2 ms·

Nobody is opposed to a recycling fee. If you actually read the article you will see it's 2.5x to 100x the recycling fees imposed anywhere else in the world. And

Nobody is opposed to a recycling fee. If you actually read the article you will see it's 2.5x to 100x the recycling fees imposed anywhere else in the world. And accompanied by a disinformation campaign from the government. Notably the same province has a massive abandoned oil & gas well problem that they have failed to deal with for decades at this point. The same government also effectively banned the use of renewables to power datacentre projects in Alberta, forcing them to use natural gas only.

reenorap 1mo ago
[flagged]
- snowpid 1mo ago
  "I stopped reading halfway because it sounded like pure propaganda to me without any justification as to why it was unreasonable." Please stick to the HN rules. Please act in good faith
- sourpanda 1mo ago
  You're putting a lot of faith and trust in a questionable Premier.
- cmrdporcupine 1mo ago
  I found some less political sources for you to help contextualize why this is a shitty policy maneuver: https://renewablesassociation.ca/recycling-a-tv-costs-2-75-why-is-alberta-charging-14-for-a-solar-panel/ https://renewablesassociation.ca/recycling-a-tv-costs-2-75-w... https://globalnews.ca/news/12048123/alberta-solar-panel-recycling-fee/ https://globalnews.ca/news/12048123/alberta-solar-panel-recy... Notably: - Commissioned research estimates approximately C$5 per panel in present-value recycling costs, accounting for cost escalation over 20 years and potential reuse. - The gov'ts "ARMA" has not published a breakdown explaining its C$14 figure. - Utility projects already face reclamation security requirements covering recycling and disposal, raising a potential double-charging concern.
  - zdragnar 1mo ago
    Do sufficient facilities exist to keep up with the recycling demand that will exist 25-50 years from now for panels? If not, then the $5 per panel needs to be increased to account for the extra infrastructure.

reenorap 1mo ago

[flagged]

snowpid 1mo ago
"I stopped reading halfway because it sounded like pure propaganda to me without any justification as to why it was unreasonable." Please stick to the HN rules. Please act in good faith
sourpanda 1mo ago
You're putting a lot of faith and trust in a questionable Premier.
cmrdporcupine 1mo ago
I found some less political sources for you to help contextualize why this is a shitty policy maneuver: https://renewablesassociation.ca/recycling-a-tv-costs-2-75-why-is-alberta-charging-14-for-a-solar-panel/ https://renewablesassociation.ca/recycling-a-tv-costs-2-75-w... https://globalnews.ca/news/12048123/alberta-solar-panel-recycling-fee/ https://globalnews.ca/news/12048123/alberta-solar-panel-recy... Notably: - Commissioned research estimates approximately C$5 per panel in present-value recycling costs, accounting for cost escalation over 20 years and potential reuse. - The gov'ts "ARMA" has not published a breakdown explaining its C$14 figure. - Utility projects already face reclamation security requirements covering recycling and disposal, raising a potential double-charging concern.
- zdragnar 1mo ago
  Do sufficient facilities exist to keep up with the recycling demand that will exist 25-50 years from now for panels? If not, then the $5 per panel needs to be increased to account for the extra infrastructure.