New Brunswick gasoline prices tumble to 3-year low
Social Sharing
Fuel prices across most Canadian provinces — including New Brunswick — tumbled Tuesday morning, ending six years of federal carbon carbon charges on fossil fuels sold at retail.
New Brunswick's Energy and Utilities Board lowered the maximum price that can be charged for gasoline in the province by 20.2 cents to $1.44 per litre.
The reductions included a 17.6 cent elimination of all carbon charges and 2.6 cents in HST attached to that. The combination is enough to save $10.10 on a 50-litre fill-up.
It's the lowest price setting in New Brunswick since January 2022.
Maximum prices for diesel, which contains more carbon than gasoline and carried a higher carbon charge because of that, were lowered 24.6 cents.
The change was causing brisk business at service stations across the province among those who knew it was coming, but the reduction is not a pure discount.
University of Alberta economist Andrew Leach told CBC News the cheaper prices will be followed by the end of federal carbon rebates and that will cost many Canadian households more than they gain.
"So you take away the carbon price, you take away the rebates, then that's a net negative for most lower-income households and a net positive for most higher income households," Leach said.
In New Brunswick over the past year, federal carbon rebates totalled $760 for a family of four in urban areas and $912 for those living in rural areas.
Also ending are carbon charges on other fossil fuels including propane and natural gas. About 7,500 New Brunswick households heat with natural gas and on average will save about $270 over the next year with the change.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
National Observer
32 minutes ago
- National Observer
Canada's Conservatives still aren't serious about housing
He was so close to getting it. Jacob Mantle, the newly-elected thirty-something Conservative MP for York-Durham, rose in the House of Commons on Tuesday to make a point about housing costs. 'Oxford Economics reports that Toronto's housing market ranks among the worst in the world for affordability. At the same time, mortgage delinquency rates in Toronto are higher than at any time during the pandemic. The financial burden is suffocating the next generation of homebuyers.' But Mantle wasn't actually interested in proposing solutions to that problem. Instead, he wanted to whine about the fact that the Carney government isn't going to table a budget until the fall, which the government has defended on the basis that it will be better able to account for the fallout from Donald Trump's tariffs by then. And despite his supposed concern over housing, Mantle was dismissive of the government's plan to embrace and scale up modular housing in Canada. 'My generation refuses to live in a shipping container,' Mantle said. For what it's worth, I suspect many members of his generation (and mine) would be happy to live in the sort of modified shipping containers that are being designed and built right now, including the ones in his own city. But modular housing is so much more than just the use and conversion of shipping containers. It's an entirely new approach to homebuilding, one that uses factories and their inherent economies of scale to drive down costs. They can be one or two-storey, single or multi-family, and configured in any number of layouts and sizes. In an environment where driving down construction costs is a nearly existential issue for Mantle's generation, you'd think he would be more open to new ideas and economic innovation — especially when it promises to use more Canadian materials and labour. Then again, if you've been paying close attention to the Conservative Party of Canada's approach to this issue, his behaviour was entirely predictable. Under Pierre Poilievre's leadership, the party and its MPs have repeatedly highlighted the very real problem of rising housing costs in Canada and the disproportionate impacts they have on younger people. But when it comes to actual solutions to that problem — ones, at least, that don't involve cutting taxes or regulations and assuming the market will magically solve the problem it has helped create — those same Conservatives either disappear into the metaphorical bushes or come out on the other side of the issue. In Calgary, for example, opposition to a city-wide measure to increase affordability and density while reducing sprawl came mostly from Conservative-leaning councilors like Dan McLean, Peter Demong and Sean Chu, with some conspicuous cheerleading work coming from federal Conservative MP Greg McLean. In British Columbia, provincial Conservative party leader John Rustad decided to go to bat for the very 'gatekeepers' standing in the way of new housing that Poilievre had repeatedly promised he would eliminate. Even in Ontario, where Conservative politicians have been more visibly and vocally on-side with pro-supply measures, the results of the Ford government's efforts have been underwhelming, to say the least. We are not in a moment where we can