The Greenhouse Gas Emissions Coverage of Carbon Pricing Instruments for Canadian Provinces
The Government of Canada first announced its intention to implement a nation-wide carbon price in October 2016. After two years of announcements, retractions, discussions and debate, the rollout of carbon pricing in each province was finalized in October 2018: the federal government announced its...
Main Authors: | , , |
---|---|
Format: | Article |
Language: | English |
Published: |
University of Calgary
2019-03-01
|
Series: | The School of Public Policy Publications |
Online Access: | ttps://www.policyschool.ca/wp-content/uploads/2019/02/Carbon-Pricing-Dobson-Winter-Boyd-final2.pdf |
Summary: | The Government of Canada first announced its intention to implement a
nation-wide carbon price in October 2016. After two years of announcements,
retractions, discussions and debate, the rollout of carbon pricing in each
province was finalized in October 2018: the federal government announced its
assessment of proposed and implemented provincial carbon pricing plans. We
now can compare the coverage, stringency and efficacy of provincial climate
policies, and to consider how they measure up with each other and with the
federal government’s standards.
This paper focuses primarily on provincial systems’ emissions coverage: the share
of emissions subject to a carbon price. The federal government has set a pricing
benchmark, the minimum level of emissions coverage that provincial pricing
policies are required to meet. The federal backstop — consisting of a carbon
tax and output-based pricing system (OBPS) for large emitters — is imposed
on provinces whose policies don’t measure up to the federal benchmark. We
examine how the coverage of implemented, announced and former provincial
pricing policies measure up to the benchmark and backstop. Using reported
emissions data for each province from 2015, we provide an estimate of emissions
coverage in each province from the policies in effect in 2019.
The federal benchmark is defined as covering substantively the same sources
as British Columbia’s economy-wide tax on combustion emissions. Part of the
motivation for the benchmark was to tackle the consistency problem arising
from disparate provincial pricing policies. The federal government, however, has
opted not to consistently enforce the benchmark across the provinces. As a
result, the carbon pricing scene in Canada resembles a patchwork quilt, with
policies and coverage varying across the country.
Only two provinces — British Columbia and Quebec — have provincial pricing
plans where coverage meets the federal benchmark. British Columbia’s carbon
tax is the definition for the benchmark, while in Quebec the cap-and-trade system
surpasses the benchmark and provides coverage comparable to the federal backstop.
Alberta, Nova Scotia, Prince Edward Island, and Newfoundland and Labrador have all
introduced provincial carbon pricing plans that fall short of the federal benchmark for
coverage. Despite this, all four provinces received the federal government’s endorsement.
Alberta’s shortcoming is the result of a targeted and short-term exemption of small
oil and gas producers, while Nova Scotia’s cap-and-trade program meets the federal
benchmark’s stringency requirement for overall emissions reductions. This likely explains
the federal government’s flexibility with these provinces. The justification for the
exceptions provided to Prince Edward Island and Newfoundland and Labrador are less
obvious, and may be a nod towards the relatively rural nature of both provinces, as well
as more limited access to lower-emitting fossil fuel substitutes.
The remaining four provinces — Saskatchewan, Manitoba, Ontario and New Brunswick
— will see the federal backstop imposed in whole or in part. In Saskatchewan the federal
backstop will be a top-up to the province’s proposed performance standards system. New
Brunswick’s proposed carbon pricing plan includes adoption of the federal backstop’s
OBPS for its large emitters. Its carbon tax, however, fell explicitly short of the federal
benchmark. As a result, the backstop will be imposed in full in the province.
The federal backstop will also be imposed in full in Manitoba and Ontario, a result of
both provinces reneging on their original carbon pricing plans. Coverage of the now
defunct plans in both provinces exceeded the federal benchmark and were comparable
to the federal backstop. With the federal backstop, both provinces now face higher
carbon prices in the long run and have sacrificed control of carbon pricing revenue to
the federal government.
When all is said and done, carbon pricing coverage differs substantially across the
provinces. Due to variation in emission sources, as well as region-specific exemptions,
carbon pricing coverage will range from 47 per cent of emissions in Prince Edward Island
to 90 per cent in New Brunswick.
Some of the disparity in provincial coverage reflects differences in provinces’ industrial
profiles. This points to a need for complementary emissions-reduction policies for noncombustion emissions in these jurisdictions. Other disparities, however, can be traced
to the federal government’s inconsistent application of the coverage benchmark. The
federal government will likely face increasing pressure on this point going forward,
particularly from the growing number of provinces that are opposed to carbon pricing
and expected to criticize any evidence of inequitable treatment. |
---|---|
ISSN: | 2560-8312 2560-8320 |