Carbon tax

[bittenyakka]

As our galiant, or not federal government gets closer to introducing a carbon tax on our lives what do you all think about it?

Personally i fully support it as long as the income is spent in appropriate areas to support what the tax is trying to gain.

[boredmatrix]

meh - it'll wind up being the ESL or River Murray Levy all over again....


too many beareaucrats arguing over where the money should be spent, while those of us who actually live in the real world have to pay those taxes and watch while it gets argued over in the public domain (cue 7 9 and 10 with their bias on the stories) and nothing gets achieved!

[Zippy]

gives me more reason to deny the theory of climate change 

Its called a phase people....australia has been through this before in the last 100 years of RECORDED climate history....how many other times would it have occured....lots.

Hate the society of today's ways of money milking...


[end rant]

[Alan J]

will forestry & national parks be taxed on bushfires?
or only hazard reduction burns ?

Vaguely recall reading that the Canberra fires pumped more CO2 & other baddies
into the air in 14 days than all combined human contributions.
might have been just another internet factoid ?

cheers

[Zippy]

Looks like the worlds population need to find out how to stop volcano's exploding!...volcano's do much much much much more damage than humans.   Yep thats right...Earth itself is Earths worst enemy.

[6739264]

Im not a firefighter, I'm an uncontrolled carbon release supression technician.

[Zippy]

thanks to Kevin Ruddy?

[jaff]

Im not a firefighter, I'm an uncontrolled carbon release supression technician.

Numbers in your claim to be a uncontrolled carbon release supression technician do you use either?

                          (a) a fire fighting agent

                or        (b) a cork

                or        (c) squeeze your butt cheeks together real hard

[Zippy]

uncontrolled carbon release supression technician

So your harvesting Cow's Farts now? Thats a pretty risky business Numbers 

[6739264]

So I saw this instructional video. It was all in German, and there was this girl and some blokes...

[Cameron Yelland]

uncontrolled carbon release supression technician

So your harvesting Cow's Farts now? Thats a pretty risky business Numbers 

Nifty bit of info for you to take with you through life.....

Methane that cows produce actually comes from their mouth!

[CFS_Firey]

gives me more reason to deny the theory of climate change 

Its called a phase people....australia has been through this before in the last 100 years of RECORDED climate history....how many other times would it have occured....lots.

Hate the society of today's ways of money milking...


[end rant]

OK, I'll bite.

Firstly, climate change is FACT not theory.  The theory is that it's caused by humans.

Regardless of whether the earth is going through a natural cycle or not, what we're facing cannot be ignored simply because it may have happened before.  The scientific fact is that the earth is heating up very fast, and its hotter than it ever has been in known history.

It is projected that the temperatures will continue to rise dramatically, however, even if they don't, enough damage has already been done to seriously change our climate.
You may have heard about the ice cap on Greenland melting - that will happen now, even if temperatures don't rise anymore.  Not only will that raise the level of the sea, (displacing lots of people), the cold water will disrupt the deep sea currents, and as you should know from school, the currents move warm water around the oceans, controlling our climate. (El Niño and La Niña are a prime example in Australia).

So we know that climate change is a fact.  What we're not sure about is why, and that leaves us with 2 choices:
1) Deny it's happening and it's out fault, do nothing, continue polluting => Leads to certain death
2) Accept that its happening and it might be our fault, change what we do, try to reduce emissions and possibly, hopefully, it makes a difference and we survive.

What have we got to lose? Even if climate change was just a plot to fool the world, what can we lose by cutting down on carbon emissions?  We'd have cleaner air, we'd be using renewable energies, so we wouldn't be reliant on coal, and the world will be a happier place!

And in a direct reply to your post:
Australia has not been through anything like this in the last 100 years... What do you base that on?
Also, its an incentive to cut down on carbon emissions, not a way to milk money.  Just like speeding fines are intended to dissuade people from speeding, not to raise money for the police. (Although many would argue with that).

[Alan J]

So we know that climate change is a fact.  What we're not sure about is why, and that leaves us with 2 choices:
1) Deny it's happening and it's out fault, do nothing, continue polluting => Leads to certain death
2) Accept that its happening and it might be our fault, change what we do, try to reduce emissions and possibly, hopefully, it makes a difference and we survive.

You left out option 3.
3) Accept that we are inconsequential compared with our planet's massive inertia & the
forces that are at play with the climate. Be prepared to change totally where & how we
live in this country. Change our society & system of values so that we can adapt
economically & socially to massive systemic changes in our land. This may mean moving
most of of Adelaide's population to northern Australia, along with much of SE
Australia's farming industry. Or building massive water pipes from north to south.

