pay it gladly.

But the vast majority of us would have to make more sacrifices if we were to continue to afford electricity. Imagine what a blow that would be to households already financially crippled by the war on coal and affordable electricity. In Canada, by the way, 20 percent of households are already classified as being in “energy poverty,” where 10 percent of their household expenditures go to the electricity needed to power their homes and transportation. Their elected officials and the environmental lobby appear not to care.

Here in the U.S. there are plenty who are also eager to see traditionally sourced electricity priced out of reach for the majority. Affordable electricity is, in their minds, a bad thing; and they are willing to snuff it out without first providing an alternative that will not cost most people more than they can afford, and cost some people their jobs.

Let us hope our own politicians keep an eye on developments in Canada, and that the environmental lobby will shift its focus from policies that do harm to those that will be good for both the environment and ALL the people living in it.

COMMENTS