• John
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    13
    ·
    1 year ago

    sounds good to me.

    Conservatives will oppose it because they live in a fantasy world view fed to them by people working for oil companies.

  • RandAlThor
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    17
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    1 year ago

    Not an issue for me. 17 cents more in 2030? I’m sure the greedy corps would have pushed the fuel price by a lot more in 7 year’s time.

    • i_love_FFT@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      1 year ago

      17 cents? That’s just normal price hike in the last 6 month.

      It’ll go down 4 cents then up 10 cents, rinse and repeat every 2 weeks 😓

    • CoderKat@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      And that’s just what the Parliamentary Budget Office predicted. The article also has another prediction:

      “There’s a zero per cent chance it would be worse than what the Parliamentary Budget Office is saying,” said Wolinetz, who predicts a cost impact of under 10 cents a litre by 2030.

  • CoderKat@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    9
    ·
    1 year ago

    Good. Some people will try to phrase this as a bad thing because yes, you will pay more (eventually, anyway – article says they don’t expect “any real bite until around 2025”). But we should be paying more given the environmental damage that burning this fuel causes. We should not be effectively subsidizing oil companies by paying the cost of their negative externalities.

    If anything, I think there should be even more than this. We should have Norway style taxation on fuel. They have a massive savings fund that massively dwarfs our own closest equivalent.

    • ConTheLibrarian@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Also I was reading that the ceiling impact will be ~$0.17/L… and that the actual cost to consumers is expected to be lower.

      I have a 40L tank… Gas costing $4 more per fill to help stop the goddamn planet burning up seems worth it to me.

      I think the real concern should be if Oil/Gas companies will actually reduce emmisions or just use this as cover to gouge us $0.17 on day 1 and $1.70 on day 1000.

      • S_204@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        It’s not going to stop the planet from burning unless you (and the rest of us) stop driving as much as we do…

          • ijeff
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            1 year ago

            Just curious why this post was removed. I see it in the modlog and there doesn’t seem to be anything wrong with it? Possibly in error?

            • ConTheLibrarian@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              1 year ago

              I think you’re right. AFAICT my original comment remains adjacent to it.

              “Fully agree it won’t prevent catastrophe on its own. I’m a huge proponent of better public transit and more walkable cities.”

  • PerogiBoi
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    9
    ·
    1 year ago

    More incentive for people to look at hybrids or electric for their next car.

  • TemporaryBoyfriend
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    9
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Why put such a shitty spin on it? We’re developing clean fuel tech – focus on that, mention the increase in costs, and spin it as a way to accelerate the transition to electric mobility.

  • Showroom7561
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    1 year ago

    I’ll just ride my bike more. I’m easily saving $2-6 per errand by using a bike instead of a car.