New federal fuel regulations are coming soon — here's what you can expect | Canada News Media
Connect with us

Business

New federal fuel regulations are coming soon — here’s what you can expect

Published

 on

In just three weeks, new federal regulations will begin slapping surcharges on the most polluting fuels in a bid to rein in transportation emissions.

Eventually, those Clean Fuel Regulations will make gasoline more expensive. The federal Conservatives and the Canadian Taxpayers Federation have taken to calling them “carbon tax 2.0” or “the second carbon tax.” Premiers in Atlantic Canada are urging Ottawa to postpone or reverse them.

This week, Saskatchewan Premier Scott Moe joined their campaign.

“I agree with my Atlantic counterparts, premiers from Atlantic Canada, that have called on the federal minister to delay the implementation of these to ensure that the minister is doing proper and appropriate consultation,” he told CBC News.

“The clean fuel standard has a potential for quite a disproportionate impact in various areas of the nation.”

So what are the federal Clean Fuel Regulations? How do they work?

Saskatchewan Premier Scott Moe says the regulations could have a ‘disproportionate impact’ on some parts of the country. (Kirk Fraser/CBC)

Federal regulations already require a minimum percentage of biofuels in gasoline and diesel. Starting July 1, a new regime will replace those rules.

The new regulations are meant to cut the “carbon intensity” of automotive fuels sold on the Canadian market — how much they generate in emissions for a given amount of energy. Unlike the current rules, the new ones cover the entire life cycle of fuels, from production and transport to consumption.

The goal is to push companies that produce or import fuel to gradually reduce the emissions intensity of that process by setting a ceiling and dropping it each year. By 2030, the rules will require a 15 per cent cut in emissions intensity compared to 2016 levels.

Producers could comply with the new rules in different ways. They could put more ethanol in their gasoline, use more biodiesel or find innovative ways of reducing their refineries’ emissions through, for example, carbon capture and storage.

Producers that come in below the federal government’s emissions intensity ceiling will earn extra credits they can sell. Other producers can buy those credits if their fuels fall short.

It’s also possible for others to earn credits through investments in, for example, electric vehicle charging stations, and to sell those credits to fuel producers.

How much will they cost?

The new Clean Fuel Regulations come into force on July 1 but refineries will have a year to comply. The federal government says it doesn’t think consumers will notice any added costs right away.

Environment and Climate Change Canada (ECCC) says the regulations’ impact on gas prices will be “minimal” for the next few years — since producers should be able to meet the standards by taking steps they probably would have taken anyway.

ECCC predicts that by 2030, consumers should see some added costs when filling their tanks, although the department isn’t certain how big the price bump will be. It estimates a price increase at the pumps by 2030 of anywhere between six and 13 cents per litre for gasoline, depending on how refineries comply.

The Parliamentary Budget Office (PBO) predicts a price increase of 17 cents per litre.

That’s on top of the 37 cents the carbon tax will add to a litre of gasoline by 2030.

The economic cost will be a hit to GDP of roughly $9 billion and a cut to emissions of about 27 million tonnes in 2030, says an ECCC regulatory impact analysis.

The government estimates that by 2040, the regulations will have cut emissions by around 200 million tonnes at a cost to GDP of $30 billion. Given how much each tonne of carbon costs society in increased climate warming, the government calculates that it’s a good bargain.

Is this just another carbon tax?

Strictly speaking, no. A carbon tax imposes a surcharge on every litre of fuel based on its carbon content. The Clean Fuel Regulations work differently, since they only penalize the dirtiest fuels.

“It’s almost like a carbon tax, but it doesn’t put the charge on every litre, so it can do more to encourage efficiency or fuel switching toward low carbon fuels or low carbon electricity without having the same price impacts on the fuel itself,” said climate economist Mark Jaccard, a professor at Simon Fraser University and an expert on clean fuel standards.

The regulations actually work more like a cap-and-trade system, which provincial governments used well before the federal carbon tax.

“It’s like a cap-and-trade system for intensity as opposed to absolute emissions,” said Jaccard.

And the federal government itself won’t collect a dime from the regulations. Instead, the money moves from producers of polluting fuels to producers of clean energy, making the cleaner fuels cheaper.

“Those who make biofuels, those who make hydrogen, those who make electricity, they actually get money coming into their pockets, because the higher intensity sellers of fuels have to buy credits from them,” Jaccard said.

The Supreme Court of Canada also found that the federal government’s carbon pricing system isn’t really a tax. That hasn’t stopped Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre, Moe and other critics from calling it one.

