Carbon tax costs average Alberta family $911 this year

From the Canadian Taxpayers Federation

The Canadian Taxpayers Federation is calling on Prime Minister Justin Trudeau to scrap the carbon tax, which is set to increase April 1.

“Alberta families are fighting to afford food and home heating and the last thing they need is Trudeau’s carbon tax hike,” said Kris Sims, CTF Alberta Director. “It’s wrong for the Trudeau government to punish Albertans for driving their cars, heating their homes and buying food.”

The federal carbon tax is set to increase to 17 cents per litre of gasoline, 21 cents per litre of diesel and 15 cents per cubic metre of natural gas on April 1.

The carbon tax will cost about $12 extra to fill up a minivan and about $18 extra to fill up a pickup truck. Truckers filling up their big rigs with diesel will pay about $200 extra due to the carbon tax.

For natural gas home heating, the average Alberta household will pay about $439 extra in the carbon tax.

According to the Parliamentary Budget Officer, the carbon tax will cost the average family in Alberta $911 this year, even after the rebates are factored in.

A Leger poll showed 72 per cent of Albertans oppose the April 1 carbon tax increase.

“If Trudeau really cares about making life more affordable for Canadians, then at the very least he wouldn’t hike his carbon tax again,” said Franco Terrazzano, CTF Federal Director. “The PBO is clear: the carbon tax costs average families hundreds of dollars more every year than they get back in rebates.”

Carbon tax costs, per PBO

Province	Net cost for the average household in 2024-25
Alberta	$911
Saskatchewan	$525
Manitoba	$502
Ontario	$627
Nova Scotia	$537
Prince Edward Island	$550
Newfoundland and Labrador	$377

Join now to get the Taxpayer newsletter

You can get the inside scoop right from my notebook each week so you can hold politicians accountable for hilarious and infuriating stories the media usually misses. You can sign up for the Taxpayer Update Newsletter now.
— Franco Terrazzano, Federal Director

Related Topics:#CanadianTaxpayersFederation #CarbonTaxAlberta #KrisSims

Up Next

Alberta and B.C. budgets represent two different approaches to government finances

Don't Miss

RFK Jr. warns Americans ‘will be slaves’ if central bank digital currency is established

Todayville

Todayville is a digital media and technology company. We profile unique stories and events in our community. Register and promote your community event for free.

Follow Author

Joe Rogan Tells Elon Musk He ‘Changed’ History By Buying Twitter, Calls Out Previous Government Interference

Fraser Institute / 1 hour ago

U.S. election should focus or what works and what doesn’t work

Business / 2 hours ago

EU Tightens Social Media Censorship Screw With Upcoming Mandatory “Disinformation” Rules

Alberta

Alberta calling for federal election! Premier Smith demands feds scrap dangerous oil and gas production caps

Published on November 4, 2024

Government of Alberta

Premier Danielle Smith, Minister of Environment and Protected Areas Rebecca Schulz and Minister of Energy and Minerals Brian Jean issued the following statement on the proposed federal oil and gas production cap:

“This production cap will hurt families, hurt businesses and hurt Canada’s economy. We will defend our province, our country and our Constitutional rights.

“Make no mistake, this cap violates Canada’s constitution. Section 92A clearly gives provinces exclusive jurisdiction over non-renewable natural resource development yet this cap will require a one million barrel a day production cut by 2030.

“The evidence is overwhelming. Three reports from reputable firms have shown that these regulations will sucker-punch Canada’s economy, a million barrels cut every day according to S&P Global, $28 billion a year in lost GDP according to Deloitte, and up to 150,000 lost jobs according to the Conference Board of Canada.

“The losses to GDP mean billions a year will disappear from the economy. Billions that won’t be going towards new schools, hospitals and roads, all for a reckless ideological scheme that will not reduce global emissions.

“Ultimately, this cap will lead Alberta and our country into economic and societal decline. The average Canadian family would be left with up to $419 less for groceries, mortgage payments and utilities every month. Canadian parents and workers will suffer while Justin Trudeau outsources the duty to provide safe, affordable, reliable and responsibly produced oil and gas to dictators and less clean producers around the world. We could be the solution. Instead, Ottawa would rather sacrifice our ability to lead.