afford to reflexively turn our noses up at potential solutions. And yet, Conservative politicians like Mantle seem determined to find fault in every proposed approach that doesn't flatter their own pre-existing ideological and political biases towards cutting taxes and reducing government involvement. Modular housing will not be, in and of itself, the solution to a problem that has been building for more than two decades. But that's only because nothing on its own will, or could, be the solution. The Carney government has embraced modular housing as a way to lower costs and improve affordability in Canada's housing market. Canada's Conservatives, on the other hand, seem determined to miss the mass timber for the trees. Instead, we need every possible lever being pulled right now, from regulatory reform and improved operating efficiencies to direct government involvement, procurement, and even development. Mantle is right that the status quo has failed his generation. But he's wrong to indignantly oppose a good-faith effort at challenging and changing it, and all the more so as he pretends to speak on behalf of an entire generation. We can only hope that his party and its online proxies don't decide to turn modular housing into this year's iteration of the 15-minute city and throw a self-evidently good and decent idea into the stew of online conspiracies it always seems to have at low boil. Yes, that might feed the eternally hungry appetites of their increasingly online political base. But it won't do anything to address the problem Conservatives like Mantle claim to care about. At some point, Canadians may conclude that they're not actually all that interested in solving it.
National Observer
32 minutes ago
- National Observer
Canada risks squandering multi-billion-dollar critical minerals market without 'swift action': report
Canada risks squandering a $12-billion-a-year domestic market for minerals and metals key to the country's energy transition by 2040 if the federal government cannot attract the massive investments needed to propel development of copper, nickel, lithium, graphite, cobalt and rare earth element mines, a new report has concluded. The study out today by the Canadian Climate Institute (CCI), a think tank, found Canada's place in the global critical minerals market would be jeopardized unless at least $30 billion in capital flowed into the country's mining sector over the next 15 years to meet growing minerals demand driven by technologies ranging from EV batteries to wind turbines and power infrastructure. 'Securing Canada's place in the global critical minerals race requires swift action to unlock public and private investment that can power Canada's energy transition with these building blocks of clean technologies,' said the CCI's director of clean growth, Marisa Beck, who was lead author of the report. "We are at a phase globally in critical minerals market development where the market is reorganizing itself [against the backdrop of the energy transition] and in the midst of major geopolitical and trade upheavals, so it is the perfect time to establish policies to support Canada's mining sector and supply chain,' she added, speaking with Canada's National Observer. To meet skyrocketing worldwide demand for these six key critical minerals – which the International Energy Agency, an industry watchdog, forecasts to reach $770 billion by 2040 – investment in Canadian mines would have to rise to $65 billion by the end of the next decade. Facilitating this investment, according to the report, which comes ahead of next week's G7 leaders summit in Alberta where critical minerals is one of three topics topping the agenda, will require: agreements between government and the private sector sharing the financial burden of capital investments in critical mineral mines; more funding for Indigenous communities to partner on these projects; strengthened environmental regulations that reduce risks and liabilities for neighbouring communities; and streamlined mining project reviews and decision-making processes. "Securing Canada's place in the global critical minerals race requires swift action to unlock investment that can power our energy transition with these building blocks of clean technologies,' says the Canadian Climate Institute's Marisa Beck. 'We are seeing very fast progress in a lot of the technologies that will need these critical minerals, so it is important to focus on the high-level areas of mine development, but we also recognize that the processing side and the high-value manufacturing side must all be considered going forward,' said Beck. 'But this was outside the scope of this report.' Marilyn Spink, director of operations at the Canadian Critical Minerals and Metals Alliance, an industry advocacy group, warned that the report could entrench 'old-world thinking' by government and industry on new mining sector development that focuses on resource development but 'doesn't sufficiently consider demand-pull,' where future market strategy is more demand-determined rather than supply-led. 'What is Canada going after?' 