Alberta is the most US-like province. As it's not been hit by Trump tariffs, it opposes any change to the current situation. As it's based on oil revenue (with some food production), of course it opposes renewable energy sources. Bit selfish, it is.
I wonder how loud they'd yowl if "no trade with Canada" gores their ox?
Can someone explain why this is wrong? There are plenty of other things that require paying a fee upfront for disposal. And solar panels are notoriously poisonous and don’t belong in landfills. This seems like a particularly… environmentally friendly step? Why is this being framed as something bad?
Also the "notoriously poisonous" part is just... not true.
There's bad faith outrage drifters and climate denialists who promote that idea, but the most common solar panel designs do not contain lead or cadmium.
And even the ones that do, solar panels are 100% recyclable. They shouldn't be going to landfill anyway, every single component in them except the glue that holds it together can be remanufactured into more solar panels.
My understanding is that it’s the thin film variant that’s “famously poisonous”, the Cadmium Telluride ones. But that’s not the type that almost any field full of solar is made up of.
I think that's because it's adding to the cost of solar, effectively making it an barrier to entry; when other provinces or states have financial incentives to install solar panels instead.
This measure sounds a bit disingenuous since Alberta has such a large petroleum industry and this type of measure targets in particular renewables, it looks like a punitive tax. If the problem really is recycling costs, make them payable on recycling (like, again, many products such as used drywall or oil)
It will only make sense if the per cost panel is less than certain number (if my math is correct it should be $175), but if the panel cost is over $175 then even with more sales taxes in other provinces the total will be cheaper. That is of course on capital cost not operational, also, not counting the “forced recycling” mentioned.
First you introduce the tax, then you increase it. Minimum public anger. They messed up because it's a recycling tax that I presume does not apply to... everything? So it feels punitive. Also it's big. I pay way less recycling tax on bigger and harder to recycle items.
This is an insane take. A $14 recycling tax per $1000+ panel comes to <1.4%, which is around a quarter of federal sales tax for example, or 1/10 of combined GST and PST somewhere like BC.
Alberta has no provincial sales tax for the record and is the ONLY province without provincial sales tax. Solar panels are still more expensive in every other province in Canada based on sales tax rates alone.
<1.4% to fund the proper recycling of a solar panel seems more than reasonable.
Edit - also Alberta already has the lowest cost per installed watt of any province due to generally lower taxes and more vibrant construction ecosystem. Plus no PST. Complaining about a recycling fee is completely brain-dead and/or propaganda.
They probably should increase the levies. On the other hand, the province does get $20 billion+ in direct oil revenue per year (royalties), so it's not like oil companies are just straight up robbing us.
Except that revenue doesn't go towards well cleanup. Not really.
Also it goes up and down drastically. After Trump is finished making a mess in Hormuz, the number will go down again, and Alberta finance ministers will go back to ranting about reigning in excessive spending.
Has always seemed like a policy failure to not just charge those fees at the point of sale and then fund a robust waste disposal program for the community.
It is easier to do with a clear funding stream. Having it happen at point of sale means that funding can keep pace with consumption. Ideally you would also have different fees based on the difficulty of processing the item and also some type of redemption fee to help incentivize people to properly dispose of the items.
In theory Alberta also has a program about orphaned oil wells as well, but they're having trouble keeping up:
> Last year, the OWA estimated it would take until 2036 to clean up all the orphans. That timeline has now been extended, since it will more likely be between 2037 and 2040, said OWA president Lars DePauw in an interview with CBC News.
> As of March 2023, oil and gas companies owe rural municipalities $268 million in unpaid taxes;[17] they owe landowners "tens of millions in unpaid lease payments".[18] Original owners of what are now orphan wells "failed to fulfill their responsibility for costly end-of-life decommissioning and restoration work"; some sold these wells "strategically to insolvent operators".[18] Landowners suffer both "environmental and economic consequences" of having these wells on their property.[18] OWA funding is underfunded by at least several hundred million.[18] The total estimate for cleaning up all existing sites is as much as $260 billion. Remediation is paid for through federal and provincial bailouts, a PPP violation.[18]
She (Danielle Smith) is one of the shrewdest politicians in North America right now, actually.
Not, like good shrewd, but very tactically smart and with a very capable public relations ability capable of keeping a notoriously hard-to-tame right wing activist base in line behind her gov't.
Why don't they slap some punitive taxes on O&G executives whose companies that leave abandoned wells all over the province? No? Government too captured by corporate interests?
AER charges all active O&G companies operating in Alberta a levy that's meant to fund closing orphaned wells should a company go bankrupt and fail to close their wells. However, you can argue that the levy isn't high enough or that there are too many loopholes that let companies sell off, merge, etc. without closing down wells first.
