I would like to point out a significant discrepancy in the recent letter “Math adds up on Carbon Tax rebate” published May 30, 2024. We should always have civil debates on the pros and cons of the Carbon Tax but we must use correct numbers.
The author uses a carbon tax on gas at $0.32/ltr when it is in fact only $0.143/ltr, however the calculation in print was out by a factor of 10. Using the authors average of 1,500 litres annual per car, which is low with two children, the additional cost would be $214 per car in Carbon tax and $428 per family with two cars versus the authors number of $96.
The author states they live in an apartment and therefore do not get a heating bill so the use of incorrect numbers for heating may be a simple mistake from an outside source. The calculation is based on 120Gj per year for a average bungalow and is within the range, albeit on the lower side. The author uses a carbon tax of $0.768/Gj while the current actual tax is $3.36/Gj. This is not an insignificant number change. The authors assumption that the annual cost would only be $92.16 annually is significantly lower than the actual tax at $403.
While it is apparent the author is not a fan of MP Blake Richards, presenting incorrect numbers of $188 versus actual of $831 is doing exactly what the author accuses Mr. Richards of doing.
There is no doubt that carbon tax on businesses are all eventually passed on to the end consumer as that is what businesses must do in order to remain competitive.
The incremental cost of the carbon tax charged is multiplied any time carbon is used in the process of growing or manufacturing a product and delivering it to the end consumer. Even the authors rent will need to increase to pay the carbon tax on heating their apartment.
We can discuss the effectiveness of the carbon tax on CO2 reduction but we need to at least all agree on facts of the direct cost to individuals and families.
Greg Trout,
Cochrane, AB
