Federal Government proposes a price on carbon.

[Psyber]

A tax, or even a trading scheme, won't actually reduce our output of CO2 or any other pollutants...

Psyber I'm struggling to understand what you mean by this - can you expand on it?

Please direct me to appropriate links if I'm wrong, but from what I've come across and read, there doesn't seem to be any plan to actively press changes to technology to lower emissions, or support them with grants or tax concessions.
There seems to be just the vague hope that the "price" will stimulate such change - the Greens policy did at least talk about financial support for changes.

If the Carbon price can be passed on to the end user I can't see being a lot of motivation for business to do anything but carry on as usual.
I doubt there will be enough competition from greener enterprises in our small market to push the changes by consumer sentiment shifting market share.
And it seems that if we do get to the trading scheme, eventually, that doesn't press a need to do more than trade credits either.
So, I am concerned that shifting credits around is all that will happen because that is the easy option, and that we will go on producing the same output.

Even if some pressure on Australian industries did build up, some processes may be simply shifted overseas and the related CO2 will be emitted elsewhere leaving the world's output the same.

My other concern is the focus on CO2 while we ignore other issues, like fine carbon particles and incompletely burned hydrocarbons as by-products of using diesel fuel, including bio-diesel.
Some of these are probable carcinogens - the medical literature is divided at present and there is some dispute.

[redandblack]

The CSIRO now calculates the cost of the carbon tax at less than the Treasury.

A whopping 0.6% per annum.

http://www.smh.com.au/environment/clima ... 1ncvq.html

[dedja]

A tax, or even a trading scheme, won't actually reduce our output of CO2 or any other pollutants...

Psyber I'm struggling to understand what you mean by this - can you expand on it?

Please direct me to appropriate links if I'm wrong, but from what I've come across and read, there doesn't seem to be any plan to actively press changes to technology to lower emissions, or support them with grants or tax concessions.
There seems to be just the vague hope that the "price" will stimulate such change - the Greens policy did at least talk about financial support for changes.

If the Carbon price can be passed on to the end user I can't see being a lot of motivation for business to do anything but carry on as usual.
I doubt there will be enough competition from greener enterprises in our small market to push the changes by consumer sentiment shifting market share.
And it seems that if we do get to the trading scheme, eventually, that doesn't press a need to do more than trade credits either.
So, I am concerned that shifting credits around is all that will happen because that is the easy option, and that we will go on producing the same output.

Even if some pressure on Australian industries did build up, some processes may be simply shifted overseas and the related CO2 will be emitted elsewhere leaving the world's output the same.

My other concern is the focus on CO2 while we ignore other issues, like fine carbon particles and incompletely burned hydrocarbons as by-products of using diesel fuel, including bio-diesel.
Some of these are probable carcinogens - the medical literature is divided at present and there is some dispute.

What he said ... absolutely spot on.

I've always thought that the focus should be on reducing pollution, regardless of type or source.

[Sojourner]

As of July next year, Council Rates to be increased to contain a Carbon Tax component for rate payers,

http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/s ... 6215621160

[redandblack]

0.4% ?

[The Sleeping Giant]

0.4% ?

0.4% on all bills and everything we purchase (food, fuel etc.) will start to add up.

[redandblack]

Don't forget the compensation, though.

[Psyber]

This presentation on the efficacy, and economy, of using nuclear power to reduce emissions, by Professor Barry Brook of the Environment Institute at the University of Adelaide, and two others, is worth seeing: http://www.abc.net.au/tv/bigideas/stori ... 138360.htm

[Sojourner]

So the electricity and gas bills are increasing, Electricity by significantly more than gas - tough luck to those that live in Ingle Farm and the various other suburbs that dont even have Gas in the street - priorites?

Then its for Council Rates, and Groceries. What else is to go up?

[Psyber]

So the electricity and gas bills are increasing, Electricity by significantly more than gas - tough luck to those that live in Ingle Farm and the various other suburbs that dont even have Gas in the street - priorites?

Then its for Council Rates, and Groceries. What else is to go up?

