Kia Niro Forum banner

1 - 5 of 5 Posts

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
457 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
I found it funny that the one place in Canada that gives the most incentives for people to purchase an EV or PHEV is not considering giving regular drivers a rebate as the cost of gasoline is now to high. This is the Province that was the first to bring in a Carbon Tax that was supposed to make people think about putting a cost on pollution. I just had to do a double take and decided to write an open letter to the Premier to try and get some understanding.


Perhaps I just don't understand how your implementation of the carbon tax works, or how it is supposed to reduce the amount of carbon pollution in the air. Please educate me as I must have missed it somewhere along to way.

My understanding was that the carbon tax was supposed to be revenue neutral. The money from the tax is not supposed to go to the coffers of government but to be used to help reduce the amount of green house gas we produce. Things like help with the development of better fuel efficient cars.

But here is where my understanding gets fuzzy, or perhaps it is more your actions. For us to reduce the green house gas we need to stop putting as much of it in the air. Now gas burning cars make pollution. So logically if less cars are driving around burning gas then we would make less pollution. Or perhaps if more people used far more fuel efficient cars over say pickup trucks, suv's and crossovers, then less pollution would be made. This second point is interesting, as it doesn't limit peoples ability to travel, just they would be burning much less fuel and so not make as much greenhouse gasses. And then by extension, as they only put in a small amount of fuel, any fluctuation in the cost of fuel would not really make that much of a difference as the amount needed would be small.

Think about that for a second. If you drive a car that can get 900km to a 45L tank rather that 450km to an 90L tank, the actual amount of actual dollars spent on fuel would be much lower. The first car uses 1/4 the actual amount of fuel than the second, so when the cost of gas goes from $1.50/L to $1.79/L, the first car will have to pay $13 more to fill their car. the second driver however will end up paying $254 more as they needed to not only pay the extra cost for gas, but they needed to fill their much larger gas tank a second time to travel,the same distance. As well they produced more that 4x the pollution.

So looking back to the reason we have the carbon tax. Wasn't it to help make consumers make better choices to help clean the air. The first car is not some mythical car not yet invented. It is a standard hybrid car that costs about $5000 more than a regular new gas only car. Heck, with all the incentives we can get, you can purchase a car that consumes even less gas than that or even cars that don't consume any gas at all, called an Electric Vehicle. Also consider that we have had carbon tax for almost 11 years now and the most consumers replaces their car every 3-5 years, the average family will have bought two new cars since carbon tax was introduced. So if they are currently driving a really inefficient car right now it is because of their own short sighted stupidity. They knew that the goal was to put the cost of carbon producing fuel up and that they would need to pay for,the pollution they made. Sure the cost of gas has gone up well higher than the increase in the carbon taxes recently, but a smart consumer who would have bought an efficient car in the past 10 years it would not matter. Heck, the cost of gas could double and it wouldn't really cost that much more, or any if you drive an EV.

So please justify to me why we need to bring in relief for the high cost of gas? Perhaps the short sighted should simply hand in their car keys and just ride a bicycle, because obviously they are not smart enough to drive a car.
I can pretty much say that most everyone here is driving or owns a pretty fuel efficient car, namely a Kia Niro of some form. A number drive the plug in version that will get a far better fuel efficiency when you count in the 53km (i think) of EV mode that you can get before the engine needs to run. Do you find it rather hypocritical of the government to promote a Carbon Tax that was intended to help reduce pollution to decide that the cost of driving is simply too much because the cost of fuel went up by 15% ??
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
371 Posts
Nice letter, you'll have to share the response with us when you get it. (That will likely reflect more on the staff your Premier has hired than on him personally, but that's still a good indirect reflection).

Gas prices have been spiking in California too, but I think BC beats us (in spite of our tax load). An internet search suggests that BC residents are currently paying about CAD 1.64/liter. In my part of CA, we're paying USD 3.89/gallon, which works out to 1.03 USD/liter or 1.39 CAD/liter after factoring in the current exchange rate, assuming I did the math right.