I unfortunately live in Alberta and I have to say Smith seems decently smart. Which is not to say I agree with or would vote for her but that shes very capable of getting things she wants. Seeing Alberta pop up on HN so often is disheartening. I hope she gets voted out soon or I just might have to move
Right, I submitted because in addition to being from Alberta (originally, not there now) and having my whole family out there I think there's actually a useful analysis where Alberta's right wing forces have been for sometime a "vanguard" the further side of conservative ideology in North America ... and have had enormous "success" in not just fighting climate change initiatives but breaking apart a lot of the Canadian social contract. They're successful in enacting policy that even their own domestic population is wildly opposed to. Over and over again. E.g. they have extremely little support within their own urban centres, but still run the province however they want.
So actually, it's a place that needs to be watched as a barometer of the future, really. And an example of why "technology will save us from climate change" is a bad take: these people (petroleum sector) will fight tooth and nail to hold onto what they have and they will take us all down with them.
Lol Alberta absolutely mogs Canada in nearly every objective measurement.
Highest per capita GDP, most affordable housing for places you'd actually want to live (Calgary twice as affordable as Toronto or Vancouver), most private sector jobs, lowest taxes, etc...
It's why Alberta absolutely dominates inter-provincial migration. Thinking Alberta isn't the best province or that there's something wrong with the government has no basis in objective reality.
You should move to another Canadian province for a year, just to see.
I mistakingly moved to BC because my wife was sick of the cold and it's basically 3rd world compared to Alberta (apart from a small slice of Vancouver which is nice I guess).
It just has oil. While it is nice having low taxes because of all the oil money, it can also be draining being surrounded by people who want to be annexed by Trump, or hold socially regressive views. But economically yes it's a great province.
As opposed to the very productive and diversified Canadian economy? Over 50% of Canada's exports are natural resources and the rest of the economy is basically just downstream from that.
Where are the tech giants or manufacturing giants? We have 1 tech giant who constantly criticizes Canada, 1 large manufacturer that gets bailed out twice a decade and otherwise we're just a country of housing schemes, financial services and fast food/retail.
It's funny the housing angle that parent poster is playing, too. While Edmonton at least has made sensible decisions around its housing stock, the real reason why Alberta has "affordable housing" is that the absolutely brutally cyclical and volatile nature of the oil industry there means that every few years a wave of unemployment and poor economics knocks real estate prices down. Every time there's low oil prices there's hand wringing all over Alberta. It's just a volatile place to invest.
Alberta real estate is affordable relative to the rest of Canada because it's actually not a good investment. Not that I think real estate should be treated as an investment, and this isn't a knock per se, but it's also nothing to brag about that every few years scores of people in Alberta are losing their shirts on real estate.
I'll probably buy a house next year in Edmonton for my daughter to use (and rent out) while she's at the UofA, but I fully expect to either lose money or not gain on it.
Can't comment without knowing more specifically what you're comparing. Massive variation across both provinces, of course.
The standard unit in rural Alberta is the quarter section - 160 acres (half mile by half mile). Greater Edmonton is surrounded by mostly flat quarters in every direction as far as the eye can see.
Solar pv and batteries have already won the future as humanities main energy source.
Tar sand is going to be totaly abandoned as a fossil fuel even before coal.
Demand collapse for hydrocarbons has begun.
China has reduced oil consumption by 9% so far this year, CO² reductions are more, while there overall energy consumption has gone up.Many other countrys are following suit, and thats, that.
One thing I find endlessly funny is when people of a particular leaning adopt “the other side”’s arguments when it suits them. People who are left leaning generally have a positive view of taxation, and reject arguments that it stifles growth and development, or that it creates a complex bureaucratic environment. Yet the author seems to have no problem applying that argument when it suits their case. You see this on the right as well when so-called personal freedom enjoyers argue for the dismantling of certain individual freedoms if they disagree with them.
In this case it sounds like a nothing burger which is being used to fuel the authors personal vendetta against Alberta’s premiers.
Seems cheap to me. No way 14 bucks covers collection, transport to a specialized recycling plant and recycling of a panel. We also have a long hiatory of slapping recycling fees on electronics and other thibgs across canada so this doeant seem out of line at all.
47 comments
[ 0.23 ms ] story [ 29.1 ms ] threadI wonder how loud they'd yowl if "no trade with Canada" gores their ox?
There's bad faith outrage drifters and climate denialists who promote that idea, but the most common solar panel designs do not contain lead or cadmium.
And even the ones that do, solar panels are 100% recyclable. They shouldn't be going to landfill anyway, every single component in them except the glue that holds it together can be remanufactured into more solar panels.
This measure sounds a bit disingenuous since Alberta has such a large petroleum industry and this type of measure targets in particular renewables, it looks like a punitive tax. If the problem really is recycling costs, make them payable on recycling (like, again, many products such as used drywall or oil)
In case you want to appropriately calibrate your anger.
Note that usually you mount many solar panels, not just one, so this will stack relatively quickly.
That's about 24 panels for a modern install (500w bifacial n panels).
So a $336 premium, or roughly 1.3 additional panels in terms of cost.
