how is carbon tax gonna work ?

[kreed]

On Jul 12, 10:34 am, who where <no...@home.net> wrote:

On Mon, 11 Jul 2011 08:32:15 +1000, "Trevor Wilson"

tre...@rageaudio.com.au> wrote:
no one wrote:
if the carbon tax  does go thru , how is this gonna help reduce
pollutants ?

**The carbon tax will go through. It SHOULD reduce the amount of CO2 emitted
by Australian industry, because industry will attempt to lower their costs
of doing business, by choosing lower emission technologies, processes and
power sources. Do you have your head permantly up your arse?

It SHOULD, and all the ivory-tower-completely-out-of-touch-with-the
realities-of-running-a-business dreamers are banking on that.

Over on the other side of town where real businesses operate the
response is clear - adapt or die.  So added input costs will appear as
added output costs - prices of outputs will rise to keep the balance
sheet balanced.  Business Accounting 101.  Any moves to lower-emission
technologies will be about as significant as a snail's fart in a
cyclone.

Last night on (ABC) Lateline a spokesman for the energy industry gave
some real numbers.  In its first year this will add $4.6B to the cost
of generating electricity in Oz.  It was clear that *will* be passed
on, and by the time you add on the retail margins thats about $200
p.a. per man/woman/child.

That's just ONE affected commodity.  Transport costs come under
multiple pressures - the fuel, most consumables, drivers' pay (their
COL is being hit too).  Supermarkets will get hit with rises in
commodities, transport, electricity, water, ....

Those same dreamers reckon a $200 shopping trolley's contents will
only go up 80c .  I want some of what they're smoking!

$20-30 increase I would believe, once the full impact filters through.

How about they just put a donation tin on the checkout and make you
put in 40c per $100 spend then ?
That will resolve it completely.

Unless they are prepared to put their money where their mouths are,
and be fully liable
either for damages, or removal of the tax if it exceeds this amount,
then it is the same load of bullshit from the same bullshit artist
that brought you

"there will not be a tax on carbon under any government I lead"

 

[yaputya]

"kreed" <kenreed1999@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:c5ea3c0d-b3f4-41f2-92e6-169e16c57af4@h7g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
On Jul 12, 5:53 am, "yaputya" <yaputya.leftle...@gmail.com> wrote:

"Eunometic" <eunome...@yahoo.com.au> wrote in message

news:defcf98c-d43d-4277-9b8e-cd3489248bc8@e20g2000prf.googlegroups.com...





But there are also other incentives for the renewable industry, and
I've
heard a lot of these companies shares have jumped in value on the Stock
market overnight .

A carbon tax will not work and will be counterproductive.

The technology for renewable energy doesn't exist. The most efficient
form of renewable energy could produce power at about 20c to 25c/
KW.Hr.

This compares to 5c for thermal brown coal. Nuclear maybe 10c when
disposal of waste and decomissioning is considered.

The Germans spent 70 billion euro to generate 0.2% of their energy
needs (2% of their electricity needs, about 6% during the day)

At least they tried to do the right thing, and guess which economy in
Europe
is the strongest ?????

More like "which ship is sinking the slowest" ?. They will just slide
into oblivion
if they do things like this rather than providing affordable energy.
Nuclear is a
far better choice - if you still believe in this C02 stuff.


** The Krauts have consigned the NUKE industry to the waste bin.
Despite having one of the largest NUKE programs in the world.
it is obvious that the costs vs risks has shifted the political goalposts
recently. That is the result of so-called democracy - stupid people
tend to vote for stupid people. (Avoid the MAD MONK - he is a religious
fruitcake that belongs in the ISLAM category of nutters. Catholics are just
as
stupid as Muslims - they believe in imaginary things.) BTW I favour
NUKEs, nuclear power is a logical development in the history of science
that is being undermined by emotional arguements. IMHO the recent
developments just show there is a serious problem with the so-called
democratic system. Too many idiots get to vote, while the true science is
politicalised.