In the days ahead, you are likely to hear federal Conservatives start echoing Jason Kenney’s current justification for killing the province’s carbon price based on a report by the Fraser Institute. The problem? Well, the modelling that they used is based on a work of fiction, and not the plan that was actually implemented, and since the federal carbon price is closely based on the Alberta model, they will have roughly similar effects. But hey, why fight with facts when you can use fiction and straw men?
The report doesn't examine Trudeau's GHG policy, but a policy they made up. If Fraser used the same tools to analyse your TIER program, they'd get similar results since they don't assess the impact of credit allocation. You'd hate it if that shoe was on your foot, Premier. https://t.co/ecmFRgYRWN
— Andrew Leach (@andrew_leach) August 24, 2019
I'm beginning to think that Alberta's Premier is not all that concerned about making sure all statements about Alberta's oil sands are accurate. I'm not even sure he's concerned about making sure his own statements about them are accurate. #ableg
— Andrew Leach (@andrew_leach) August 24, 2019
Hey, look at what else the report said. Oh, and they didn't actually model Trudeau's carbon policy, but you know that and choose to spread falsehood anyway, Premier. pic.twitter.com/ByMpubZv7u
— Andrew Leach (@andrew_leach) August 24, 2019
Also, you might consider that yelling loudly about foreign-funded entities making false statements and influencing our elections and also tweeting out false analysis from foreign-funded entities seeking to influence our election might strike some as hypocritical. #AbLeg #cdnpoli
— Andrew Leach (@andrew_leach) August 24, 2019
And for the record, here is the EcoFiscal commission explaining how the Fraser Institute got it all wrong.
Quick background: Canada’s carbon pricing system has 2 parts: a fuel levy and an “output-based pricing system” (OBPS) for large emitters. An OBPS is a way to price carbon in sectors where a full carbon tax would cause production & emissions to shift to other jurisdictions. (2/10)
— Ecofiscal Commission (@EcofiscalCanada) August 22, 2019
The report’s analysis omits the fact that Canada is using an OBPS for this precise reason: to address competitiveness concerns. The modelling assumes the full $50/tonne price applies to large industrial emitters. This is not how the policy is actually designed. (4/10)
— Ecofiscal Commission (@EcofiscalCanada) August 22, 2019
In addition to modelling a policy that does not exist, the report relies on I/O tables instead of a CGE model and only examines short-run effects. This fails to capture behaviour & investment changes in response to policy. As a result, it significantly overestimates costs. (6/10)
— Ecofiscal Commission (@EcofiscalCanada) August 22, 2019
It seems to imply that treating firms differently based on emissions intensity is a bug rather than a feature. This design choice is deliberate. It rewards the best performers while providing all firms with an incentive to improve. (8/10)
— Ecofiscal Commission (@EcofiscalCanada) August 22, 2019
Output-based pricing is a way to price emissions from industrial sectors while other jurisdictions catch up on climate policy. The Fraser Institute’s analysis acts as if it simply doesn’t exist. (10/10)
— Ecofiscal Commission (@EcofiscalCanada) August 22, 2019