Will Canada Fall Behind U.S. in Wind Energy Jobs?

Check out the BBC video report about workers from a closed washing machine factory in Iowa who are finding jobs at a wind turbine plant. This is the type of green job creation that Obama is trying to encourage with his stimulus plan. But back in Canada, the Conservative budget -- supported by the Liberals -- did not renew support for wind energy. That's making it hard to sell Canadian-made wind turbines in Canada. How long will Canadian manufacturers continue to expand in Canada if all of their orders are from the U.S.?
(Source: CBC Radio's The House, Saturday, February 14, 2008 - listen to the MP3 file - 22 MB; fast forward to 27:10 of 48:09).

[Important Notice]

One Blue Marble Blog -- Our winter of discontent: Harper and Ignatieff

One Blue Marble blog has an excellent, detailed post on where Iggy went wrong in supporting Harper -- especially on the environment and climate change. It's definitely worth reading.

[Important Notice]

Iggy's Budget Amendment Ignores Climate Change

What a downer! All of Dion's idealism and coalition-building, all of Ignatieff's bluster, and it has come down to this: support for the Harper's budget, conditional on mere progress reports. The topics of the progress reports (see sidebar at the link above) would not even include the impact of the budget on the environment in general, or on Greenhouse Gas emissions in particular. In any event, this reporting "condition" was so easy that Harper & Co. agreed to accept Iggy's budget amendment within hours.

The whole thing was clearly just a face-saving move by a Liberal leader who wanted to avoid bringing down the Conservative government -- while appearing to be tough with empty talk of "Conservatives on probation". Instead of real progress toward a sustainable economy, we will have four more wasted years of Harpernomics HarperIggiocy.

Now that the Liberal-NDP coalition is sadly R.I.P., it is time to take the pro-coalition badge off the sidebar of this blog. The only federalist opposition in Parliament to the new Conservative-Liberal Coalition Alliance Mish-Mash is the NDP. The Greens have been busy keeping their eye on the ball at post-Kyoto negotiations and promoting a green economic recovery. But they are still being kept out of Parliament due to our antiquated voting system, despite getting the votes of almost 1 million Canadians.

For more on the missed environmental opportunities in this budget, see this Toronto Star article. (The CBC story on this topic has clearly missed the point.)

Alas for our children and their children.

[Important Notice]

Message to Ignatieff - Please Reject Harper Budget - Need Green Economic Recovery

Here is a copy of the message that I sent to Michael Ignatieff via his web site at http://www.michaelignatieff.ca/en/get-involved/feedback :

"Please reject this budget because it does not meet the planet's -- and Canada's -- need for a Green Economic Recovery. Any stimulus package must focus on making our economy sustainable and reducing Greenhouse Gas emissions. Obama gets this -- Harper does not. Global climate talks on a post-Kyoto accord are under way. Four years from now may be too late for Canada to show leadership -- we need it today! Thanks for considering my views. (These are my personal opinions as an individual citizen.)"

(The web form on the above page does not allow for longer messages, so I had no room for more details. But then, I doubt that anybody would have the time to read long messages in the next few hours :-)

[Important Notice]

E85 rebate slipped in at the last minute by finance

Thanks to Far and Wide for pointing out this G&M article.

Finance Minister Jim Flaherty's department made a last-minute change to the budget that allows cars built at the General Motors plant next to his riding to qualify for federal climate-change incentives even though environmentalists say the cars are gas guzzlers.

I wondered why they included those - there's currently only two places you can buy E85 gas in Canada - both in Ottawa! The mileage on them is not great either - 14.8/9.2 l/100km (for both models), or 12.3 using the calculation. Not anywhere close to the other cars getting rebates!

NOT A Green Federal Budget

The CBC has a good summary of reactions to yesterday's Canadian Federal Budget from environmental groups and others, including Green Party leader Elizabeth May: 'Green' budget falls short for environmental groups. As expected, throwing a few goodies at the problem simply does not cut it. The lackluster green car rebate/gas guzzler levy (more here and here), reviving a few Liberal programs in reduced form -- without a plan on how to actually implement the Kyoto Protocol -- without even mentioning Kyoto by name -- is not nearly enough.