Previously "valuable" productive land will become unproductive.
Previously unproductive & "valueless" land will become productive.
Our economic 'model' demands that tangibles like land remain fixed in size & location, but increase in monetary value. "Value" is lock-stepped to "wealth" which is lock-stepped to "economic productivity".

Our model has been here just 200 years & is already in trouble.

The aborigines model - where land is merely occupied, not personally "owned" - lasted
thousands of years & multiple climate changes, from ice ages to the medaieval warm
period when global temps were >5degC warmer than now.

Whose model is better ?

Note that I didn't say I like option 3.  Just that it is an option, and probably the
option that we'll be forced to take after we bankrupt our nation failing at option 2.

cheers

[Cameron Yelland]

gives me more reason to deny the theory of climate change 

Its called a phase people....australia has been through this before in the last 100 years of RECORDED climate history....how many other times would it have occured....lots.

Hate the society of today's ways of money milking...


[end rant]

OK, I'll bite.

Firstly, climate change is FACT not theory.  The theory is that it's caused by humans.

Regardless of whether the earth is going through a natural cycle or not, what we're facing cannot be ignored simply because it may have happened before.  The scientific fact is that the earth is heating up very fast, and its hotter than it ever has been in known history.

It is projected that the temperatures will continue to rise dramatically, however, even if they don't, enough damage has already been done to seriously change our climate.
You may have heard about the ice cap on Greenland melting - that will happen now, even if temperatures don't rise anymore.  Not only will that raise the level of the sea, (displacing lots of people), the cold water will disrupt the deep sea currents, and as you should know from school, the currents move warm water around the oceans, controlling our climate. (El Niño and La Niña are a prime example in Australia).

So we know that climate change is a fact.  What we're not sure about is why, and that leaves us with 2 choices:
1) Deny it's happening and it's out fault, do nothing, continue polluting => Leads to certain death
2) Accept that its happening and it might be our fault, change what we do, try to reduce emissions and possibly, hopefully, it makes a difference and we survive.

What have we got to lose? Even if climate change was just a plot to fool the world, what can we lose by cutting down on carbon emissions?  We'd have cleaner air, we'd be using renewable energies, so we wouldn't be reliant on coal, and the world will be a happier place!

And in a direct reply to your post:
Australia has not been through anything like this in the last 100 years... What do you base that on?
Also, its an incentive to cut down on carbon emissions, not a way to milk money.  Just like speeding fines are intended to dissuade people from speeding, not to raise money for the police. (Although many would argue with that).

Eh why bother?  We are doomed anyway.

If climate change doesnt kill us some idiot with a nuke will.  or failing that an asteroid?

Heck maybe the aliens will join in the party!   

[chook]

Option 3 is starting to happen in a small way (farming up in the NorthWest but the soils are poor).
NSW is already starting to plan for higher sea levels & increased extreme weather.
The realities of low river flows are now here, acidification, unpredictable fires on the river flats. Senator Nick said on TV the other night that about 1000 families will walk off the land in the Riverland in the next 12 months.
La Nina has decayed & we will be in a neutral pattern for the next 3 months - very unlikely to receive above average rainfall in the basin. And we have virtually stopped local fresh juice production (bulk tankers in from Leeton).
In the Mallee it is looking like the some of the local football clubs will fold at the end of the season (no people left in the towns).
This is being repeated all over the basin - people are leaving the land & moving either to the city or up north into mining.
I'm not sure if our little effort (we contribute about 1% in total) will do a lot to slow global warming down, but if we don't at least try Australia will be screwed along with the rest of the world.
Finally just a bit more info for you, my father (who is in his late 60's) is from NE Victoria near Lake Hume & he has never seen it empty took a photo of th Dam wall a few months ago. He was standing on solid ground near the middle of the lake. No one ever thought that would happen, if you remember it was only a few years ago that major rectification work had to be carried out to prevent the wall moving with the weight of water behind it!
So you can think all you like about whether its all bull filtered or a government conspiracy however I regularly travel over a fair bit of the system & its stuffed!
I just hope Kevin 07 can't dream up any new colors for reports (green paper white paper) other wise nothing will get done!
He is few simple things to start but:-
1)GIVE every household in Australia a solar power system & solar hot water,
2)start duplicating every major hwy with rail, & plan to electrify it with the excess power from 1,
3) stop building on the most productive land - its stupid!
4) NO MORE expansion in Sydney & Melbourne -decentralise & invest in reuse of storm water in every capital city
5) Accept the fact that maybe relying on the river to irrigate a desert is not that smart (even though we are the most efficient irrigators in the country) & if you are going to do that maybe desal plants & real food (not grapes) is what should be grown.
Sorry for the long ramble & Cam that could be a better option
cheers

[bittenyakka]

I like the sounds of that

It is just another challenge to change the way we use our resources. 