“Tweaks won’t work. This cap must be scrapped. Alberta’s government is actively exploring the use of every legal option, including a constitutional challenge and the use of the Alberta Sovereignty within a United Canada Act. We will not stand idly by while the federal government sacrifices our prosperity, our constitution and our quality of life for its extreme agenda.”

Energy

Ottawa’s plan to decarbonize Canada’s electricity by 2035 not feasible and would require equivalent of 23 Site C hydroelectric dams

Published on November 3, 2024

Todayville

From the Fraser Institute

By Elmira Aliakbari and Jock Finlayson

The federal government’s plan to make all electricity generation in Canada carbon-free by 2035 is impractical and highly unlikely, given physical, infrastructure, financial, and regulatory realities. So says a new study published today by the Fraser Institute, an independent, non-partisan Canadian public policy think-tank.

“Canada’s federal government has set an ambitious, and, frankly, unrealistic target of achieving complete carbon-free electricity in ten years,” said Jock Finlayson, Fraser Institute senior fellow and co-author of Implications of Decarbonizing Canada’s Electricity Grid.

The study finds that in 2023, nearly 81 per cent of Canada’s electricity came from carbon-free energy sources, including hydro, nuclear, wind and solar. But to replace the remaining 19 per cent which uses fossil fuels, in the next 10 years, would require constructing the equivalent of:

• Approximately 23 large hydroelectric dams, similar in size to BC’s Site C, or 24 comparable to Newfoundland and Labrador’s Muskrat Falls, or;

• More than four nuclear power plants similar in size to Ontario’s Darlington power station, or 2.3 large scale nuclear power plants equivalent to Ontario’s Bruce Power, or;

• Around 11,000 large wind turbines, which would not only require substantial investments in back-up power systems (since wind is intermittent) but would also require clearing 7,302 square kilometers of land—larger than the size of Prince Edward Island—excluding the additional land required for transmission infrastructure.

Currently, the process of planning and constructing major electricity generation facilities in Canada is complicated and time-consuming, often marked by delays, regulatory challenges, and significant cost overruns.

For example, BC’s Site C project took approximately 43 years from the initial planning studies in 1971 to receive environmental certification in 2014, with completion expected in 2025 at a cost of $16 billion.

What’s more, the significant energy infrastructure listed above would only meet Canada’s current electricity needs. As Canada’s population grows, the demand for electricity will increase significantly.

“It is not at all realistic that this scale of energy infrastructure can be planned, approved, financed and built in just 10 years, which is what would be required merely to decarbonize Canada’s existing electricity needs,” said Elmira Aliakbari, director natural resource studies at the Fraser Institute and study co-author.

“This doesn’t even account for the additional infrastructure needed to meet future electricity demand. Decarbonizing Canada’s electricity generation by 2035 is another case where the government has set completely unrealistic timelines without any meaningful plan to achieve it.”

This essay examines the implications of decarbonizing Canada’s electricity grid by replacing existing fossil fuel-based generation with clean energy sources.
In 2023, clean energy sources—including hydro, nuclear, and wind—produced 497.6 terawatt hours (TWh) of electricity, accounting for nearly 81% of Canada’s total supply, while fossil fuels contributed 117.7 TWh (19.1%). To replace this fossil fuel generation with hydro power alone would require about 23 large projects similar to BC’s Site C or 24 like Newfoundland & Labrador’s Muskrat Falls. Using nuclear power would necessitate building 2.3 facilities equivalent to Ontario’s Bruce Power or 4.3 similar to Darlington Nuclear Generating Station.
The process of planning and constructing electricity generation facilities in Canada is complex and time-consuming, often marked by delays, regulatory hurdles, and significant cost overruns. For example, the BC Site C project took approximately 43 years from the initial feasibility and planning studies in 1971 to receive environmental certification in 2014, with completion expected in 2025 at a cost of $16 billion.
Land requirements for new electricity generation facilities are also significant; replacing 117.7 TWh of fossil fuel-based electricity with hydro power, for instance, would need approximately 26,345 square kilometers, nearly half the size of Nova Scotia.
The slow pace of regulatory approvals, high and rising costs of major energy projects, substantial land requirements, and public opposition to project siting all cast doubt on the feasibility of achieving the necessary clean electricity infrastructure in the coming decade to fully replace fossil fuels in Canada.