{"id":9558,"date":"2025-06-26T20:58:34","date_gmt":"2025-06-26T20:58:34","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.jstconsultancy.cz\/?p=9558"},"modified":"2026-07-31T22:32:00","modified_gmt":"2026-07-31T22:32:00","slug":"carbon-tax","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/intelligent-kalam.80-240-27-133.plesk.page\/en\/carbon-tax\/","title":{"rendered":"Carbon tax"},"content":{"rendered":"

Together with AI, we played the carbon tax.\u00a0 The aim was to find out how much more expensive heat treatment will be and what the advantages of LPC will be in the new tax system.\u00a0I will compare the device with LPC, type ECM ECO 1299, and a multi-purpose furnace of the same dimensions working with an ENDO atmosphere.<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/a>\"\"<\/a><\/p>\n

The result is as follows:<\/p>\n

Emissions and tax on our resources at a tax of 20 \u20ac\/t CO2<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

\"\"<\/a><\/p>\n

Emissions and tax on our resources at a tax of 70 \u20ac\/t CO2<\/strong><\/p>\n

\"\"<\/a><\/p>\n

And how will the cost per cycle increase?<\/p>\n

LPC<\/strong>, tax 20 \u20ac\/t CO2<\/strong>, the cost of the cycle for CHD 1.5 mm<\/strong> will increase by 116.74 CZK<\/strong>.\u00a0 With an effective charge of 1200 kg, it is 0.097 CZK\/kg<\/strong><\/p>\n

\"\"<\/a><\/strong><\/p>\n

LPC,<\/strong> tax 70 \u20ac\/t CO2<\/strong>, the cost of the cycle per CHD 1.5 mm<\/strong> will increase by 408.59 CZK<\/strong>.\u00a0 With an effective charge of 1200 kg, it is 0.34 CZK\/kg<\/strong><\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

\"\"<\/a><\/p>\n

And what about multi-purpose furnaces<\/strong>? Tax of 20 \u20ac\/t CO2<\/strong>, the cost of the cycle for CHD 1.5 mm<\/strong> will increase by 385.2 CZK<\/strong>.\u00a0 With an effective charge of 1200 kg, it is 0.32 CZK\/kg<\/strong><\/p>\n

\"\"<\/a><\/strong><\/p>\n

SQ<\/strong>, tax 70 \u20ac\/t CO2<\/strong>, the cost of the cycle per CHD 1.5 mm<\/strong> will increase by 1,348.2 CZK<\/strong>.\u00a0 With an effective charge of 1200 kg, it is 1.12 CZK\/kg<\/strong><\/p>\n

\"\"<\/a><\/p>\n

Is it too little or too much? If you convert it to the number of cycles per year, they are hundreds of thousands. That’s really not a small amount.<\/p>\n

The only relief is that the carbon that enters the steel through diffusion can be deducted from the tax base. In the case of LPC, it can be up to 80% carbon, for SQ I don’t know. And how is it supposed to work? You automatically pay tax on the consumption of the commodity, if you want relief, you have to prove that it really happened. That is, that the carbon diffused into the steel. Not even \u0160vejk could have invented that. So you have to record the amount of carburized area per period, CHD and the link to the amount of carbon in the diffusion layer, or other parameters. It’s up to you, but I really wouldn’t want to do it anymore.<\/p>\n

If I compare it between LPC and conventional carburizing, LPC will cost us about 4 times less tax-wise. If I do 800 cycles per year in the furnace, then the savings on LPC are about 800,000 CZK per year compared to SQ.<\/p>\n

Is it a chance or a burden? It will be about the same fight as between a diesel engine and an electric car…<\/p>\n

And what are the carbon taxes elsewhere?<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/a>\"\"<\/a><\/p>\n

Carbon tax price per country:<\/p>\n