In my case, I don't care that much, because I have the opposite problem: I'm driving my PHEV around with 3/4 of a tank that I purchased in early January and starting to fret that I need to either use that up pretty soon with a road trip or else put fuel stabilizer in the tank because that's kind of a long time to have the same gas in your tank. But I know I"m an anomaly in this regard.

I don't follow Canadian politics as closely as I probably should, but I've always had a favorable impression. I did a little reading after seeing your post, and my impression is that your Premier is doing what any smart politician would do in the current situation: he's recognized that you're paying a lot for gas (looks to me like you're paying more than anywhere in the US or the UK, aside perhaps from some really remote locations in the US, like that rare gas station out in a small town atop the Sierras). The article I read said "Horgan says his government will monitor prices at the pumps over the summer after they reached the benchmark record of almost $1.64 a litre Thursday in Metro Vancouver". I take that to mean that he's floating a trial balloon and waiting to hear from people like yourself about whether he should do something or not. Strikes me as a reasonable approach for a politician to take.



But reducing the tax is kind of a lame solution, especially when a better alternative would be to increase competition. The California gas market suffers from a lack of competition compared to the gas markets east of the Sierra mountains, and it sounds like BC might be in a similar situation. This article (from a year ago) supports the idea that BC gas prices suffer from a lack of competition.



Hope it gets better soon for you.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
457 Posts
Discussion Starter #3 (Edited)
The problem inside of BC really hasn't got anything to do with lack of competition, if anything it is there is too much. The supply of gas "product" is effectively in short supply compared to the demand and so simple economics show that price will then go up.
The model is made worse with the political interference by this government with the neighbor over a pipe or more to the case, and new pipe that will transport oil to ship overseas.

BC itself doesn't have much refinery capacity to make its own gas from oil, so it has to import in the manufactured product along with the oil for what capacity it has. This war on words over the pipe has caused the importers of gas to hedge their bets and charge more to cover the cost of uncertainty.

Then you throw in the side that the local government has mandated that all new cars by 2040 must be zero emission, so even though there is a demand right now for increased capacity to gas, they don't want to make more refineries to manufacture it because:

1. The demand for it will lessen after 20 years, and it will take at least 7-8 years to get a refinery built.

2. A refinery makes pollution and they are trying to become a much cleaner and greener province. Or at least the appearance of it.

3. They are the ones that are causing the problem in the first place with the argument over the pipe and it makes their position worse or at least look bad in their fight to stop the pipe if they start looking into making a refinery,

4. They know with some of the Federal bills they support, specifically Bill69, that if that even if the first 3 points were not an issue, it could never get built as the new proposed law will effectively kill any and all new construction of anything to do with oil.

The funny part is that Canada as a whole account for such a small part of the global amount of CO2 produced that anything done to reduce the footprint is effectively window dressing. It is sort of like when you go to a concert and the band gets the audience to sing. Your voice might sound loud to you, but really in the bigger picture doesn't make a lick of difference to the total sound of everyone singing. If you stopped, the people at the other end of the stadium wouldn't know. It takes a large number of people to make the sound. The USA, China, India, Rusia are all big enough groups that as a whole we have a problem. There are enough people inside these groups to produce a large amount of CO2 that it has affected the planet. It will take enough of these large groups to want to stop or at least cut down for change to start happening. I know the change is happening in the USA and it's great that it is. I think it is starting to happen in China too. Sadly I fear it is not in India, and that in reality it is just getting worse there and offsetting anything that the USA has done to get better.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
36 Posts
The problem inside of BC really hasn't got anything to do with lack of competition, if anything it is there is too much. The supply of gas "product" is effectively in short supply compared to the demand and so simple economics show that price will then go up.
The model is made worse with the political interference by this government with the neighbor over a pipe or more to the case, and new pipe that will transport oil to ship overseas.

BC itself doesn't have much refinery capacity to make its own gas from oil, so it has to import in the manufactured product along with the oil for what capacity it has. This war on words over the pipe has caused the importers of gas to hedge their bets and charge more to cover the cost of uncertainty.

