MedVision ad

Carbon Tax versus Emissions Trading (2 Viewers)

Which do you support?

  • Carbon tax

    Votes: 11 68.8%
  • Emissions trading

    Votes: 5 31.3%

  • Total voters
    16

moll.

Learn to science.
Joined
Aug 19, 2008
Messages
3,545
Gender
Male
HSC
2008
That's a really good point. Fuck the ETS.

I have no idea why I'm on the side of Liberals here (I'll give them a break: they do often come up with good ideas when they're not being deliberately contrary), but the more I hear about an ETS, the stupider it sounds. Bring on a carbon tax.

In fact, they should tax carbon in such a way that things which pollute above a certain level are taxed while below a certain level are given tax relief. So things like ethanol would end up neutral (no tax or relief) because they are "carbon neutral".
You don't even need a specific carbon tax. Just raise the existing taxes and prices of electricity, gas, petrol and water. People would start caring a shitload more then.
 

moll.

Learn to science.
Joined
Aug 19, 2008
Messages
3,545
Gender
Male
HSC
2008
Why not subsidise fucking coal power (if you're going to have subsidies for any form of power)? Except for the carbon emissions, it's pretty sweet.

No new nuclear plants were built in the US for 30 years or so, because it's marginally economical at best, no one wants to invest in it.
Uhhh... And cos the Thirty Mile Island incident freaked everyone in America out.
 

moll.

Learn to science.
Joined
Aug 19, 2008
Messages
3,545
Gender
Male
HSC
2008
this poll is essentially pointless.

last year we had an indepth look at this debate in economics and either method would work perfectly fine. its not like one would work and the other one would just fail after 2 years, both would reduce emissions. just 2 routes to the same location

the real problem isnt deciding which one is better, its getting one, any one, of these methods actually working and being enforced
Except one is production-based tax, the other is consumption based. Entirely different effects upon the economy.
 

LordPc

Active Member
Joined
May 17, 2007
Messages
1,370
Location
Western Sydney
Gender
Male
HSC
2008
Except one is production-based tax, the other is consumption based. Entirely different effects upon the economy.
true, but is the final effect not the same?

you can either increase the carbon tax or you decrease the carbon quota depending on what system you use

lol @ Garnaut: perhaps we should do nothing now and "have another crack at it and do a better one when time is right"

see, the biggest problem is not what system to use, its getting the thing of the ground
 

LordPc

Active Member
Joined
May 17, 2007
Messages
1,370
Location
Western Sydney
Gender
Male
HSC
2008
You don't even need a specific carbon tax. Just raise the existing taxes and prices of electricity, gas, petrol and water. People would start caring a shitload more then.
lol, this would be good too. incorporate carbon emissions into pricing of everything. except politically it wont sound as prestigious as the ETS
 

moll.

Learn to science.
Joined
Aug 19, 2008
Messages
3,545
Gender
Male
HSC
2008
smh.com.au said:
ELECTRICITY consumers and environmental groups have reacted angrily to an announcement by the NSW Energy Minister, Ian Macdonald, that power companies will be allowed big price increases to pay for the largest energy expansion program in the state's history.

The head of the Energy Users Association, Roman Domanski, said the NSW power industry was becoming more inefficient and needed reform, not excessive spending.

"You won't solve the problem by throwing money at it," he said, adding that companies had not justified the big spending programs they were asking for.

Yesterday Mr Macdonald pre-empted the announcement of the independent energy regulator by declaring $18 billion would be spent over the next five years to replace, renew or upgrade the state's electricity network.

The money will come from electricity consumers. Domestic users in Sydney are expected to have to pay extra $2.50 per week.

Environment groups and energy-efficiency experts joined a chorus of criticism over the program, which is expected to be formally approved by the Australian Energy Regulator on April 29. The groups say it will increase greenhouse gas emissions and work against energy efficiency programs.

The NSW Total Environment Centre described the price increase as a money grab by the power distribution companies, Energy Australia, Integral Energy, Country Energy and Transgrid.

"Federal Energy Minister Martin Ferguson and NSW Minister Ian Macdonald need to be called to account for the colossal waste of money," said the centre's Jane Castle. "In NSW energy efficiency and demand management have proven to be four times cheaper than building more poles and wires.".

The price increases for Energy Australia customers are expected to begin with a 16 per cent rise this year followed by an 8 per cent rise for the following four years.

A spokesman for Energy Australia, which will spend $8.5 billion on its share of the program, said the spending would renew and upgrade an electricity system built in the 1960s and 1970s.

"It's now time to start renewing and replacing that network. It's got nothing to do with wanting to expand for the sake of expansion," said a spokesman, Anthony O'Brien.

The independent regulator had been through the company's submission "with a fine tooth comb", he said, and Energy Australia needed to comply with its licence conditions to run electricity distribution safely and reliably.

The NSW Environment Minister, Carmel Tebbutt, recently introduced an energy efficiency target for power retailers to cut electricity use in NSW.

But Ms Castle said the new infrastructure spending could counter these efforts.

Part of the spending increase is to provide more power for the increased use of air-conditioning, which is boosting demand in peak periods. Energy Australia says it is using off peak pricing and other techniques to increase energy efficiency.
Green, consumer anger over power price increases | smh.com.au

I would have thought that the green groups would be happy about an increase in power and utilities prices? I understand that they don't like the fact that the energy sector is using the extra funds to uprgarde and repair the old and polluting infrastructure, but the fact that power prices are rising is surely a good thing, right?
 

boris

Banned
Joined
May 6, 2004
Messages
4,671
Gender
Male
HSC
2007
Green, consumer anger over power price increases | smh.com.au

I would have thought that the green groups would be happy about an increase in power and utilities prices? I understand that they don't like the fact that the energy sector is using the extra funds to uprgarde and repair the old and polluting infrastructure, but the fact that power prices are rising is surely a good thing, right?

green groups dont give a fuck man, they just need shit the whinge about
 

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Users: 0, Guests: 2)

Top