Tax subsidies for the Oil Sands would be phased out -- but not until 2015.

"They're going to continue to subsidize the big oil and gas companies at the same level as today for another three years," said NDP Leader Jack Layton. "That's billions of dollars shoveled into the bottom lines of Exxon and such companies while they continue to pollute."

The absurdity of helping the world's wealthiest -- and most polluting -- corporations to destroy the planet to the tune of $1.4 billion per year is apparently not enough for this Government to end it immediately.

Spending most of the water strategy budget on Coast Guard ships does little to address the looming water quality and shortage issues of the 21st century -- which would be made worse by lack of action on Climate Change.

The list goes on and on.

For more opposition reaction, see Bloc to support budget; Liberals, NDP say no.

Elizabeth May summed it up best:

"We're just losing time and we can't afford to lose time."

Beyond these criticisms, there is no National Transit Strategy, and no linking of infrastructure spending to success in curbing urban sprawl.

In general, the Conservative Government has no vision on how to transition Canada to a sustainable economy based on renewable energy. Thirty-four years after the publication of the Canada as a Conserver Society by the Science Council of Canada (in 1973!), the federal budget does not even try to make environmental and social costs part of the economic bottom line. This unscientific approach amounts to economic and ecological negligence, almost guaranteeing the continuation of "uneconomic growth" (some of these issues are also covered in the interview with David Suzuki on the Treehugger Radio podcast).

Writing about the Conserver Society idea in the Canadian Encyclopedia, Dixon Thompson notes:

"As we move to the 21st century... capitalism has begun to look beyond its own horizons and has seen the profitability of conservationism blooming on the hillsides. Advanced conserver societies may thus have better prospects for the future."

In the U.S., 65 financial companies and investment groups representing USD $4 trillion have just called for:

• "Long-term greenhouse gas reductions by 2050, in line with the 60 to 90 percent cuts below 1990 levels that are urgently needed to avoid worst case scenarios — including 'mandatory market-based solutions, such as a cap-and-trade system, that establish an economy-wide carbon price, allow for flexibility and encourage innovation.'

• "Realignment of U.S. energy and transportation policies to promote research, development, and deployment of new and existing clean technologies at the scale required.

• "Clear guidance from the SEC [U.S. Securities Exchange Commission] on what companies should disclose to investors relative to climate change."

(Sources: Wired Blogs - Autopia; Boston Globe).

One of these days, Canadian businesses will wake up, too. If the message comes from a business lobby, perhaps the Conservative Government would start to listen.

More realistically, it would take an election to displace the Conservatives before we see real progress.

This is where the parochialism of the Bloc Québécois endangers us all: their own web site links to a brochure [PDF] titled "Save Kyoto" that opposes the oil-sands subsidy (on p. 1), and says says (on p. 2):

"If nothing is done to combat climate change, future generations may well end up living on an uninhabitable planet where natural disasters are the rule rather than the exception.

"Kyoto is an all-round winner for Quebec. We need it to save the planet and allow our children to continue to live comfortable lives.

[...]

"Each barrel of oil that Quebec doesn’t consume enriches us and helps reduce pollution.

"Kyoto is necessary for the environment and essential for Quebec’s economy."

[...]

[Bolding added.]

Yet somehow, just increasing federal transfers to Quebec, without even a mention of Kyoto, has made this budget good for Quebec in the Bloc's view. They will support this budget, and let this Government stand.

"Après moi, le déluge" -- literally, and by their own admission.

[Important Notice]

"Green Levy" lightened by the elimination of the HVT

An addendum to yesterday's post. Down at the bottom of the section on the Green Levy (in Appendix 5 of the budget document), it says this:

With the introduction of the new levy, the existing excise tax on heavy vehicles will be eliminated effective March 20, 2007

What is this "heavy vehicle tax"? I looked all over the GC web site, without much luck. But this article in the Star says:

the impact of the penalty will be reduced, because the budget states that Ottawa will drop its excise tax on heavy vehicles, which typically adds $500 to $700 to the cost of a big luxury car or full-size SUV.

