The current election campaign suffers, like the climate emergency itself, from information from sources that is not in agreement with the facts prepared by scientific and economic experts.
 |
| Checking an error |
According to an Ipsos poll reported by Global News, Canadians want to stop climate change — but half don’t want to pay an extra cent.
“There’s a big difference here between intent and behaviour,” said Sean Simpson, vice president of Ipsos...Ipsos also looked at how much all average voters who identify with one of the main parties are willing to pay, and it was voters who identify as Green supporters who were willing to pay the most with an average of $701. NDP voters on average said they would be willing to pay $375, while Liberal supporters said they would be willing to pay an extra $326. Bloc Quebecois and Conservative voters had the lowest averages of $254 and $206, respectively.1
Shawn McCarthy provides the actual numbers for the claim that “we can shut down our economy tomorrow morning and within a matter of weeks China would replace all of our emissions.”
In 2017, China added 4,614 megatonnes of annual carbon emissions to reach 10,877 MT. That’s an annual average growth of 384 MT. Canada’s accounted for 716 MT of GHGs in 2017. So China’s recent growth represents two years of Canadian emission, not weeks worth.2
The CBC checks with experts on the claim that British Columbia's carbon tax hasn't worked.
Between 2005 and 2017, British Columbia's population and economy grew significantly. In that respect, it is notable that B.C.'s emissions didn't also rise. (Over the same period, Alberta's emissions rose by 18 per cent.)
But to properly assess the impact of the carbon tax, you have to consider a counterfactual scenario in which the carbon tax was not in place.
Multiple studies have considered that question and those studies found the carbon tax was responsible for a decrease in fuel consumption and emissions. A study in 2016 linked the carbon tax with the purchase of more fuel-efficient vehicles.
"The primary objective of the B.C. carbon tax is to reduce GHG emissions and essentially all studies show it is doing just that, with reductions 5–15 per cent below the counterfactual reference level," concluded a 2015 survey of published research.
A reduction of five to 15 per cent is not enough, on its own, to achieve Canada's international target, but it would be a significant contribution. The federal price is currently scheduled to reach $50 per tonne.
In their own defence, the Conservatives point to a study which observed that demand for diesel fuel was inelastic — that is, it is less likely to be impacted by changes in price. But even that study estimated that the carbon tax in British Columbia had reduced the per capita use of diesel.3
It seems that political pronouncements will be made based on inaccurate numbers. Our role as critical thinking Canadians is to seek the numbers from experts who can “show their work” in coming to their conclusions.
References
No comments:
Post a Comment