Technology

59312 readers

4649 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.

Our Rules

Follow the lemmy.world rules.
Only tech related content.
Be excellent to each another!
Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
Politics threads may be removed.
No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

988

Just 137 crypto miners use 2.3% of total U.S. power — government now requiring commercial miners to report energy consumption (www.tomshardware.com)

submitted 9 months ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

360 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] [email protected] 15 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (1 children)

Unfortunately they are correct as the carbon tax in Canada is indeed a racket. It's only on consumer consumption.

oil exports, our largest source of emissions, are exempt
agriculture and forestry, the next largest, also exempt
shipping and rail, oh look, exempt
heavy industry can buy phoney carbon credits for $5/ton instead of paying the $65/ton tax. Some of these are for forests that have already burned down
oh yeah the greatest emission source last year, dwarfing all others, 80% of our total emissions came from the massive forest fires for which our policy is just to LET THEM BURN

So the only people who carry the burden of the Canadian carbon tax are the ordinary taxpayers. But hey, the optics are good! Looks very progressive. Despite the fact that Canadian consumer consumption is the definition of a drop in the bucket that is global emissions.

If Canada wanted to make a difference they would nationalize the grid, build nuclear and renewables. Or forget it all for now and just put out the damn fires!

Edit: I forgot one more, as imports are not taxed, the carbon tax actually encourages the import of goods made with coal power in China, over goods made with hydropower in Canada!

[–] [email protected] 3 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Do you have a source of your wildfires cause 80% of our carbon emissions?

Only thing I could find was about 25% which is much different then the number you showed.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 9 months ago (1 children)

I believe it was a CBC article last fall that mentioned it, talking about the massive rise in acres burned from previous years. But I can't directly give you a link at this time unfortunately, am on mobile and can't find it either.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 9 months ago (1 children)

I’d be really surprised if you could because it’s a made-up number.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Not made up, but estimated. Rather than find the exact article, here are the numbers after all was said and done:

https://www.canada.ca/en/environment-climate-change/services/climate-change/greenhouse-gas-emissions/sources-sinks-executive-summary-2023.html

In 2021, Canada’s greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions were 670 megatonnes of carbon dioxide equivalent (couldn't find 2023 quickly on mobile but it will be close)

https://atmosphere.copernicus.eu/copernicus-canada-produced-23-global-wildfire-carbon-emissions-2023

The wildfires that Canada experienced during 2023 have generated the highest carbon emissions in record for this country by a wide margin. According to GFASv1.2 data, the wildfires that started to take place in early May emitted almost 480 megatonnes of carbon

470 / 670 = 72%

To be fair this is not 72% of total emissions including wildfire smoke, but wildfires emitted 72% as much as the Canadian economy did.

So yes, it's not 80% of total emissions - but it's still a massive amount. Putting out these fires would have had nearly the same effect as shutting down our entire country and letting them burn.

Or you could say letting them burn nearly doubled our emissions, and in the hand-wavey world of emissions accounting you would be pretty close.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Not made up, but estimated.

So yes, it's not 80% of total emissions.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Man it's been like 6 months since I read it, give me a break lol. "80% of Canada's emissions" is correct, it can just be read either way, and I remembered it the wrong way (as % of combined, not % of emissions)

[–] [email protected] 2 points 9 months ago

There’s no Shane to admit you’re wrong.

It’s the internet no one cares.