It's also a lot of dubious Science .

My Grandfather an RC would'nt go in the Catholic Cathedral

in Bendigo because when it was started children in Bgo. were starving and dying .

To make his point he took me to the Bgo. Cemetery ; I can't quote a name but the epitaph is printed on my mind "Lifes keen Sythe did cut me down like grass" this lady had eight children and died in her late eighties outliving both her children who died as juviniles and her Husband by 50 years .

Grand Dad reckoned Hype and Hysteria triumped over dead children when all they needed was a clean water supply !

In our time we have a lanky great daft bald Pop Singer who made his fame selling the Evil of "Uranium" has now changed into a sellor and promoter of that product ! Now he is to be found rebirthed as a AGW Fanatic , same game "Hype and Histeria" ; now this Master of the third Leg has teeth and he is out and apparently influentual to commit us with hippy science to starvation and misery .

Juell Briggs seems to be saying because it sounds expensive we shouldn't make the effort. Like most voices arguing against climate action it's sounding more and more like a weak, wishy-washy response to the challenges of the new climate reality , an emerging theme of "they must be wrong, let's wait and see, it sounds hard to do anything about, it'll be expensive, fixing it will be the end of civilisation". Under the bluster that's what the doubt, deny, delay crowd are beginning to sound like. Wimps proposing we cover our eyes, block out ears and pretend it's all a mistake or hoax or something! Anything but face the new climate reality head on.

We need to Tax carbon and feed the money to efficiency at consumer level and emissions reduction at the producer level. What's so freaking radical about that? Well before carbon taxes hit $100/ton CO2 it will be available from clean alternatives for less. Juell really thinks it can't be done? Whether it's predominately wind and solar and - when the costs overwhelm mainstream Australia's reluctance - new gen nuclear like IFR, it can be done.

This cap and trade foolishness is just another way for the gov't to tax the citizens. If you think the taxes will be used for environmental goodness think again. It is just a tax when there is no justification for it. Labor governments around the world love it.

The most sensible approach to total emissions reduction is two pronged: 1) simply pass a federal law stating that the emissions from the electric generator smoke stacks can not exceed some amount by some date. Since most generators are owned by state governments there should be little problem with this other than the perennial squabbling about who has the money and who is responsible. Simple, raise the price of electricity to pay for the low/no carbon enhanced generation. The price will be less than if we had trading of pollution licenses because there is far less government bureaucracy in the process and far less chance of bureaucratic bungling in the initial allocation of free pollution licenses.

Secondly, adopt the motor vehicle emission and mileage standards currently in place for California - including the "gas guzzler tax". These standards are probably the highest in the world and all auto makers that want to sell in the California market know how to build to these standards - therefore no new technology required. This will be a gradual implementation as the public buys new cars. It may take 10-15 years before a reasonable percentage of cars are low emission vehicles but there will be a continuous improvement.

The "gas guzzler" tax? It is a rather hefty tax (several thousand dollars) on the purchase price of a car that does not meet the mileage requirement. It allows the rev-heads to have their V8s but they will pay for it twice - once upon purchase and continuously with lower mileage.

There we have it folks. All problems easily solved and all the gov't needs to do is pass a couple laws. No need for all the complexities and extra expenses of taxes.

What a great idea Brucie , will you help finance me into one of these here Camel Cars cobber , I am a 66yr old pensioner with 3 dependants .

I personally am in favour of a simple carbon tax ratcheted up over the coming years.

The cap and trade with carbon credits are bogus accounting schemes that allow people to fudge the figures.

A simple carbon tax encourages lower emmissions energy use and provides an alternative tax for the government that can help Rudd pay off the huge deficit that is coming.

Juel don't blame the ETS for a carbon price of A$225. It has nothing to do with the ETS. It's the price we will pay to stabilise GHGs at 450ppm CO2-e.

It's not difficult to see now why governments all over the world are "dragging their feet" on climate change.

Yes it will be expensive and hurt the economy. Let's hope the climate scientists have it right or some of them may be swinging from the end of ropes if the science is shown to be wrong in a couple of decades.