Please take a few moments to fill out this survey. It is run by a new party - cnservatives for climate and environment:

http://www.surveymonkey.com/s.aspx?sm=8DxFU51ealvnvcT0YQiC_2fA_3d_3d

3. Would you be happy to pay a carbon price penalty for fossil fuel energy sources ?
E.g. $50/tonne CO2 price would see petrol up 12c/litre and coal fired electricity up around 5c/kWh.
(The Nobel Prize winning IPCC's report shows around 45% global mitigation potential by 2030 at $50USD/tonne CO2)

4. Even a tax or trading scheme at $50/tonne would collect almost as much revenue as the GST. How would you like to see it spent ?

More info:

http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1168051896/42#42

http://www.ozpolitic.com/green-tax-shift/green-tax-shift.html

there's no point in a carbon tax unless the money is spent providing alternatives. no australian politician can be trusted to do this, as the structure of political society does not allow precise supervision or accountability.

perhaps a better approach is to extract a resource price from mining companies. they are, after all, making a profit from 'the commons', leaving a hole where there used to be a valuable resource not of their making.

Actually no, the tax serves a purpose even if the income is used to reduce income tax or GST or something like that. The increase in price alone will significantly reduce emissions. This is the best way to achieve fast reductions with little impact on the economy.

The fact that politicians can't be trusted is kind of a moot point. You could make the same argument about any change. It is the public that is u;ltimately responsible. Politicians will only get away with what the public allows them to.

Not much point, human caused global warming is no longer the issue.
With world oil, gas and coal either about to start depleting, or depleting
in the next 10 years, (coal 2025 to 2030) there will not be the CO2
to worry about.

We have a much more serious problem;
The tacit agreement of politicians to not mention peak oil.
Reminds me of Faulty Towers "Don't mention the war".
Oil at almost $US100 a barrel.
Australia 40% depleted.

Those carrying on about human caused global warming have missed the boat.
It is no longer the major problem.
I know to even say this is like swearing in church but face it.

You don't actually believe that do you? At most we have used half the available oil, and far less of the coal, which is a bigger problem. We've hardly begun on the tar sands. This is not the time to say 'OK, we're only going to put out 5 times as much as we have so before it runs out, so lets not worry about it.' If what you say is true, it would be a good thing. But it isn't.

Hello Freediver said,
>You don't actually believe that do you? At most we have used half the
>available oil, and far less of the coal, which is a bigger problem.

Sorry, but coal was presumed by everybody to have years of reserves.
The German Energy Watch group found that there had been no review for
40 years I think it was. That was recently confirmed.
Oil depletion may well have already started.

> We've hardly begun on the tar sands.
ERoEI, and it can't be ramped up faster than depletion. Also problem
with gas availability to heat the tar and pollution.

> This is not the time to say 'OK, we're only going to put out 5 times
>as much as we have so before it runs out, so lets not worry about it.'

Isn't it ? Well the Hydrocarbon group at Uppsala thinks that the
IPCC studies need looking at because of this problem.

> If what you say is true, it would be a good thing. But it isn't.
Well, we will have to wait until it sinks in to the GW pushers but at
present it is against their religion, so we await prophet Gore to speak.
=
NB what I have said applies to world production, not Australia.
In Australia oil depletion is already by 40 percent.
We have gas in plenty, but will sell it to China & Japan until we have
none to use ourselves.
Likewise with China, someone in the Chinese government said they will
use all their coal and then use ours. They are now a coal importer.
What price is oil today ?

"Sorry, but coal was presumed by everybody to have years of reserves.
The German Energy Watch group found that there had been no review for
40 years I think it was. That was recently confirmed.
Oil depletion may well have already started.

This is absurd. Because the German government didn't find any reviews it means we are running out? It means there is no need for a review. This is a rediculous theory that is completely lacking in any evidence. In fact you even admitted it is an assumption based on lack of evidence. We are not going to run out of coal in a timeframe relevant to the climate debate.

Freediver;
I think you misunderstood. The Energy Watch Group, when they found that
there had not been a survey of coal for many years then did one and
found that world peak coal will occur around 2030 to 2035.

Just go and read it.

2030 to 2050? That is far fetched. Even if it werte true, it is still irrelevant from a climate change perspective. Under a peak coal scenario, emissions would continue to climb until 2050. Climate change scientists want emissions reduced by soimething like 50% by then. They want to impose peak coal right now.

Also, check the assumptions on that report. You will probably find that are stupid. For example, they are probably based on known reserves, which means an assumption that people will not start looking for more coal as known reserves run out.

Freediver,
Here is the report, read it first.
You will find their latest report on when peak oil occured on the
same site.

http://www.energywatchgroup.org/files/Coalreport.pdf

That site doesn't work. Let me guess, you found a 'report' on some two bit website that sounded official so you believed it, without checking the assumptions. Can you tell me what the assumptions are? I'm not going to read through pages of gibberish to find out what I already know.