Thanks Rich2 for imparting some sense and bringing up the issue of the moral argument. There is a moral imperative for Australia, as the highest emitter on a per capita basis of greenhouse gas emissions, to do something and to be a model for the rest of the world. A carbon tax WILL make individuals change their behaviour. If it is added to the cost of petrol, for instance, they may choose to take the bus to work. If it is added to the cost of electricity, then they may turn off their electrical appliances at the wall and use them less. They may invest in solar power. I think the carbon tax is a great initiative and my only hope is that it will be set high enough to make renewables competitive with coal power.

"If you accept the scientific view, which I do, then the need for every country to dramatically reduce its emissions is clear and will happen - the only question is one of timing."

Well, there are scientific views, and then there are scientific views: yours is unfortunately in a minority which is steadily dwindling every day. Nothing depicts the desperation of the AGW alarmists quite so poignantly as their desperate attempts to portray themselves as a majority and a 'consensus' instead of what they are: a small gang of fanatics and a bandwagon-load of opportunistic followers who are bailing out even as we speak.

popnperish - rich2 managed to read all of the above material in the posts and in the article seemingly without a word of it penetrating. His post is simply a restatement of the green orthodoxy without acknowleding, let alone refuting, any counter arguements.

As for us being obligated because we are a big emitter per capita, one of the reasons for our emissions is that we don't have any nuclear power reactors, like France, England, Germany, Canada and the US. Another is that our power industry uses mainly coal rather than gas. So if we switch to gas we are suddenly no longer a major per-capita emitter, and do we still have that over-riding moral imperative?

More importantly do voters and power consumers know that they are paying for what is essentially an ideological gesture, that can have only the smallest of effects on industrial emissions.

The reality that rich2 and others simply do not want to face is that this issue has now coooled noticeably (pun intended). I recently read one analysis in the LA Times, over the net, that President Obama has stopped referring to the environment altogether in his speeches. Time to abandon all hope that anything globally will be done about emissions.

Curmudgeon
Without going into the amount of greenhouse gases emitted in the building and decommissioning nuclear reactors, would we still have a moral obligation to act even if our emissions were less (by using nuclear power)? Yes, because historically we have put a disproportionate amount emissions into the atmosphere. And anyway, we still emit a huge amount through transport and the fact that we have bigger houses than anyone.
A carbon tax is not an ideological gesture - it is a concrete measure to reduce emissions, even if they don't start reducing for a year or two.
Yes, the issue has cooled (thanks to you lot) but the issue has not gone away. Carbon dioxide is still rising, sea-levels are still rising and the temperature (as measured over decades to even out annual variation) is still rising. And if we don't start acting now, we may be faced with runaway climate change.

"A carbon tax is not an ideological gesture - it is a concrete measure to reduce emissions, even if they don't start reducing for a year or two."
What a load of rot. This proposed tax will little, or no, effect on our emissions. Not in one or two years or even ten. It will have absolutely no effect on climate change. It is merely a token gesture to say "look at us." - As if the rest of the world really gives a toss about what Australia does or does or does not do. Time for a reality check.

Sorry Sparkyq, but where is your evidence for your assertion that a carbon tax won't reduce emissions? If it is set at $70, then wind will be competitive with coal and you will see a massive shift away from coal towards wind and other renewables.
And what Australia does IS of importance. Every country is looking to good examples of what can be done and before long, we may well have an international emissions trading scheme anyway. If Australia isn't ready with its own ETS or equivalent, she'll be left out of the world's trading community.