Oh, absolutely. I wouldn't even consider it to be a bridge. I would consider it to be a good practice to leave in place. If a farmer is subjected to higher carbon taxes through grain drying, they should have the ability to implement 4R at a higher rate, for example, to reduce emissions that way at a cheaper cost. If they could offset the carbon tax they are paying in grain drying by substituting some other practice that they could see a benefit from in terms of carbon tax revenue reductions, that would be a win-win. It would also lead to fewer greenhouse gas emissions.
On October 24th, 2022. See this statement in context.