1754 replies to this topic

[LeoVictoria]

On a related topic, my latest Fortis gas bill was $72.00. Only $6.00 of that $72.00 was actual gas usage. The rest was fees, surcharges and taxes. 

 

Fortis splits out Delivery and Storage and Transport from the cost of gas, but of course that cannot actually be unbundled.   So yeah, your "Cost of gas" is extremely low, but unless you want to drive to Alberta to pick it up, the actual "Cost of Gas" must include getting it to your house.  

 

My $66.39 bill consists of:

 

$37.64 cost of gas to my house

$13.89 basic charge from Fortis for being hooked up

$14.89 in taxes

[Mike K.]

The City of Victoria has become the first municipality in B.C. to support filing a class-action lawsuit that seeks to have oil and gas companies help pay a portion of the costs associated with climate change and is hoping other municipalities follow its lead.

 

A Victoria council meeting, held on Jan. 17, found that the impacts of climate change have resulted in substantial costs for local B.C. governments, and asks the Union of BC Municipalities (UBCM) to examine the possibility of initiating the lawsuit. - https://www.theglobe...st-the-oil-and/

 

[jonny]

What a bunch of morons. 

 

This has rapidly become a mind-numbingly stupid city hall. 

[Mike K.]

Given the amount of taxation applied to gasoline prices, including local transit taxes, carbon taxes (de-coupled from revenue neutrality) and on top of the whole smorgasbord of taxes, GST, governments are complicit in profiting from the sale of gasoline.

[jonny]

Not only that, but the City of Victoria - admits through its own actions - the criticality of fossil fuels via its use of police vehicles, fire/rescue vehicles, ambulances, transit buses, CoV work trucks, library trucks that shuttle books between branches, school district vehicles, delivery trucks, heavy construction equipment, etc., etc., etc.

 

I would just love to see the CoV pave a roadway without fossil fuels. I would just love to see them maintain BHP without fossil fuels. Bet they could have easily built the new JSB without good old dino oil. *rolls eyes*

 

The City of Victoria profits off of its parking garages that are more or less for the exclusive use of ICE personal vehicles, for heaven sakes.

[exc911ence]

My latest Fortis bill: $5.11 gas used, $5.74 Carbon Tax. So the tax on the carbon is more than the actual carbon... 

 

Total bill: $44.40 for $5.11 worth of natural gas. 

[lanforod]

My latest Fortis bill: $5.11 gas used, $5.74 Carbon Tax. So the tax on the carbon is more than the actual carbon... 

 

Total bill: $44.40 for $5.11 worth of natural gas. 

 

You totally ignored Leo's post above eh.

By all means, drive to a natural gas refinery and pick-up 5.11+carbon tax of natural gas. I guarantee you, it'll cost you more than 44.40 and good luck finding a portable tank for any reasonable price that can hold LNG or CNG.

[Mike K.]

Maybe the lesson here is to discontinue gas services?

[exc911ence]

You totally ignored Leo's post above eh.

By all means, drive to a natural gas refinery and pick-up 5.11+carbon tax of natural gas. I guarantee you, it'll cost you more than 44.40 and good luck finding a portable tank for any reasonable price that can hold LNG or CNG.

 

No, not ignored. I understand the costs involved in getting the gas from the ground to my house, I was just breaking the bill down to its most basic: the actual gas used vs. the carbon tax applied to it. Should the consumer be paying a carbon tax for pulling the gas out of the ground? The storage of it? The movement of it? Or should we pay only a carbon tax on just the consumption of it? After all, no carbon is released until the gas is burned, at least in the interests of the end user. If any carbon is released in the process of drilling for it, storing it or moving it, then that responsibility should fall on the company doing that work and they should be paying the carbon tax on those processes. And if they are already, why is the end consumer also paying?

[lanforod]

^ thanks for clarifying. Good questions

[North Shore]

^^Couldnt you also say that all of that work is done at the behest of the end consumer? And therefore, they should be the ones paying tax on it?

[Mattjvd]

There really is no difference between the comsumer and the company paying the tax. If Fortis had to pay it up front, they would build that cost into the price of the gas and it would cost the consumer the same amount.

[LJ]

Trudeau stands alone in green energy..

 

https://business.fin...ns-green-energy

[jonny]

Twitter trolls linked to suspected foreign influence campaigns stoked controversy over pipelines and immigration in Canada, according to a CBC/Radio-Canada analysis of 9.6 million tweets from accounts since deleted.

The troll accounts, which have since been deleted by Twitter, are suspected of having originated in Russia, Iran and Venezuela.

https://www.cbc.ca/a...impression=true

Edited by jonny, 13 February 2019 - 07:56 PM.

[Mike K.]

With accusations that upwards of 50% of Facebook accounts could be fake accounts, I wouldn't be surprised if a significant amount of content people consume via social media is clandestine political meddling.

[jonny]

With accusations that upwards of 50% of Facebook accounts could be fake accounts, I wouldn't be surprised if a significant amount of content people consume via social media is clandestine political meddling.

 

We now now with absolute certainty that foreign interests have been influencing the public O&G debate in Canada via direct funding of special interest and lobbyists and social media manipulation. No wonder we've found ourselves in such a mess.  

[Jackerbie]

Oil by rail is a go. Alberta to lease 4,400 rail cars from CN and CP in order to ship estimated 120,000 barrels per day by 2020. Re-branded rail cars will hit the tracks in July. via https://www.cbc.ca/n...e-oil-1.5024665

[Victoria Watcher]

ive never quite understood why the government actually gets involved in this plan. why don’t the oil companies just do it if it’s so lucrative?

[RFS]

Literally the worst and most risky way to ship oil. Great job anti pipeline people, this is your result

[jonny]

ive never quite understood why the government actually gets involved in this plan. why don’t the oil companies just do it if it’s so lucrative?

 

It's not so lucrative. This is a knee jerk reaction by the Alberta government to try something - anything - to stave off further capital flight and decline in the Alberta economy. 

 

Pipelines are lucrative, which is why the oil companies tried that angle. Oil companies are global enterprises, which is why they have been fleeing Alberta and her landlocked oil.