I think we really need to get geothermal power going in a big way FAST. But i have a fear that our governments will not be brave enough to say this. This is because Currently our coal power generation supports a huge worker bas in mines and if we went nuclear that to would support a worker base in mines. And in my experience job security wins votes.

[chook]

I'm not advocating the dismantling of the coal industry - its almost at full capacity anyway. It's about not expanding generation capcity any further until the clean coal technology is available.
Here is a few more ideas:
Those industries that rely on LNG boilers - subsidise co generation plants (we could power Berri area for less than $1 million)
Industires who don't use LNG (use coal or oil boilers) subsidise to convert to LNG & co generation.
Industries who use large amounts of water & it can be reclaimed - subsidise RO plants & desal plants.
Government buyout of all those tax schemes that involved irrigation of crops we don't need.
Remove state governments and create regional zones (which would be like super councils & represented in Canberra by a Senator similar to what they do for the states now.
Encourage the private transport sector to start thinking about redeveloping the rail system instead of the heavy reliance on road transport & if not do it for them.
As a country we need to decide whether we will continue to be that"large island between the Indian & Pacific oceans" or that we will go into survival mode and ensure that we can look after our own citizens in regards to our basic needs.
With the current world food shortage, the Americans busily converting anything with sugar in it to fuel, the rest of the world owing China so much money, good productive land decreasing & world population increasing the day is coming where hard choices will have to be made.
The question is do we set ourselves up to lead the change or do we just wait like Lemmings & see what every one else is doing!
As far as the jobs thing goes, yes there will be difficult change however we have seen the massive decline in manufacturing over the years & we have adapted. So I guess there will be new opportunities going for its just making sure we can grab those with people who are well trained in these areas.
And it not the workers that scares the government its the big corporations that control the industries that scares them
cheers

[bajdas]

I like the sounds of that

It is just another challenge to change the way we use our resources. 

I think we really need to get geothermal power going in a big way FAST. But i have a fear that our governments will not be brave enough to say this. This is because Currently our coal power generation supports a huge worker bas in mines and if we went nuclear that to would support a worker base in mines. And in my experience job security wins votes.

It is happening, have a look at www.geodynamics.com.au or www.geothermal-resources.com.au

Hopefully they will succeed

[Alan J]

Option 3 is starting to happen in a small way
<big snip>
(I just hope Kevin 07 can't dream up any new colors for reports (green paper white paper) other wise nothing will get done!
He is few simple things to start but:-
1)GIVE every household in Australia a solar power system & solar hot water,
2)start duplicating every major hwy with rail, & plan to electrify it with the excess power from 1,
3) stop building on the most productive land - its stupid!
4) NO MORE expansion in Sydney & Melbourne -decentralise & invest in reuse of storm water in every capital city
5) Accept the fact that maybe relying on the river to irrigate a desert is not that smart (even though we are the most efficient irrigators in the country) & if you are going to do that maybe desal plants & real food (not grapes) is what should be grown.
Sorry for the long ramble & Cam that could be a better option
cheers

I don't think we can trust the politicians to make the right decisions.
They tend to decide for re-election rather than what works or with foresight.
Former NSW Govt is a classic example... about 17 or so years ago, someone took
them to task over electricity supply to the remote outback. I gather NSW law
said that the Govt will make volts available to all no matter where they live.

Anyway, the story goes that it boiled down to a choice between two technologies
costing about the same over 10 years.  Either :
1] extend the grid, using tens of thousands of concrete poles & tonnes of copper /
aluminium, & cop transmission losses of 90% or higher due to distance. Or
2] invest in the fledgling solar industry & install solar cells + back-up diesels
at the 1000 or so properties & communities affected. The massive injection into the
solar industry would have propelled it years ahead in R&D.

Pretty obvious which was chosen - the grid was extended.
I think we can expect the same short-sighted non-decisions from whoever is sitting
in the chair.

[chook]

It is sad they opted for that solution, but not surprising!
The private sector is no different - if the ROI (Return on investment) is greater than two years forget it.
Several years ago our co-generation plant was going to cost 3/4 of a million, so no dice. Since that time privatisation has seen our power bill go up & up. Two years ago one of our Brisbane plants put up a plan for an RO plant for about the same price - same result eventhough Brisbane was quickly running out of water.
Unfortunately there are too many vested interests to consider any of the proposals I listed previously, all people consider is next weeks profit or the next election.
Anyway if the worst projections come true in 50 years there be major flooding on the Darling & Adelaide will have to move closer to Berri!
I guess we will have to wait & see!
cheers