Then you throw in the side that the local government has mandated that all new cars by 2040 must be zero emission, so even though there is a demand right now for increased capacity to gas, they don't want to make more refineries to manufacture it because:

1. The demand for it will lessen after 20 years, and it will take at least 7-8 years to get a refinery built.

2. A refinery makes pollution and they are trying to become a much cleaner and greener province. Or at least the appearance of it.

3. They are the ones that are causing the problem in the first place with the argument over the pipe and it makes their position worse or at least look bad in their fight to stop the pipe if they start looking into making a refinery,

4. They know with some of the Federal bills they support, specifically Bill69, that if that even if the first 3 points were not an issue, it could never get built as the new proposed law will effectively kill any and all new construction of anything to do with oil.

The funny part is that Canada as a whole account for such a small part of the global amount of CO2 produced that anything done to reduce the footprint is effectively window dressing. It is sort of like when you go to a concert and the band gets the audience to sing. Your voice might sound loud to you, but really in the bigger picture doesn't make a lick of difference to the total sound of everyone singing. If you stopped, the people at the other end of the stadium wouldn't know. It takes a large number of people to make the sound. The USA, China, India, Rusia are all big enough groups that as a whole we have a problem. There are enough people inside these groups to produce a large amount of CO2 that it has affected the planet. It will take enough of these large groups to want to stop or at least cut down for change to start happening. I know the change is happening in the USA and it's great that it is. I think it is starting to happen in China too. Sadly I fear it is not in India, and that in reality it is just getting worse there and offsetting anything that the USA has done to get better.
BC is mostly solar powered, and has been for many decades so it makes sense that we should keep electrifying our transportation.
If we were more serious about carbon emissions from cars, we'd have a revenue neutral penalty-reward system that would average fuel efficiency across all cars, including the hypothetical fuel efficiency of EVs. This way an ancient tech Dodge minivan or F-150 would suffer a massive penalty, and a Nissan Leaf driver would thank them for the rebate, on top of all other rebates.
It would make many people angry, but who cares. Those same people fill the air with toxic particulates that kill thousands of people a year, heat the planet up, and make a few psychopaths richer.
Rarely stopping for petrol in the Niro PHEV was a massive treat, but unless you've experienced it, pulling into a gas station just to use the toilet, or check tire pressure, in a pure EV is a bit of a high.
I'm in a Model 3 now. Missing some of the Niro comforts but really, really enjoying the range, power, handling, lack of maintenance, but most of all, no combustion motor so no gasoline!
The higher the price of fuel, the faster people will come to their senses and get a pure EV, and give the middle finger to the mega-corrupt oil companies.
I wanted the Niro EV so badly, but Kia is screwing that up. I hope it eventually does well since I really enjoyed the Kia experience.
Tesla is a nightmare to deal with! (But ****... The cars are nothing short of miraculous).
Also relatively cheap now!
Keep those petrol prices high, please.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
457 Posts
Discussion Starter #5 (Edited)
I personally do not have a problem with a Carbon Tax on Gasoline. I do have a problem with the way that they are rolling it out, and how it is being sold to the general public. Call it a tax for what it is and tell the people how it works and how it will effect you. Don't try and hide it behind a whole load of lies and they try and pull a fast one saying it won't cost you anything and most people will be get back more than they are paying. That is utter BS.


If you are going to have a plan to increase the cost of gasoline to help reduce the amount of polution by convincing people to either drive less or drive more efficiant, then SAY THAT.


I do have a problem with them putting the general cost of carbon on Natural Gas, as this is Canada, and we have to heat homes to live. Ontario SCREWED UP the cost of Electricity. Thee is no way anyone could afford to replace a NG furnace with an Electric one. and then the icing on the cake is that they have a whole bunch of NG boiler power stations that are stilling most of the time on standby producing CO2 with zero gain, just to cover if the Windmills don't produce enough power, and we get to pay the highest electricty costs in the country becuase our now EX-Liberal government couldn't figure out how to run a province without screwing most everyone who lives here.
 
1 - 5 of 5 Posts
Top