So why are we going through all this agony?

Because the Australian public has been convinced that CO2 is VERY BAD, and is the cause of what, we are assured, will become Catastrophic Global Warming. Actually, (and I have devoted several hours per day for the past 10 years or so studying the underlying science) despite what the governments paid advisers (Will Steffen, David Karoly, Tim Flannery et al) are telling you, it is definitely NOT proven that rising CO2 levels are causing significant warming.

To the extent that voters are seeing what they think is CO2 caused climate change, it is far more likely that they are observing the effects of land-use affecting local and regional climate. Or natural changes in climate.

The science is most certainly NOT settled, and those who are arguing that it is will be held to account in due course.

herbert, some people use this as a proxy for a class war with "rich people, right wingers, red necks" all of whom are demonised as rampant polluters.

Whether they are or not is irrelevant to the cause .. the cause is, to have a cause. it's so nice to be able to clump together and have in common, some sort of ritual dislike for another "group" supported by "science"

So you have a bunch of people who all find they are brothers and sisters because they all dislike people who have more than they do, they can then demand taxes, which will not affect them, only the 'polluters".

Which means they can go on with their lifestyles, not change anything at all, because they will not pay as they are not polluters, yes we all do little bits of polluting, but the point is it's THEM over there! (We'll be compensated, so nyah nyah)

It's those who love the environment against those who hate it, well they must hate it, why else would they consume the way they do? yes we consume too, but they do it more and We're the good guys, we demand!

Then the class war gets right out of control when you have organizations banding together to demand more taxation!

Again, because for some reason, they think they will not be paying it .. the trickle down effect will not trouble them at all (Greg Combet said so).

I have so much trouble trying to understand what is driving the demanders, yes polluting less is good, but do they really expect another tax is going to do anything, except embolden the government to add yet more taxes .. if it sells once, it must sell again.

We the demanders, they cry, are entitled!

We demand they are taxed, we demand we demand we demand!

Held to account, no they'll be able to say it was the scientists who led them astray .. nothing to do with them at all.

Some good posts, but also confusion about what this tax will actually achieve, and how it will work. (Except vanna, who has it figured - by all of us living in tents, and going back to horse and cart, candles and peddle radios.)

Solar subsidies: It appears an enormous cost blow-out caused a government re-think, and for Keneally to slash the grid input in NSW to 20 cents/Kwh (to dissuade further uptake.) The schemes were far too successful! However, perhaps the absence of reduced consumption was the telling factor - as any argument that these schemes were reducing greenhouse could not be substantiated, and therefore the cost (to taxpayers' funds) could not be justified. (I suspect solar households just used more, because it wasn't costing.) Solar has a long way to go to make it truly cost-effective. (Another post was also on and off the mark, in that a magic solar tech breakthrough was made in Oz, but of course it went overseas for development. China?)

Have to take the author to task, or rather the quote from Leigh Ewbank: "This infrastructure, ......., is the platform needed to deliver Gillard's vision of "a sweeping technological revolution ..." Since when did Ms Gillard have any sort of "vision" about anything?

Agnostic of Mittagong,

What a splendid idealistic view of how this carbon tax will play out. Sorry to burst a lot of bubbles, but the "Ms G/Combet/Swann" trio is proposing to allow energy generators to pass the full increased cost to consumers - minstrels and magnates alike. So where's the incentive for the generators to go green? Answer - we have to wait for the ETS, without which all fails. The trick is that, when revealed, the ETS will appear the "savior" of/from this carbon tax. Poof!

Consumption will reduce? (Even though households are compensated?) Poof!

Alternates will rise, like phoenix from the ashes? Poof!

I have to rebut an unkind comment about Tony Abbott's stance. He is rightly questioning, and proposing direct action. In contrast, the "fabulous trio" is proposing smoke and mirrors.

Prediction: There will be no Carbon Tax. And Gillard will blame Tony Abbott!

Shadow Minister,

(This post also posted on the tail of Tristan Ewins piece.)

A Post Script: I'm a bit tired of the political debate which is clouding discussion on the REAL ISSUE - which is the carbon tax. I'm also tired of the skeptics and naysayers - BECAUSE I think what really matters is the efficacy and sincerity of this proposed tax. It is TIME we focused on what this tax may, or may not do, to OZ, to all of us. It is time we focused on the FACTS relating to the tax itself, and on whether it is really a responsible and effective mechanism.

I can't help feeling Ms G is only pushing this tax as a tax-grab on the one hand (because of as yet undeclared huge budget black holes, perhaps), and on the other hand as a last ditch attempt to lever Labor towards a slim hope of remaining in power after the next election. Neither of these potential motivations can justify this tax imposition (as an alternative to coming clean with the Oz public), nor do I believe that this tax has anything whatsoever to do with addressing climate change, and nor do I really believe that it is the most effective way for Oz to build a sustainable energy future.

Sorry for getting a bit ahead of myself. I am really interested in YOUR VIEWS on this matter, and should not be demonstrating a closed mind by railing on. My apologies.

Apologies also to Tristan for not being the least bit interested in Liberal-Socialism or Easter Bunnies. My head is sore enough already.

Also sorry to the climate skeptics who keep saying "convince me, convince me; give me the proof!" They unfortunately miss the point altogether, being that we are addressing a new tax scheme, not global warming - whether it exists or not is entirely irrelevant to the discussion. (As really are the underlying political motivations.)

Gillard's visit to the solar boosted coal station underscores the task ahead. The new gadgetry is supposed to provide 44,000 megawatt hours of clean energy a year but I think you'll find coal provides between five and six million megawatt hours from that operation. Perhaps Ms Gillard should have stayed home and offered to save the fuel from the VIP jet.

As to those who are sharpening their knives for a day of reckoning I'd be inclined to get body armour instead. Climatologist James Hansen who has been making mostly correct predictions for decades says 2012-2014 will be extra hot. Better have your excuses ready.