Jaccard said it doesn’t really matter if the emissions reduction tool is called a tax or a regulation — because in order to work, the tool must increase the cost at the pumps.

“The effect to the consumer is no different,” Jaccard said.

Who wins, who loses?

In a recent analysis, the PBO concluded that the regulations would hit people differently depending on how much they earn and where they live.

Since low-income people use a higher portion of their earnings on fuel, they’ll feel more pain. So will the Atlantic and Prairie provinces. The PBO predicts the regulations will cost an average Saskatchewan household $1,117 and the average Alberta household $1,157 in 2030.

Those totals come from higher fuel costs, inflated prices for other goods and impacts on wages and other earnings. In B.C., the PBO says the hit will add up to just $384 in 2030 for the average household.

The economic toll will also vary widely. In Newfoundland and Labrador, real GDP is forecast to be about one per cent lower in 2030 than it would have been without the regulations. Saskatchewan would be the next worst off, with a hit of 0.9 per cent that year, the PBO found.

Moe said those are good reasons to hit pause and look for ways to limit the damage for the regions that will feel it more.

“Slow down, understand what the economic impacts are, work with the industry on what’s achievable,” he said.

In its regulatory impact assessment, ECCC said it conducted years of consultations with industry. It cited a long list of working groups, committees and consultation documents that resulted in hundreds of comments on the regulations. It said provinces were “heavily engaged.”

Despite the PBO report and Moe’s concerns, Jaccard said he’s not convinced the regulations will have a great negative impact on provinces like Saskatchewan and Alberta.

“A clean fuel standard in transportation would not have markedly different regional costs or transfers going on,” he said. “I’ve read no evidence for that.”

He said the the Prairie provinces also stand to benefit from the regulations.

“In B.C. when we buy the biofuels, we buy them from the Prairies,” said Jaccard.

Canola blooms in farm fields near La Salle, Manitoba on July 28, 2022. Canola is used to make biofuels. (Shannon VanRaes/Reuters)

Chris Vervaet, executive director of the Canadian Oilseed Processors Association, said he also thinks the regulations will benefit his industry. He said his group was “heavily involved” in their development.

“We’re optimistic that the Clean Fuel Regulations will be a demand driver for our low-carbon feedstock,” he told CBC News.

Vervaet said he’s already seeing billions of dollars of investment in new processing facilities. He predicted the regulations will give producers a chance to diversify away from unpredictable sources like China.

“We have a market here in Canada that is more predictable, so that’s a huge advantage,” he said.

That could explain why Moe — who never has a single nice word to say about carbon taxation — has been less ferocious in his opposition to the Clean Fuel Regulations. He acknowledged they have the “ability” to rein in admissions and could even bring benefits to agriculture in his province.

“There quite likely is a path through, as I say, consulting with industries, consulting with the provinces, in putting together a policy in this space that likely is workable,” he said.

Adblock test (Why?

Source link

Continue Reading

Business

The #1 Skill I Look For When Hiring

Published

 on

File this column under “for what it’s worth.”

“Communication is one of the most important skills you require for a successful life.” — Catherine Pulsifer, author.

I’m one hundred percent in agreement with Pulsifer, which is why my evaluation of candidates begins with their writing skills. If a candidate’s writing skills and verbal communication skills, which I’ll assess when interviewing, aren’t well above average, I’ll pass on them regardless of their skills and experience.

 

Why?

 

Because business is fundamentally about getting other people to do things—getting employees to be productive, getting customers to buy your products or services, and getting vendors to agree to a counteroffer price. In business, as in life in general, you can’t make anything happen without effective communication; this is especially true when job searching when your writing is often an employer’s first impression of you.

 

Think of all the writing you engage in during a job search (resumes, cover letters, emails, texts) and all your other writing (LinkedIn profile, as well as posts and comments, blogs, articles, tweets, etc.) employers will read when they Google you to determine if you’re interview-worthy.

 

With so much of our communication today taking place via writing (email, text, collaboration platforms such as Microsoft Teams, Slack, ClickUp, WhatsApp and Rocket.Chat), the importance of proficient writing skills can’t be overstated.

 

When assessing a candidate’s writing skills, you probably think I’m looking for grammar and spelling errors. Although error-free writing is important—it shows professionalism and attention to detail—it’s not the primary reason I look at a candidate’s writing skills.

 

The way someone writes reveals how they think.

