There are two main outcomes that will arise from increase in taxes that will be needed if we are to invest in significant forms of renewable energy (like the carbon tax - only proceeds will go to paying debt rather than infrastructure).

First, there will be an increase to family costs of living making it harder for the Australian economy to power ahead. This increase will have to be charged for the power companies to continue supply. They wont change their methods... Just charge more for it.

Second, jobs will go overseas as the companies will not find it profitable to operate on home soil any longer. Companies such as Bluescope Steel are already under enough pressure without such taxes.

Another issue that has failed to be mentioned is the fact of base load of power. The only real form of production to satisfy this base load is coal... And possibly nuclear energy (which Gillard and the Labour Government are for some reason opposed to).

Addressing the accusations of bias; I am an academic individual that is a member of the legal and commerce profession. My main concern is economic prosperity, not the environment that undergoes natural process and will adapt to inevitable change through Darwin's Theory of Natural Selection.

Such investment in renewable energy could lead to our demise. Yes it is a step that needs to be taken... But not in some big panic that will send business broke, and families starving!

This wraps my points up conclusively! I will only respond to further posts if they are of proper argument, and no insults are made!
Thank You

I would not trust briefings given to politicians it all depends on who is given a hearing. J Gillard believes by taxing CO2 emmissions and giving it to poorer people to pay for their electricity and purchase comodities produced by releasing CO2 will eleviate climate change. What Logic is that?

Firstly It shall be noted that political advisers, some of whom I know, are the best in their field! They are knowledgeable and have comprehensive understanding of the topic they are involved in.

Secondly... Julia G. does not want to help families (despite saying she does). She wants to attempt to pull Labour from their huge deficit by taxing families. This is the same concept as Keneally's idea of selling NSW Power. Rather than use a strategic approach, she sells and prices go up making it harder for families.

This is a very opinionated and complex topic... So lets just try making what little sense out of all of this as we can!

Whether an individual has a clear view of what lies ahead, and states what needs to be done, a political system (whatever stage or persuasion it may be) has to act out its conclusions.

Only after a catastrophe such as WWWI or WWW2 that changes in policies can take place. Even then, the changes are deadling with the events leading up to the catastrophe rather than to prevent another. This is natural. It would be ridiculous to claim perfect vision ahead, - especially from a political entity. The case in point is the financial difficulties experienced in some countries. Changes are taking place to prevent another similar financial "meltdown", - not prevent another looming one.

Paul's article is just another business as usual vision.
In an energy depleting world it is a brave assumption that the internet
will still be operational. If we are lucky we might have a basic POTS
telephone service.
I suggest that a reading of the Hirsch Report would be of great help
to all that have an interest in the not too far distant future.
The reports main conclusion is that we need 20 years to make the
transition to a new energy regime.

http://www.google.com.au/url?sa=t&source=web&cd=2&ved=0CCMQFjAB&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.netl.doe.gov%2Fpublications%2Fothers%2Fpdf%2Foil_peaking_netl.pdf&rct=j&q=The%20Hirsch%20Report&ei=vJe4TZHkBYGSuAOW35iiAw&usg=AFQjCNE3FtTu9VvtUOQaCvSKRG0Tb2Tchw&cad=rja

www.netl.doe.gov/publications/others/pdf/oil_peaking_netl.pdf

The second link might be easier.

As peak crude oil is now history and peak coal is around 2020 to 2025
we should have started the energy transition about 1980.
Most of the visions as seen by Paul are either impossible or to the
people trying to adapt to the changed conditions are of no interest whatsoever.