A A

BY OLE HAMMARLUND

GUEST OPINION

The concept of a carbon tax is simple: Just raise the price of carbon-containing fuel significantly and people will try to use other and cheaper alternatives such as electricity or try to reduce usage by for instance using cars who use less gas or are electric.

is an effective and transparent way of reducing carbon emissions, and we only need to look to Europe to see how gas prices, that are double what they are here, does not ruin the economy. Quite the opposite. Denmark's economy for instance is humming away quite nicely, exporting Lego and Velux windows to Canada despite high gas and electricity prices.

Ultimately, it is the fault of Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, who instead of tackling the carbon tax himself, offloaded it on the provincial politicians. Only Alberta and B.C. have had the political courage to implement this vital tax. Climate change and the solution, to reduce carbon emissions, is an international and national problem, not a provincial one and Justin Trudeau passed the buck to the premiers.

RELATED: No carbon tax in P.E.I. government's climate-change plan

Conservative institutions, such as the Fraser Institute (no doubt financed by oil money) all rail against carbon tax like it is going to ruin our economy, despite evidence to the contrary, such as B.C. or Europe. The key to avoid effects on the economy is of course to return the tax proceeds to the people, either directly through tax reductions as has happened in B.C., or through increased social benefits as is the case in Denmark, where students for instance enjoy free secondary education.

fishermen and farmers should not be exempt. Higher fuel prices will affect the way farming is done. That is the whole point. Maybe no till methods will become more popular. Maybe certain imported vegetables will be too expensive to truck in, favoring local produce. Cash supports should be given the fishermen and farmers as needed, but let them decide how to best spend it.

So why not subsidy instead, you might ask? Because it is more expensive and less effective. Just look at the tens of billions Ontario spent on solar and wind systems with little noticeable effect except a growing deficit. The problem is that you and I spend our money through taxes on a subsidy that someone else gets. For instance, an electric car subsidy is paid by us, but the savings are collected by the electric car owner. Sweet deal for him, less so for the rest of us.

Instead you could double the cost of gas through carbon taxes, and suddenly electric cars, energy efficient cars or public transportation all look a lot more attractive, with the users, not the government, making the choices and collect the savings.

An effective carbon tax will favour bullet trains over air planes, public transportation over private cars, local production over imports, local labor over other regions or countries, local holidays, local enjoyment and entertainment instead of country hopping, work at home instead of commuting, easily drilled and extracted oil instead of expensive tar sands oil, locally produced energy instead of imported gas and oil.

Meanwhile the economy will be humming with activity and growth: Construction sector will be busy retrofitting houses with insulation and collectors, technicians previously servicing oil boilers will service collectors and wind mills, gas stations will become recharge centers, more food will be locally produced, more exports will be by rail and sea. All the activity will be fueled by the carbon tax collected and redistributed to citizens.

If you are not sold yet on the carbon tax consider liquor taxes. Imagine the government providing subsidies to try to reduce liquor consumption. How do you think that would work compared to just increasing the price of liquor? Everyone would of course love a subsidy to buy a cheaper case of beer, but would it reduce consumption? You know the answer already.

- Ole Hammarlund is a sustainable architect and he happily pays liquor and gas taxes and tries to limit his consumption of both, but is not always successful. He can be reached at olehammarlund@gmail.com