 

  • Clear writing = Clear thinking
  • Structured paragraphs = Structured mind
  • Impactful sentences = Impactful ideas

 

Effective writing isn’t about using sophisticated vocabulary. Hemingway demonstrated that deceptively simple, stripped-down prose can captivate readers. Effective writing takes intricate thoughts and presents them in a way that makes the reader think, “Damn! Why didn’t I see it that way?” A good writer is a dead giveaway for a good thinker. More than ever, the business world needs “good thinkers.”

 

Therefore, when I come across a candidate who’s a good writer, hence a good thinker, I know they’re likely to be able to write:

 

  • Emails that don’t get deleted immediately and are responded to
  • Simple, concise, and unambiguous instructions
  • Pitches that are likely to get read
  • Social media content that stops thumbs
  • Human-sounding website copy
  • Persuasively, while attuned to the reader’s possible sensitivities

 

Now, let’s talk about the elephant in the room: AI, which job seekers are using en masse. Earlier this year, I wrote that AI’s ability to hyper-increase an employee’s productivity—AI is still in its infancy; we’ve seen nothing yet—in certain professions, such as writing, sales and marketing, computer programming, office and admin, and customer service, makes it a “fewer employees needed” tool, which understandably greatly appeals to employers. In my opinion, the recent layoffs aren’t related to the economy; they’re due to employers adopting AI. Additionally, companies are trying to balance investing in AI with cost-cutting measures. CEOs who’ve previously said, “Our people are everything,” have arguably created today’s job market by obsessively focusing on AI to gain competitive advantages and reduce their largest expense, their payroll.

 

It wouldn’t be a stretch to assume that most AI usage involves generating written content, content that’s obvious to me, and likely to you as well, to have been written by AI. However, here’s the twist: I don’t particularly care.

 

Why?

 

Because the fundamental skill I’m looking for is the ability to organize thoughts and communicate effectively. What I care about is whether the candidate can take AI-generated content and transform it into something uniquely valuable. If they can, they’re demonstrating the skills of being a good thinker and communicator. It’s like being a great DJ; anyone can push play, but it takes skill to read a room and mix music that gets people pumped.

 

Using AI requires prompting effectively, which requires good writing skills to write clear and precise instructions that guide the AI to produce desired outcomes. Prompting AI effectively requires understanding structure, flow and impact. You need to know how to shape raw information, such as milestones throughout your career when you achieved quantitative results, into a compelling narrative.

So, what’s the best way to gain and enhance your writing skills? As with any skill, you’ve got to work at it.

Two rules guide my writing:

 

  • Use strong verbs and nouns instead of relying on adverbs, such as “She dashed to the store.” instead of “She ran quickly to the store.” or “He whispered to the child.” instead of “He spoke softly to the child.”
  • Avoid using long words when a shorter one will do, such as “use” instead of “utilize” or “ask” instead of “inquire.” As attention spans get shorter, I aim for clarity, simplicity and, most importantly, brevity in my writing.

 

Don’t just string words together; learn to organize your thoughts, think critically, and communicate clearly. Solid writing skills will significantly set you apart from your competition, giving you an advantage in your job search and career.

_____________________________________________________________________

 

Nick Kossovan, a well-seasoned veteran of the corporate landscape, offers “unsweetened” job search advice. You can send Nick your questions to artoffindingwork@gmail.com.

Continue Reading

Business

Politics likely pushed Air Canada toward deal with ‘unheard of’ gains for pilots

Published

 on

 

MONTREAL – Politics, public opinion and salary hikes south of the border helped push Air Canada toward a deal that secures major pay gains for pilots, experts say.

Hammered out over the weekend, the would-be agreement includes a cumulative wage hike of nearly 42 per cent over four years — an enormous bump by historical standards — according to one source who was not authorized to speak publicly on the matter. The previous 10-year contract granted increases of just two per cent annually.

The federal government’s stated unwillingness to step in paved the way for a deal, noted John Gradek, after Prime Minister Justin Trudeau made it plain the two sides should hash one out themselves.

“Public opinion basically pressed the federal cabinet, including the prime minister, to keep their hands clear of negotiations and looking at imposing a settlement,” said Gradek, who teaches aviation management at McGill University.

After late-night talks at a hotel near Toronto’s Pearson airport, the country’s biggest airline and the union representing 5,200-plus aviators announced early Sunday morning they had reached a tentative agreement, averting a strike that would have grounded flights and affected some 110,000 passengers daily.

The relative precariousness of the Liberal minority government as well as a push to appear more pro-labour underlay the prime minister’s hands-off approach to the negotiations.

