<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
<channel>
	<title><![CDATA[Grist - Comment Feed for More on B.C.&#8216;s carbon tax shift]]></title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.grist.org/rss/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<description>Grist Comment Feed</description>
	<language>en</language>
    
		<item>
            <title>Comment #1 by Ron Steenblik</title>
			<link>http://www.grist.org/article/oh-canada1/</link>
			<pubDate>Thu, 13 Mar 2008 08:31:08 -0700</pubDate>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.grist.org/article/oh-canada1/1</guid>
			<description><![CDATA[
				<p><strong>Question about treatment of biofuels</strong></p><p>Very interesting development, indeed, Alan.</p><p>
You say, that it excludes non-fossil carbon that comes from the atmosphere and ends up in wood, other biomass, and biofuels, and that this is logically consistent. </p><p>
Is that because the carbon in the diesel fuel used to plow, sow and harvest any feedstock crops grown in BC is taxed, as well as any fossil fuels used in processing the feedstock into biofuel in BC? I presume, however, that any biofuel imported from outside B.C. will not be taxed?

<p>These are only my personal opinions.</p></p>
			]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[
				<p><strong>Question about treatment of biofuels</strong></p><p>Very interesting development, indeed, Alan.</p><p>
You say, that it excludes non-fossil carbon that comes from the atmosphere and ends up in wood, other biomass, and biofuels, and that this is logically consistent. </p><p>
Is that because the carbon in the diesel fuel used to plow, sow and harvest any feedstock crops grown in BC is taxed, as well as any fossil fuels used in processing the feedstock into biofuel in BC? I presume, however, that any biofuel imported from outside B.C. will not be taxed?

<p>These are only my personal opinions.</p></p>
			]]></content:encoded>
		</item>
    
		<item>
            <title>Comment #2 by Werdna</title>
			<link>http://www.grist.org/article/oh-canada1/</link>
			<pubDate>Thu, 13 Mar 2008 08:35:03 -0700</pubDate>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.grist.org/article/oh-canada1/2</guid>
			<description><![CDATA[
				<p><strong>Great, but still skeptical</strong></p><p>As I have mentioned before, this is a great step forward and I hope that other provinces, states, and countries can emulate this kind of tax.</p><p>
But, I am still skeptical of how serious the BC liberals are when it comes to tackling the climate.</p><p>
First, up until 2002, this administration was opposed to the Kyoto protocol because it feared it would be bad for BC's economy.</p><p>
Second, you would expect that a government truly concerned about the environment would tackle low hanging fruit first. &nbsp;This is not the case. &nbsp;The BC Liberals are still pushing forward with major highway and port expansions in the province that would (among other environmental problems) significantly increase GHG emissions.</p><p>
Third, they are not putting any significant money into public transportation until 2013 (that is after the proposed completion of the highway expansion).</p><p>
Fourth, there are still significant funds in the budget (~$10 million) to help fund oil and gas exploration within BC. &nbsp;Emissions from oil and gas production are exempt from the carbon tax.</p><p>
Fifth, they are paving over some 500 acres of prime farmland and forested area outside of Vancouver to make way for a container storage facility for the new port expansion.</p><p>
So, yes, I think this carbon tax is a good thing, but there is still so much more that the BC liberals are <strong>not</strong> doing. &nbsp;I fear that this carbon tax is a political smokescreen to ensure that they can continue doing other unsavory things.

<p>Andrew Eisenberg
<br>The gateway project is wrong---http://www.livableregion.ca</p></br></p>
			]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[
				<p><strong>Great, but still skeptical</strong></p><p>As I have mentioned before, this is a great step forward and I hope that other provinces, states, and countries can emulate this kind of tax.</p><p>
But, I am still skeptical of how serious the BC liberals are when it comes to tackling the climate.</p><p>
First, up until 2002, this administration was opposed to the Kyoto protocol because it feared it would be bad for BC's economy.</p><p>
Second, you would expect that a government truly concerned about the environment would tackle low hanging fruit first. &nbsp;This is not the case. &nbsp;The BC Liberals are still pushing forward with major highway and port expansions in the province that would (among other environmental problems) significantly increase GHG emissions.</p><p>
Third, they are not putting any significant money into public transportation until 2013 (that is after the proposed completion of the highway expansion).</p><p>
Fourth, there are still significant funds in the budget (~$10 million) to help fund oil and gas exploration within BC. &nbsp;Emissions from oil and gas production are exempt from the carbon tax.</p><p>
Fifth, they are paving over some 500 acres of prime farmland and forested area outside of Vancouver to make way for a container storage facility for the new port expansion.</p><p>
So, yes, I think this carbon tax is a good thing, but there is still so much more that the BC liberals are <strong>not</strong> doing. &nbsp;I fear that this carbon tax is a political smokescreen to ensure that they can continue doing other unsavory things.

<p>Andrew Eisenberg
<br>The gateway project is wrong---http://www.livableregion.ca</p></br></p>
			]]></content:encoded>
		</item>
    
 </channel>
</rss>