Thread: Carbon Tax on it's way through the House.

Very good presentation, I don't know what to think about the tax, what is your alternative? Bob

Bob

I've said all along that the Government should have been providing low interest loans, tax concessions and significant grants for research and development of on the ground alternative power generation projects.

In the 1940s and 1950s we invested heavily in the Snowy Mountains Hydro-Electric Scheme, but since that time the only major power generation projects funded or supported by the various Governments have been coal fired power stations.

What has happened to our innovation over the last 60 years. We got lazy and went for the cheapest option. Even the solar cell technologies produced in our taxpayer funded universities (specifically UNSW) has gone overseas for lack of investment and Commonwealth grants to build production.

Have you ever been to Lake Argyle and Wyndam? The tidal flows in that part of the country are huge, there are even narrows across those flows that would make tidal flow a viable possibility and outside the slack water at each tide provided reliable generation forces that are not dependant upon wind or sunlight.

On the west coast of Tasmania and the Bass Strait (in-fact right across the Southern coastline from Albany) we regularly have huge seas and these can be used as wave action generators located below the surface so as not to obstruct shipping.

Solar thermal and geo thermal are other options but AFAIK only two pilot projects have received any funding at all.

Diana

We (as in the human population) have to do something. Is this strategy right? Don't know. Should we wait for everyone else to act before we do? No. Are industry and the markets already taking major steps to reduce carbon emmisions and energy usage? You better believe it.

Well said,

I am a geologist/easrth scientist if you wish and no stranger to a little controversy, but like lotz-a-landies has said the best way to reduce our footprint would be to investing in new technologies, tax breaks to put solar hot water and photoelectric solar cells on roofs, insulates homes/start building well designed energy efficient homes, not steel frames with plastic /tin on the outside. I.e reduce our power consumption and invest rather than tax.

Research, I work down at UWA and they did have a project to put in a hot rocks bore (~1000m) to tap into the hot waters/rocks of the Perth basin. The idea would be to power the campus' air conditioning, use it as a test bed for applied technology for potential use in new build office complexes and retrofitting to existing buildings and train young scientists. Cost about $300 million. Private and government money. What did the government do? Pulled the funding and the project went under. Imagine the power consumption reduction if you could get a percentage of down town Perth powered by the temperature gradient beneath it? Now that is reducing power consumption, and thus fossil fuel usage, and therefore carbon output. Instead we tax the producers, give the cash to the poor to make up for the increased prices and invest very little. Good work.

I guess if we don't use electricity,or we reduce our consumption, then the government doesn't make any money in the form of taxes, so really they don't want us to reduce out energy needs, since they would not make any money......

A couple of years ago, I had the opportunity to work as part of a design team to build a solar collector pilot power plant. The foreign company wanted tax breaks so they could compete with the mud burning power stations in the Latrobe Valley.
The government said no.
The power plant was built in another country with a foreign design team.
Opportunity lost.

This carbon tax is nothing but a money grab.

And I thought they would never be able to tax the air. I'm now re-thinking.......

Originally Posted by WhiteD3

We (as in the human population) have to do something. Is this strategy right? Don't know. Should we wait for everyone else to act before we do? No. Are industry and the markets already taking major steps to reduce carbon emmisions and energy usage? You better believe it.

Where is the kudos in being the first country to bleed it's population with yet another ill timed and concieved tax? We have some of the best innovators in solar energy, alternative energies etc leaving the country because they cannot get sufficient support from the government here in Australia. We live in a country blessed with so many resources, yet all we do is dig them up, chop them down or just ship them live. Where is the valve adding in our supply chains? Where is our future?

The solar rebates were sold, in part based on the fact that if enough people buy then, we can avoid building another dirty power station...now what happens? The government goes back, yet again on theirs promises....we need innovators (of all kinds) in government, not more lawyers or accountants or union leaders.

If every new house built in Aust from now on was required to have solar panels on its roof I wonder how our energy footprint would reduce - cost increase on a new house would be less that 10% and most likely much less. Certainly not the sole solution but as part of a range of initiatives - like those already suggested a start.

Garry

Originally Posted by Lotz-A-Landies

Bob

I've said all along that the Government should have been providing low interest loans, tax concessions and significant grants for research and development of on the ground alternative power generation projects.

In the 1940s and 1950s we invested heavily in the Snowy Mountains Hydro-Electric Scheme, but since that time the only major power generation projects funded or supported by the various Governments have been coal fired power stations.

What has happened to our innovation over the last 60 years. We got lazy and went for the cheapest option. Even the solar cell technologies produced in our taxpayer funded universities (specifically UNSW) has gone overseas for lack of investment and Commonwealth grants to build production.

Have you ever been to Lake Argyle and Wyndam? The tidal flows in that part of the country are huge, there are even narrows across those flows that would make tidal flow a viable possibility and outside the slack water at each tide provided reliable generation forces that are not dependant upon wind or sunlight.

On the west coast of Tasmania and the Bass Strait (in-fact right across the Southern coastline from Albany) we regularly have huge seas and these can be used as wave action generators located below the surface so as not to obstruct shipping.

Solar thermal and geo thermal are other options but AFAIK only two pilot projects have received any funding at all.

Diana

Think I know what happened after the snowy, the Franklin river. After that, most of the " alternative " power solutions were deemed too much of a political hot potatoe. I have been around the Australian coast about 4 or 5 times, including around Tasmania. The problem with the tidal dream is no-one has been able to make it financialy viable. It's all right to have feel good dreams, making them reality is the problem. You haven't given a solution, just pie in the sky dreams, sorry, Bob