Carbon tax and ETS
Lessons learned from
Quebec
Myrzah Bello, M.Sc., M.Env.
Director, Climate Change
Latin American and Caribbean Carbon Forum
Bogotá, Colombia
September 4, 2014
2
Introduction
• Different schemes in Canada
• BC: Carbon tax
• Alberta: Cap and trade with 15$/t CO2e cap
• Quebec: Cap and trade linked to California, previously had a
carbon tax (green levy) on fossil fuels
• Through mainly the Quebec experience:
• Advantages
• Limitations
• Recommendations
3
Rationale of Quebec’s carbon tax
• 2006-2012 Climate change action plan to reduce emission
and to adapt to climate change
• Carbon tax was dedicated entirely to the actions in plan
• Approximately 1.5 billion $
• 2013-2020 Climate change action plan to reduce emissions
and adapt to climate change
• Cap and trade revenues will finance the 2013-2020 action plan
• Expected revenues more than double of the 2006-2012 plan
4
A Carbon Tax…
• Is easier to manage by government and industry (emitters)
• What’s the objective?
• Needs to be dedicated to carbon emission reductions and
climate change adaptation –
• Needs to be established based on the value of carbon
• Doesn’t instigate change by emitters in the long term
(especially if the value of tax isn’t revised periodically)
5
Establishing the cost of carbon
• Quebec’s carbon tax was based on an average amount of
0,01$ per liter or m3 of fuel
• The value was practically unchanged for a period of 7 years
Natural gas
Diesel
Fuel
Light oil
Heavy oil
5,29 $/t
3,58$/t
4,24$/t
3,17$/t
3,66$/t
• It did not take into account the carbon contribution of each
fuel.
• The carbon ETS now does:
• Floor price: 11.34$/t
• Maximum price: 55.13$/t
• Prices increase at minimum 5% per year.
6
Once the carbon tax collected, now
what?
• Development of an action plan to reduce emissions, develop
technologies, etc.
• When setting up the program:
• Measuring efficiency of the program
• Comparing national emissions from one year to another is not an efficient way
to measure (other variables)
• Governance structure: accountability, results, responsibilities
• Monitoring advancement needs to be established: clear
indicators
• Objectives: priority reduce emissions, co-lateral benefits
• Thorough documented analysis of possible measures is
essential to retain more pertinent and more economical to attain
objective
7
Cost ( $ t/ CO2 )
Technology limit in 2014
Investing in lower cost per tonne first!
Profits
15 $
Projects with « profits »
8
THANK YOU!
Myrzah Bello, M.Sc., M.Env.
Director, Climate Change
+1-514-441-3167
Myrzah.Bello@snclavalin.com