Thread: Carbon Tax. Well someone had to bring it up!

Originally Posted by mudmouse

Well, I'm simple. So, how does aircraft, ships or trains operate without fossil fuels? Renewables can't cut it. Nor can they maintain anything near base load for electrical 'residential' use, let alone industrial. I'd suppose that if it were viable, even on a distant horizon, that a private (or Government) sector would be pumping squillions into finding the answer, and therefore score a monopoly - but they're not, because it isn't.

At $23 a tonne, it's no incentive for BP (for example) to do anything but pass it on to the consumer (and yes, the Government hand out is also funded by the consumer).

I understand the finite resource and renewable arguments but they are not viable in support of a tax on carbon (dioxide).

Lastly, and without putting 'us' down, when has Australia ever been anything close to a world leader in mass production? And where is our manufacturing base?? China?

Matt.

You seem to have ignored H2 - it is renewable, and the only viable fuel for long distance transport. However, it is a LONG way off...

I did not mention manufacturing... (however AU is not as bad as most people think in terms of manufacturing). However expertise in installing, commissioning and operating energy technology is what I was taking about.

Most of the big engineering infrastructure companies in Australia have significant offshore projects as well.

Originally Posted by mudmouse

Lastly, and without putting 'us' down, when has Australia ever been anything close to a world leader in mass production? And where is our manufacturing base?? China?

Matt.

Matt, we ar one of the bigest polluters per capita so we have to do our bit.
Now, I do not think that the carbon tax is the best alternative but it is heaps better and cheaper to us in tax that the Direct Action Plan proposed by Abbott.
I was in favor of the Rudd and Turnbull ETS and was looking forward of an agreement between the 2 parties after the shadow cabinet agree with the ETS.
Remember back the, QUOTE:
SHADOW cabinet has approved an emissions trading deal struck between Coalition frontbencher Ian Macfarlane and Climate Change Minister Penny Wong, Opposition sources have confirmed.

Federal cabinet and the Labor caucus rubber-stamped the heavily amended scheme this morning.

It is understood that, among the many concessions offered in return for Opposition support, the $750 million assistance for coalmines has been doubled to $1.5 billion.

The deal was emailed to Mr Macfarlane, the Opposition's emissions trading spokesman, at 10am, the same time the Opposition's joint party room meeting on the issue began.

Shadow treasurer Joe Hockey, who is backing Malcolm Turnbull, said the rebels would not be allowed to decided the matter by secret ballot.

"You know it is always the case that people try to reinvent the rules when they can't get their way," he said.

Mr Turnbull and his supporters are confident that the majority of the party room will support his desire to cut a deal with Labor and have the Senate pass the legislation this week.END OF QUOTE

So we are in limbo now because we cannot trust The LIBS or the ALP and we have to do something about the future of the planet.
Do not believe the arguments of Abbott that the global warmiong is bull, he have a oplicy to reduce the emissions but it is more expensive than the Carbon Tax and our monet goes to the polluters, 23 billion of them at $720 per year in increased taxes with no compo for us.

Originally Posted by isuzurover

Incidentally, concrete production works out as about 1T of CO2 per 1T of concrete, so concrete prices shouldn't rise by more than $60/m3 (assuming concrete is not exempt).

Unfortunately steel is about 2000t of CO2 for every 1000t of Steel

So anything with metal is going up

Originally Posted by Chucaro

Yes I read that article abd I did not mentioned it here because more than one will say that these people are ferrals

Calm down Arthur... I posted a reply with my definition of Feral...

It does not include those economists, scientists etc....

I'm not against economic, civic, social or enviromental responsibility.... much in favour actually...

I just dont believe this is the solution

Originally Posted by Tombie

Calm down Arthur... I posted a reply with my definition of Feral...

It does not include those economists, scientists etc....

I'm not against economic, civic, social or enviromental responsibility.... much in favour actually...

I just dont believe this is the solution

Tombie, my comment was not addressed to you, I know which kind of people you are referring to.
You know, I considering myself as a "Green person" I am trying my best to learn about the subject, I am trying to live this planet in better condition to what was I born, and like to debate about it. We all learn in the process I guess.
For sure in the terms that I have described above you are "Green” as well

What make me very upset is the uneducated people that call themselves Greens just because it is "Cool" or "In" and are not capable to find a sustainable way to protect our environment and give the chance for others to have a better life.

Bugger!!! I have to stop driking to much cafeine

Originally Posted by Tombie

Calm down Arthur... I posted a reply with my definition of Feral...

It does not include those economists, scientists etc....

I'm not against economic, civic, social or environmental responsibility.... much in favour actually...

I just dont believe this is the solution

And thats the problem. The evidence is real. There are many that dont believe the evidence put forth by the majority of the earth sciences.

Someone has to start a course of action, whether that action be an optimal solution or not. The previous ETS solution was knocked back by parliament.

If many parts of Europe, states in the US, and countries like NZ and Australia around the world make a start, which they are, there is at least recognition that reducing carbon emissions is a good thing for future generations to come.

Theres that old philosophical debate about who goes first. It is not an excuse to hark on about China.

What is the solution ? No idea, but lets start something and see where it goes !

Gunny, what upset me most is that we need a open mind federal opposition which can put the interest of the country and the future of the planet before their own.
These people know about the problem with global warming, they have policies to implement back in 2007 and supported by the leader in opposition and his shadow cabinet.(Turnbull)
Then we have a irresponsible leader of the opposition who first believe that Carbon tax will be a solution instead of ETS, then denying the findings of the since saying that global warming is bull, and then now have a policy of imposing on us a huge tax of over $700 a year to give the money to the pollutes to look into way to reduce emissions.
How we can have a reasonable outcome like this?
As I said before, I do not like the carbon tax as a solution, I did not agree with the PM to promising something that in a democratic system cannot be held but I prefer to do something about that nothing.

Originally Posted by Chucaro

Gunny, what upset me most is that we need a open mind federal opposition which can put the interest of the country and the future of the planet before their own.
These people know about the problem with global warming, they have policies to implement back in 2007 and supported by the leader in opposition and his shadow cabinet.(Turnbull)
Then we have a irresponsible leader of the opposition who first believe that Carbon tax will be a solution instead of ETS, then denying the findings of the since saying that global warming is bull, and then now have a policy of imposing on us a huge tax of over $700 a year to give the money to the pollutes to look into way to reduce emissions.
How we can have a reasonable outcome like this?
As I said before, I do not like the carbon tax as a solution, I did not agree with the PM to promising something that in a democratic system cannot be held but I prefer to do something about that nothing.

+1 or as they say in the old language "hear hear". Abbott is opposition for the sake of opposition & nothing else. Turnbull would offer the county a very different perspective, maybe to such an extreme where voting for someone is actually policy based ;-)