While sure, that's not nothing, it's ~$6700 vs ~$7050, or ~0.5% in added cost to the pre-tax cost of the panels.
Here’s 31 445W panels for $4,650, full retail. This is literally the first google result I clicked.
Two and a half years ago I bought 18 405W panels for $3,312, full retail. They were cheaper wholesale.
https://cdnsolar.ca/products/canadian-solar-445w-all-black-p...
Alberta has no provincial sales tax for the record and is the ONLY province without provincial sales tax. Solar panels are still more expensive in every other province in Canada based on sales tax rates alone.
<1.4% to fund the proper recycling of a solar panel seems more than reasonable.
Edit - also Alberta already has the lowest cost per installed watt of any province due to generally lower taxes and more vibrant construction ecosystem. Plus no PST. Complaining about a recycling fee is completely brain-dead and/or propaganda.
Can Alberta apply it to oil and gas companies too?
Also it goes up and down drastically. After Trump is finished making a mess in Hormuz, the number will go down again, and Alberta finance ministers will go back to ranting about reigning in excessive spending.
https://www.aer.ca/regulations-and-compliance-enforcement/li...
(Other Canadian provinces have stronger programs, but still...)
In theory Alberta also has a program about orphaned oil wells as well, but they're having trouble keeping up:
> Last year, the OWA estimated it would take until 2036 to clean up all the orphans. That timeline has now been extended, since it will more likely be between 2037 and 2040, said OWA president Lars DePauw in an interview with CBC News.
* https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgary/bakx-owa-seqouia-albe...
And:
> As of March 2023, oil and gas companies owe rural municipalities $268 million in unpaid taxes;[17] they owe landowners "tens of millions in unpaid lease payments".[18] Original owners of what are now orphan wells "failed to fulfill their responsibility for costly end-of-life decommissioning and restoration work"; some sold these wells "strategically to insolvent operators".[18] Landowners suffer both "environmental and economic consequences" of having these wells on their property.[18] OWA funding is underfunded by at least several hundred million.[18] The total estimate for cleaning up all existing sites is as much as $260 billion. Remediation is paid for through federal and provincial bailouts, a PPP violation.[18]
* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orphan_wells_in_Alberta,_Canad...
"Privatize profits, socialize costs."
Start with gasoline and diesel first.
Not, like good shrewd, but very tactically smart and with a very capable public relations ability capable of keeping a notoriously hard-to-tame right wing activist base in line behind her gov't.
Best not to underestimate her.
So actually, it's a place that needs to be watched as a barometer of the future, really. And an example of why "technology will save us from climate change" is a bad take: these people (petroleum sector) will fight tooth and nail to hold onto what they have and they will take us all down with them.
Highest per capita GDP, most affordable housing for places you'd actually want to live (Calgary twice as affordable as Toronto or Vancouver), most private sector jobs, lowest taxes, etc...
It's why Alberta absolutely dominates inter-provincial migration. Thinking Alberta isn't the best province or that there's something wrong with the government has no basis in objective reality.
You should move to another Canadian province for a year, just to see.
I mistakingly moved to BC because my wife was sick of the cold and it's basically 3rd world compared to Alberta (apart from a small slice of Vancouver which is nice I guess).
Where are the tech giants or manufacturing giants? We have 1 tech giant who constantly criticizes Canada, 1 large manufacturer that gets bailed out twice a decade and otherwise we're just a country of housing schemes, financial services and fast food/retail.
Alberta real estate is affordable relative to the rest of Canada because it's actually not a good investment. Not that I think real estate should be treated as an investment, and this isn't a knock per se, but it's also nothing to brag about that every few years scores of people in Alberta are losing their shirts on real estate.
I'll probably buy a house next year in Edmonton for my daughter to use (and rent out) while she's at the UofA, but I fully expect to either lose money or not gain on it.
Contrast with Vancouver, which is hemmed in by ocean, mountains, and a border.
The standard unit in rural Alberta is the quarter section - 160 acres (half mile by half mile). Greater Edmonton is surrounded by mostly flat quarters in every direction as far as the eye can see.
These are the last gasps of the petro dollar.
Demand collapse for hydrocarbons has begun.China has reduced oil consumption by 9% so far this year, CO² reductions are more, while there overall energy consumption has gone up.Many other countrys are following suit, and thats, that.
ctrl- Danielle Smith
Ah.
One thing I find endlessly funny is when people of a particular leaning adopt “the other side”’s arguments when it suits them. People who are left leaning generally have a positive view of taxation, and reject arguments that it stifles growth and development, or that it creates a complex bureaucratic environment. Yet the author seems to have no problem applying that argument when it suits their case. You see this on the right as well when so-called personal freedom enjoyers argue for the dismantling of certain individual freedoms if they disagree with them.
In this case it sounds like a nothing burger which is being used to fuel the authors personal vendetta against Alberta’s premiers.