Gillards Carbon Tax and effect on Aviation fuel
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Australia
Posts: 632
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Because she's aware that it's all too easy for those large companies to depart Australian shores.
Seriously, what major manufacturing is still left in Australia that would leave because of a tiny percentage increase in their cost?
Perhaps that's because solar and wind are roughly 4-10 times more expensive
intermittent on supply and fail to produce when power needs are highest
Pitiful wages to the majority of the population?
You are not seriously trying to suggest the US economy (and the policies that created it) is all hunk-dory, right?
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Alabama, then Wyoming, then Idaho and now staying with Kharon on Styx houseboat
Age: 61
Posts: 1,437
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thorium will be the next big ticket item. Cleaner than coal and safer than Uranium.
Although I think Baswell is a strange git I do agree with he/she that Rio and BHP are full of ****e, they aren't going anywhere. Too much coal to feed to third world countries who couldn't give a rats ass about global warming/climate/carbon/emissions etc etc. And now that Japan doesn't need our Uranium we can change the rules of the game and start flogging it to India who have promised to use it for energy purposes only and not for any of those nasty bombs!
Although I think Baswell is a strange git I do agree with he/she that Rio and BHP are full of ****e, they aren't going anywhere. Too much coal to feed to third world countries who couldn't give a rats ass about global warming/climate/carbon/emissions etc etc. And now that Japan doesn't need our Uranium we can change the rules of the game and start flogging it to India who have promised to use it for energy purposes only and not for any of those nasty bombs!
Last edited by gobbledock; 11th May 2012 at 13:21.
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: dans un cercle dont le centre est eveywhere et circumfernce n'est nulle part
Posts: 2,606
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You do realise that had one independent chosen them the, ehrm, coalition would have had to, ehrm, awkward, form yet another ... coalition!
Bring it on Cobber.
Poor Bas, backing loosers. Stewth mate get a grip.
Seasonally Adjusted
Abbott is on record of saying if he puts the aboloition of the carbon tax to the senate more than twice, he "WILL CALL A DOUBLE DISSOLUTION OF PARLIAMENT",
Ah, weather vane Tony, who back in 2009 was quoted as saying, "If you want to put a price on carbon why not just do it with a simple tax."
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Alabama, then Wyoming, then Idaho and now staying with Kharon on Styx houseboat
Age: 61
Posts: 1,437
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yes what great choices we have? A middle aged union hater who still wears his Sluggers around Manly or the red haired freak who is going to cop a Labor 'Guiness Book Of Records' hiding next election?
Hate to say it Australia but we are fu#ked.
Hate to say it Australia but we are fu#ked.
Last edited by gobbledock; 11th May 2012 at 13:21.
.
Heh, caint have that Rusty1970 - we best inform yer then..
It is not a broken promise, its an outright lie - and it wont last three years..
Lets have a look-see...
Europe = basket case. Will the euro even survive ?
South Korea = Dunno ?
China = Tell me more about China doin a carbon tax. Do you believe them..
California = Bankrupt. Just how bad... A couple of years ago there were plans for California to sell some parks to pay state employee wages... Business is leaving the state and moving to Texas etc...
Yes, more and more business will either send the jobs off shore or close..
Anyone who has followed this subject here will know that I've been researching and debating this subject fairly intensly for years now.
In the beginning we had Al Gores carbon scam helped along by green hysteria and it just went down hill from there..... The whole carbon tax/trading is based on corruption.
Via Garth Paltridge, Atmospheric physicist and former Chief Research Scientist CSIRO Division of Atmospheric Research -
There is a fair amount of reasonable science behind the global warming debate, but in general, and give or take a religion or two, never has quite so much rubbish been espoused by so many on so little evidence. One wonders why.
.
via Rusty1970 #47; This is largely the least informed debate I have ever read.
...it is a broken promise for 3 years...
...It will then be excatly the same as Europe, South Korea and China (yes China) among others have/are implementing. Even the 12th largest economy in the world - California - has one...
Europe = basket case. Will the euro even survive ?
South Korea = Dunno ?
China = Tell me more about China doin a carbon tax. Do you believe them..
California = Bankrupt. Just how bad... A couple of years ago there were plans for California to sell some parks to pay state employee wages... Business is leaving the state and moving to Texas etc...
...In the meantime, business will do what business always does, they will try and reduce their input costs, so if their carbon intensive inputs are more expensive then they'll try to reduce them...
