Today
we have a follow up to the post, “Any
smart business person would have made those changes anyways. Why? Because doing
them increases profits, and saves them money!” from last Tuesday (May 29,
2012)
This morning
I received a comment from HB2cents, who said:
I just wanted
to share one tid-bit of info with you that you might consider - the Carbon Tax
is revenue neutral, and the PCT doesn't get a cent of it. Taxpayers get income
tax breaks as a result of the tax (that's why it is revenue neutral, i.e. government
doesn't keep the money).
The tax was
implemented to price carbon so that people would give thought to using less. If
you do use less, you benefit even more - by saving on fuel and income tax.
Just wanted to
make that point of clarification.
You should
also know that Carbon Neutral Government (the reason why public sector pays for
offsets to the Pacific Carbon Trust) is an incentive for those organizations to reduce carbon so
they pay less in offsets. As a result of this, busy hospital CEOs and the like have
actually paid more attention to their energy use because they are required to
measure their CO2 output. This forces them to see the opportunities to reduce
energy use - and they are doing it.
Like you point
out in your article, you would think that if there is the potential for a
business or school to save money by investing in new technology or simply
turning down the heat, they would. The sad truth is people see cost (new
curtains in a greenhouse, solar hot water heaters) and they turn the other
way... unless there is a discount or incentive or law.
