Steve ponders:
>What does any of your commentary above John have to do with perverse
>incentives from using "sin tax" revenue for transfer payments?
>
>Steve
I have not got the foggiest clue what you are talking about. To be brief...
we have always subsidized the oil and gas industry by providing billions of
dollars in exploration tax credits. Was this a good thing if that oil and
gas is also polluting, and non-renewable? Now if various governments had not
subsidized oil and gas, there would have more demand for alternative energy
sources. Logically there would be more small scale hydro, which as a matter
of fact was once the only form of electricity generation in BC. With the
development and amalgamation of BC Hydro as a public company years ago, the
cost of financing of the debt to build hydro dams had to be paid off, so as
a result many small scale hydro facilities were closed down since these were
owned by the cities and contributed nothing to paying off the multi-billion
dollar debt of a crown corporation. Many small cities in BC like Revelstoke,
and Prince Rupert used to generate their own power. So in fact the idea that
an industry could be subsidized works very well but once a point is reached
where there is a shortage of alternative energy sources, then there is
dislocation. I hope you like this new word....In fact Weyerhaueser and other
forestry companies had engineered plans to install hog fuel plants to
generate enough power to meet their own needs and the needs of the
communities nearby. But BC Hydro would have no truck with this idea of
practical reason and prevented the companies from generating their own power
from bark and wood wastes...but that is now changing...
john foster
|