...Seriously people, don't believe what the papers say, do a bit of original research...
In the beginning we had Al Gores carbon scam helped along by green hysteria and it just went down hill from there..... The whole carbon tax/trading is based on corruption.
Via Garth Paltridge, Atmospheric physicist and former Chief Research Scientist CSIRO Division of Atmospheric Research -
There is a fair amount of reasonable science behind the global warming debate, but in general, and give or take a religion or two, never has quite so much rubbish been espoused by so many on so little evidence. One wonders why.
.
Last edited by Flying Binghi; 11th May 2012 at 13:38.
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Back again.
Posts: 1,140
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Only if you care about short term return. In the long term, they are all cheaper.
That's what we have enough existing fossil burning plants for.
BTW, there's a difference between individual income and household income. Check it out.
Want to see a preview of what happens with the introduction of a CO2 tax? As Flying Binghi pointed out, look no further than California. The state is close to bankrupt and it has a business exodus for destinations east that rivals the gold rush to the region in 1849 (sarc).
Which country is going to be the first to leave the EU...Greece, France or Germany? Germany is refurbishing its coal generation program. It relied on PV and wind and is discontinuing nuclear, but the money is running out like water through a drainpipe and someone is starting to notice that unless they do something fast, there will be a desperate and dangerous shortage of power.
Last edited by Lodown; 11th May 2012 at 20:54.
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: dans un cercle dont le centre est eveywhere et circumfernce n'est nulle part
Posts: 2,606
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Speaking of solar panels, a quick question. If you shine 100 watts of light onto a solar panel, how many watts do you get back?
so....
...if this won't have much effect on the price of anything, how will it effect on our consumption and therefore the emissions of airborne carbon?
Of course, the toyota corollary to this is if the carbon tax does have some effect, it must make things more expensive, surely?
...and the problem with our economy isn't that it's socialist or corporatist or whatever. The main problem is that we are moving towards a centrally planned economy - we all know how well they worked out by the late '80s. I know for a fact that the centrally planned economy is the ambition because Juliar and her ilk keep banging on about how well the government is managing the economy. My guess is when it really turns pear-shaped, it will be all the excuse they are looking for to 'manage' it even more!
...if this won't have much effect on the price of anything, how will it effect on our consumption and therefore the emissions of airborne carbon?
Of course, the toyota corollary to this is if the carbon tax does have some effect, it must make things more expensive, surely?
...and the problem with our economy isn't that it's socialist or corporatist or whatever. The main problem is that we are moving towards a centrally planned economy - we all know how well they worked out by the late '80s. I know for a fact that the centrally planned economy is the ambition because Juliar and her ilk keep banging on about how well the government is managing the economy. My guess is when it really turns pear-shaped, it will be all the excuse they are looking for to 'manage' it even more!
Last edited by Andy_RR; 12th May 2012 at 07:04.
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: dans un cercle dont le centre est eveywhere et circumfernce n'est nulle part
Posts: 2,606
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Frank, is that an incandescent 100W light bulb, or the flourescent or LED equivalent
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Australia
Age: 51
Posts: 931
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
so what do I get back for the extra output of cash?
and it won't tow the ski boat!
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Sydney NSW Australia
Posts: 3,051
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I recall Dr Karl on Jjj saying that at the equator, 1sm of surface area under direct sunlight will receive the equivalent of 1 watt of electricity in solar energy.
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Back again.
Posts: 1,140
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
...with the sunlight striking at or close to perpendicular; no dust, scratches, bird crap, salt spray or pollen on the glass; at around 25C and absolutely no shadows of any size; straight out of the box (they lose about 5% output in the first year and about 1% every year thereafter). After about 25 to 30 years, the good ones are done. So far, there is no recycle program for them either, so at present, they end up at the dump.
More bad news for the Mother Gaia supporters: USA Oil Boom
With traditional oil mining techniques, it is estimated that only about 5% of oil in the wells has been recovered. Frakking is opening up huge resources in the USA. Peak oil? Not in my lifetime and probably not in the lifetime of my great grandkids.
And we haven't even touched oil shale in the USA yet: recoverable oil equal to total world oil supply
Don't bet on the stock exchange baswell: Green Power Failure
More bad news for the Mother Gaia supporters: USA Oil Boom
With traditional oil mining techniques, it is estimated that only about 5% of oil in the wells has been recovered. Frakking is opening up huge resources in the USA. Peak oil? Not in my lifetime and probably not in the lifetime of my great grandkids.
