The Forum > General Discussion > Big mistake removing carbon tax
Big mistake removing carbon tax
- Pages:
-
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- Page 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
-
- All
Posted by Robert LePage, Monday, 21 July 2014 9:51:47 AM
| |
"BTW, it now appears that the temperature rise precedes the CO2 rise. Chickens and eggs anybody?"
Bazz, there is a great deal in the scientific literature about this. You should read it before you comment. Out-of-context comments mislead and misinform people. Although I don't think you are, some people here do it intentionally. Posted by DavidK, Monday, 21 July 2014 12:05:16 PM
| |
Davidk, yes I am aware of the controversy over which came first.
However it is so fundamental that it should be hammered down for good. I heard a talk by a scientist of very considerable note just last week that made that point. Robert, the prices in the US & UK I quoted are before subsidy prices. In the US they get a tax credit in the UK citizens get a fixed sum. I would pay their unsubsidised prices but not the Great Australian Ripoff. Quote Robert; The media ignored this part of the Report, so the ministers of our two major parties Yes indeed I have spoken to pollies and I feel they are totally aware of the problem. Just like the pressure put onto the EIA by the US government to "Don't frighten the horses" to play down peak oil, so our pollies do not want to frighten the voter by talking about such terrifying things as petrol rationing, food shortages etc. When discussing the problem there seems to be a well rehearsed mantra of "We have good solid commercial arrangements etc etc" and "No shortage is thought likely in the foreseeable future". Are these the phrases you hear ? I certainly got the same wording from three different politicians. I even suggested to two of the pollies that the owner of a car should be issued a card that he had to present when buying petrol or diesel and each purchase be transmitted to the rationing computer and his ration deducted from his entitlement. I could see that this was beyond the pale to them, one even remarked the public would not stand for it ! My suggestion was they should just plan it in case as if Iran closed the Strait of Hormuz (it was a hot topic at the time) they would only have a couple of weeks to have it working. I thought we paid politicians to do this sort of thing to protect the public just in case. Are not the armed forces an insurance policy ? Posted by Bazz, Monday, 21 July 2014 2:15:53 PM
| |
Bazz, there is no significant controversy, except in the minds of a few so called 'contrarian' scientists.
Why didn't you name him/her? Posted by DavidK, Monday, 21 July 2014 3:50:32 PM
| |
Well, I would not put his name up here without his permission.
So I guess you will just have to take my word for it. Posted by Bazz, Monday, 21 July 2014 4:41:06 PM
| |
Bazz yes there is a problem in relation to the availability of conventional oil but you are mistaken in thinking that it is an immediate problem. We may well have reached peak oil globally, but that means we have still have a similar amount left compared to the amount we have already burnt. There are plenty of unconventional oil sources such as tar sands which we have barely touched. We also have alternatives such as
making petrol from coal. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oil_sands http://www.tarsandsworld.com/australia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coal_liquefaction It is quite likely that these alternative resources will be exploited, but by exploiting them we will go way past the target for emissions that the scientists suggest we can practically adapt too. The obvious solution is a price on CO2 emissions and incentives to move to a low carbon economy. So what does our government do, it acts to discourage taking any sensible steps to deal with the problem Posted by warmair, Monday, 21 July 2014 5:17:44 PM
|
As for the Nissan Leaf, the only places they can sell any have either huge taxpayer subsidies on the things, or special conditions, like congestion charges.*
Well one good reason would be as below.
We are closing down refineries so even the small amount of oil we have left has to be shipped overseas to be refined and then shipped back.
Google “export land model” and it will explain how other countries will stop exporting to Australia as their oil runs low and that is excluding the much higher price that oil will be by then.
Australia WILL be out of oil by 2020
Without oil, modern civilisation doesn’t work
by Mark O’Connor
Treasury’s last Inter-generational Report http://archive.treasury.gov.au/igr/igr2010/report/html/07_Chapter_6_A_sustainable_society.asp
contains, hidden away on page 91, a simple stunning statement: Australia’s oil will be gone by 2020. The timing could not be worse. By 2020 Peak Oil is likely to have rendered oil imports precarious and costly. And without oil, modern civilisation doesn’t work.
The media ignored this part of the Report, so the ministers of our two major parties and the bureaucrats who advise them, have rarely been required to explain why they let this happen. On those rare occasions the question has been brushed aside with assurances that either market forces will always supply oil (or a substitute) at reasonable prices or Australia has vast reserves of natural gas.