So, it's even less of a penalty than it sounds.

Another note: The complete list of vehicles eligible for the fuel-efficiency rebate can be found here.

Federal green levies and rebates for cars

The US has had rebates for hybrid vehicles available for a while now, and we are finally catching up. In fact, yesterday's budget brings in both rebates for efficient cars, and a new "green levy" on the most inefficient of cars sold in Canada. (See Annex 5 for details. Search way down at the bottom for "green levy") This levy is comes into effect immediately on any new cars delivered or imported after March 19, 2007. (However vehicles already on dealer lots are exempted.)

So, how inefficient does a car need to be to get hit by the levy? And will it stop people from buying these cars? According to the Dept. of Finance:

Vehicles that have a weighted average fuel consumption of 13 or more litres per 100 kilometres will be subject to the levy at the following rates:

* at least 13 but less than 14 litres per 100 kilometres, $1,000;

* at least 14 but less than 15 litres per 100 kilometres, $2,000;

* at least 15 but less than 16 litres per 100 kilometres, $3,000; and

* 16 or more litres per 100 kilometres, $4,000.

Note that this is a weighted average fuel consumption:

"taking into account 55 per cent of city fuel consumption and 45 per cent of highway fuel consumption, as determined in accordance with information published by the Government of Canada under the EnerGuide mark, such as the 2007 Vehicle EnerGuide."

So, which vehicles will get hit with this levy? If you look at the National Resources Canada Vehicle Energuide site, you can get an idea. Of course, you'll have to do a bit of calculating to figure it out, as they haven't yet added the weighted average calculation to the tables. As an example, I looked at 2007 mid-size vehicles, and sorted by fuel consumption. It looks like anything from the Audi S6 (15.2 l/100 km city/10.4 l/100km hwy) on down will be "levied".

Now, given that the Audi S6 pricing starts at $100,000, how many buyers are likely to be deterred by a $1,000 (or even $4,000) levy?! In fact, this is probably the case for most of the cars likely to be hit with the levy (whose brand names include Mercedes-Benz, Cadillac, Rolls-Royce, Ferrari, etcetera).

[Actually, the CHRYSLER SEBRING FFV (15.5 l/100km city; 10.0 l/100km hwy) looks like it would fall under the levy as well, however the FFV stands for "flex-fuel vehicle", which means that it can run on 85% ethanol, and is therefore eligible for the rebate instead; see below. However, there aren't many places yet in Canada to buy E85 fuel. A lot of the time owners of this car would likely end up using gasoline; and the gasoline consumption ratings alone certainly wouldn't have qualified this car for a rebate.]

In addition to the levy, Flaherty will give you a rebate of up to $2000 if you purchase a more efficient car. (See Chapter 3 of the budget for details.)

The basic rebate amount will be $1,000, and an additional $500 will be added for each half litre per 100 km improvement in the combined fuel-efficiency rating of the vehicle below these thresholds. The maximum rebate value will be $2,000. Efficient E-85 fuel vehicles will be eligible for a rebate of $1,000. Eligible new vehicle purchases or leases as of March 20, 2007, will qualify for the rebate.

Eligible for the full rebate are the Toyota Prius (4.1 l/100km weighted average, MSRP starts at $31,280), Honda Civic Hybrid (4.5 l/100 km weighted average, MSRP starts at $26,250), and Ford Escape Hybrid (7.4 l/100 km weighted average, MSRP starts at $31,499).


These rebates are on top of any provincial rebates that you may have available. (Described in this post, and this post.)

Note the fine print:

While the introduction of rebates for eligible fuel-efficient vehicles is proposed to take effect March 20, 2007, the payment of rebates will be made once administration and delivery systems have been put in place. The Government is aiming to make rebate payments by fall 2007.

So, to sum up, while it's nice to reward people for buying Priuses, it's unlikely that the levy on highly inefficient luxury cars will have any effect on reducing pollution or GHG emissions.