'What is Canada going after? Materials enable the economy; critical minerals do not. We need to intelligently decide who the customers for these critical minerals will be — EV battery-makers, sure, but think about the wider clean-tech space, energy infrastructure, robotics and so on,' she said, speaking with Canada's National Observer. 'Then decide which critical minerals you mine and where you mine them, because then you can build the midstream facilities to process them and then add real high-value manufacturing that will lead to economic development and job creation.' She cautioned that without following this strategy, Canada could fall prey to the 'resource curse,' when a country 'fails to leverage a natural resource well because it doesn't add manufacturing value and this results in slowly eroding the wider economy.' In a bid to ramp up mining of critical minerals in a global market dominated in recent decades by China, Ottawa in 2022 announced $3.8 billion in federal funding to finance geoscience and exploration, mineral processing, manufacturing and recycling applications, as well as research and development. And last year, Canada's critical minerals list was updated with three new materials, bringing the total to 34. But only a handful of critical minerals mining projects have gained traction in the past year, with developments in BC, Manitoba, Ontario and Quebec recently receiving a financial boost from the $1.5 billion Canadian Critical Minerals Infrastructure Fund.
Winnipeg Free Press
an hour ago
- Winnipeg Free Press
$30B in new investments needed to meet Canada's critical mineral demand: report
TORONTO – A newly released report estimates Canada will need at least $30 billion in new capital investments by 2040 if it wants to meet domestic demand for the critical minerals key to a green economy transition. But the Canadian Climate Institute's report says cutting back on environmental safeguards and Indigenous consultation to speed up those projects is likely to backfire. The report released Thursday says those cutbacks can lead to delays later on, due to community opposition or litigation. The think tank's latest report comes as the federal government, along with Ontario and British Columbia, face major pushback from First Nations and environmental groups to legislation intended to speed up mining project approvals. The report says Canadian governments should support Indigenous participation and reduce environmental risks as part of efforts to reduce regulatory delays. It says Canada has a big opportunity to capitalize on the surging domestic and global demand for critical minerals to build the batteries, solar panels and electric vehicles required to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. It estimates domestic demand alone for six key critical minerals, including lithium and copper, will reach $16 billion by 2040 if Canada keep up its climate policies, with almost half of that coming from EV manufacturers. To meet that demand, the think tank estimates Canadian mining projects will need a total of $30 billion in capital investments, and even more if the industry wants to help satiate international demand too. The report says that's also likely a lowball figure since it excludes major cost overruns that often plague mining projects. The estimated domestic need 'vastly exceeds' current investment in the sector, which averaged about $2 billion per year from 2018 to 2023, the report said. The report suggests there's a role for governments to step in to support the sector with either equity investments or financial risk-sharing agreements. But it should not come at the expense of Indigenous consultation or environmental oversight, the authors say. 'Successful projects that are being developed fast are the ones that have participation from Indigenous communities, that have adhered to the highest environmental standard,' said co-author Marisa Beck, the think tank's clean growth research director. Critics say recently passed Bill 15 in B.C. and Bill 5 in Ontario gives those provinces sweeping powers to exempt mining projects from environmental oversight and undermines constitutional obligations to consult First Nations. The provincial governments disagree and say the legislation will help speed up approvals without sacrificing First Nations rights or environmental protections. Ottawa has also faced pushback to its legislation intended to speed up infrastructure approvals. The authors of Thursday's report declined to comment on the specifics of those legislative efforts, but it did put forward several policy recommendations. Governments should also support Indigenous communities exercising their right to self-determination and economic participation, such as through funding for Indigenous-led environmental assessments, the report says. Elsewhere, the report recommends provinces strengthen mining regulations to reduce environmental risks and liabilities, such as requiring producers to make their closure plans publicly available. This report by The Canadian Press was first published June 12, 2025.