And we haven't even touched oil shale in the USA yet: recoverable oil equal to total world oil supply
Only if you care about short term return. In the long term, they are all cheaper.
Last edited by Lodown; 13th May 2012 at 01:55.
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Enroute from Dagobah to Tatooine...!
Posts: 791
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Well, Rusty 1970 you reckon this is the least informed debate you have heard on this subject hey?
You were probably referring to my last post when you made this statement:
You know what? That is plain wrong. Aeromedical might be exempt but aviation transport fuel is most definitely going to be taxed. That's right, aviation - where technological developments are an industry imperative and where leaps and bounds in efficiency measures are made all the time - is being singled out for prime pickings while other less innovative sectors of transport get exempt (some only temporarily).
RAAA director Jim Davis is quoted in the latest AA edition as saying "The annual cost to RAAA members of the carbon tax, being imposed through an increase in the levy on aviation fuels, is estimated at over $20 million a year but it will bring no efficiency gains or reductions in emissions." (my bolding). That's right: estimated $20 million a year with absolutely ZERO environmental results to gain from it. That is why I call it a phoney tax!
You know what else? You might be partially right in that SOME transport will not be taxed. That's right, the vast sums of private motor vehicles. Also trucks will be exempt but only until 2014. That is the other big problem with this tax. Softly, softly approach and bring destruction by stealth. It might seem okay to start with and I'm not suggesting that the sky is going to fall in on July 1. However typical of the 'in the moment' generation, ignore the future consequences of where this will lead with subsequent changes and the fact that the 'set price' on carbon will only go up from the already inflated inaugural figures that are always being used with examples currently being bandied around. This tax IS going to cost with major consequences, and the most maddening thing is that there won't even be anything good to show for it...
You were probably referring to my last post when you made this statement:
(BTW, transport fuel is exempt from to the person who was complaining about costs on costs - not being rude, just can't remember who it was.)
RAAA director Jim Davis is quoted in the latest AA edition as saying "The annual cost to RAAA members of the carbon tax, being imposed through an increase in the levy on aviation fuels, is estimated at over $20 million a year but it will bring no efficiency gains or reductions in emissions." (my bolding). That's right: estimated $20 million a year with absolutely ZERO environmental results to gain from it. That is why I call it a phoney tax!
You know what else? You might be partially right in that SOME transport will not be taxed. That's right, the vast sums of private motor vehicles. Also trucks will be exempt but only until 2014. That is the other big problem with this tax. Softly, softly approach and bring destruction by stealth. It might seem okay to start with and I'm not suggesting that the sky is going to fall in on July 1. However typical of the 'in the moment' generation, ignore the future consequences of where this will lead with subsequent changes and the fact that the 'set price' on carbon will only go up from the already inflated inaugural figures that are always being used with examples currently being bandied around. This tax IS going to cost with major consequences, and the most maddening thing is that there won't even be anything good to show for it...
Last edited by Captain Nomad; 13th May 2012 at 03:22.
The truth is, noone really knows the lifespan of solar PV, but it's certainly in the decades. How many is anyone's guess...
More here
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: dans un cercle dont le centre est eveywhere et circumfernce n'est nulle part
Posts: 2,606
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I recall Dr Karl on Jjj saying that at the equator, 1sm of surface area under direct sunlight will receive the equivalent of 1 watt of electricity in solar energy.
Spreading this kind of misinformation
But no wonder those electric aeroplanes need large wings. Not just the high aspect ratio, but somewhere to put the panels.
Quick EDIT to ask another.
How long do these new fangled battery's last, and what happens to them when they do die?
Last edited by Frank Arouet; 13th May 2012 at 06:57.
The truth is, noone really knows the lifespan of solar PV, but it's certainly in the decades. How many is anyone's guess...
I also agree with Lodown, output degradation starts when these things first see sun. This is why the 20 year guarantees you talk about are output related and at 10 years, the output guarantee is only 80%. Further tho this most solar manufacturers who offer 20 plus years of warranty haven't even been in the business 5 years!
Don't get me wrong though, I live with solar power, love making my own electricity and wouldn't take a grid connection if it was offered free. Unfortunately the unreliability and warranty issues have made long term solar folk slightly peeved.
The big problem is that electricity consumption per person is rising around 10% per annum and most people have absolutely no idea how much electricity they currently consume. Do you?