Trudeau said Friday the government would not step in to fix the impasse — unlike during a massive railway work stoppage last month and a strike by WestJet mechanics over the Canada Day long weekend that workers claimed road roughshod over their constitutional right to collective bargaining. Trudeau said the government respects the right to strike and would only intervene if it became apparent no negotiated deal was possible.

“They felt that they really didn’t want to try for a third attempt at intervention and basically said, ‘Let’s let the airline decide how they want to deal with this one,'” said Gradek.

“Air Canada ran out of support as the week wore on, and by the time they got to Friday night, Saturday morning, there was nothing left for them to do but to basically try to get a deal set up and accepted by ALPA (Air Line Pilots Association).”

Trudeau’s government was also unlikely to consider back-to-work legislation after the NDP tore up its agreement to support the Liberal minority in Parliament, Gradek said. Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre, whose party has traditionally toed a more pro-business line, also said last week that Tories “stand with the pilots” and swore off “pre-empting” the negotiations.

Air Canada CEO Michael Rousseau had asked Ottawa on Thursday to impose binding arbitration pre-emptively — “before any travel disruption starts” — if talks failed. Backed by business leaders, he’d hoped for an effective repeat of the Conservatives’ move to head off a strike in 2012 by legislating Air Canada pilots and ground crew to stick to their posts before any work stoppage could start.

The request may have fallen flat, however. Gradek said he believes there was less anxiety over the fallout from an airline strike than from the countrywide railway shutdown.

He also speculated that public frustration over thousands of cancelled flights would have flowed toward Air Canada rather than Ottawa, prompting the carrier to concede to a deal yielding “unheard of” gains for employees.

“It really was a total collapse of the Air Canada bargaining position,” he said.

Pilots are slated to vote in the coming weeks on the four-year contract.

Last year, pilots at Delta Air Lines, United Airlines and American Airlines secured agreements that included four-year pay boosts ranging from 34 per cent to 40 per cent, ramping up pressure on other carriers to raise wages.

After more than a year of bargaining, Air Canada put forward an offer in August centred around a 30 per cent wage hike over four years.

But the final deal, should union members approve it, grants a 26 per cent increase in the first year alone, retroactive to September 2023, according to the source. Three wage bumps of four per cent would follow in 2024 through 2026.

Passengers may wind up shouldering some of that financial load, one expert noted.

“At the end of the day, it’s all us consumers who are paying,” said Barry Prentice, who heads the University of Manitoba’s transport institute.

Higher fares may be mitigated by the persistence of budget carrier Flair Airlines and the rapid expansion of Porter Airlines — a growing Air Canada rival — as well as waning demand for leisure trips. Corporate travel also remains below pre-COVID-19 levels.

Air Canada said Sunday the tentative contract “recognizes the contributions and professionalism of Air Canada’s pilot group, while providing a framework for the future growth of the airline.”

The union issued a statement saying that, if ratified, the agreement will generate about $1.9 billion of additional value for Air Canada pilots over the course of the deal.

Meanwhile, labour tension with cabin crew looms on the horizon. Air Canada is poised to kick off negotiations with the union representing more than 10,000 flight attendants this year before the contract expires on March 31.

This report by The Canadian Press was first published Sept. 16, 2024.

Companies in this story: (TSX:AC)

Source link

Continue Reading

Business

Federal $500M bailout for Muskrat Falls power delays to keep N.S. rate hikes in check

Published

 on

 

HALIFAX – Ottawa is negotiating a $500-million bailout for Nova Scotia’s privately owned electric utility, saying the money will be used to prevent a big spike in electricity rates.

Federal Natural Resources Minister Jonathan Wilkinson made the announcement today in Halifax, saying Nova Scotia Power Inc. needs the money to cover higher costs resulting from the delayed delivery of electricity from the Muskrat Falls hydroelectric plant in Labrador.

Wilkinson says that without the money, the subsidiary of Emera Inc. would have had to increase rates by 19 per cent over “the short term.”

Nova Scotia Power CEO Peter Gregg says the deal, once approved by the province’s energy regulator, will keep rate increases limited “to be around the rate of inflation,” as costs are spread over a number of years.

The utility helped pay for construction of an underwater transmission link between Newfoundland and Nova Scotia, but the Muskrat Falls project has not been consistent in delivering electricity over the past five years.

Those delays forced Nova Scotia Power to spend more on generating its own electricity.

This report by The Canadian Press was first published Sept. 16, 2024.

The Canadian Press. All rights reserved.

Source link

Continue Reading

Trending

Exit mobile version