Contrast that with Victoria where in Olinda and Mt Dandenong, over 55Km from the CBD and at altitudes over 500metres, we had a natural gas supply piped in...

[purch]

... I have read a lot of crazy stuff written by climate change deniers over the years but this just about takes the cake!...is typical of the desperation that climate change deniers have to resort to...If the deniers believe that climate scientists disagree with climate change in such large percentages why do they need to resort to such nonsense to make their point?

...And another thing - the very idea that there is a group called "Minnesotans for Global Warming" is extremely distasteful.

As a qualified Earth scientist who has issues with the findings of some climate change sensationalists I find the term "climate change deniers" extremely distasteful.

Fact: No decent Earth scientist believes that the climate isn't changing...

[Psyber]

... I have read a lot of crazy stuff written by climate change deniers over the years but this just about takes the cake!...is typical of the desperation that climate change deniers have to resort to...If the deniers believe that climate scientists disagree with climate change in such large percentages why do they need to resort to such nonsense to make their point?
...And another thing - the very idea that there is a group called "Minnesotans for Global Warming" is extremely distasteful.

As a qualified Earth scientist who has issues with the findings of some climate change sensationalists I find the term "climate change deniers" extremely distasteful.
Fact: No decent Earth scientist believes that the climate isn't changing...

My impression is that the term "Climate Change Denier" is often used to obscure the views of those who dissent from the mass faith about what the actual outcome of climate change will be, and whether the current planned "interventions" are effective. That use is about as rational as the few real deniers of any change.

I agree that only "nutters" would dispute that Earth's climate is in a constant state of change.
Real dispute is only about the details of the change and the choice of, and effectiveness of, intervention policies.

However, the recent article I read about how reduced insolation and global cooling caused the collapse of the Harrapan civilisation in the Indus valley, about 5000 years ago, is interesting.
(No I'm not "denying" the global warming trend - just pointing out that fluctuations occur too.)

[smac]

http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/money/sta ... 6396017546

Lucky I've got my $43 compensation, should cover this increase and any resultant increases to goods and services.

[mighty_tiger_79]

we fall into the middle income category where there is no compensation just devastation to the budget

[Psyber]

we fall into the middle income category where there is no compensation just devastation to the budget

I may be asset rich but my income is moderate as shares are not paying great dividends.
So, cost is a driving factor...

It is cold up here in the hills and I have found it frustrating trying to only heat part of the house, because that means I just sit around in the warm bit rather than getting on with my renovations.
So, I've reverted to wood heating to save electricity and allow myself to get on with it.

For the future, I have a lot of trees rather too close to the house for safety in Summer, and legally removable under the legislation since November.
So, a little selective culling is in order, though I shall plant replacement trees further from the house.

[mighty_tiger_79]

good plan Psyber

[Sojourner]

[dedja]

C-Day today ... Chicken Little day

[mick]

At least some people will be very happy with the Carbon Tax.

http://www.news.com.au/business/worklife/carbon-tax-compo-being-gambled-away/story-e6frfm9r-1226428729094

[Psyber]

At least some people will be very happy with the Carbon Tax.
http://www.news.com.au/business/worklife/carbon-tax-compo-being-gambled-away/story-e6frfm9r-1226428729094

I guess the Education money will produce similar benefits.
However, since the primary aim is to increase the popularity of Julia and the ALP a "gambling grant" will do it just as well as anything else..


PS: In an earlier post I said this:

My other concern is the focus on CO2 while we ignore other issues, like fine carbon particles and incompletely burned hydrocarbons as by-products of using diesel fuel, including bio-diesel.
Some of these are probable carcinogens - the medical literature is divided at present and there is some dispute.

I'm gratified to note that the WHO has now rated diesel fumes at the same level of carcinogenicity as Asbestos.
We make a lot of fuss about dealing with Asbestos, but where is the rush of politicians doing something similar about this one.

The few pollies I've spoken to about it have just looked away and not commented.
I guess it looks expensive and unpopular, so health is secondary in this case of carbon compound pollution..