pweedas said...
Trant, what you have failed to pull out of your butt is an alternative method of producing power at anywhere near the cost it can be pulled out of a coal fired power station. Unfortunately it is about half the cost of the next cleanest alternative which is a gas powered power station. And these still produce bags of "dangerous carbon polution" by-products.

Gee, looks like wind, biomass, geothermal and hydro are all looking quite good too.
I can't imagine why there are so many wind farms popping up in Europe.



source : US Energy Information Administration - www.eia.gov/oiaf/aeo/electricity_generation.html

Gizmo said...

How about we just harness the hot air and garbage generated by politicians as an energy source ... there seems to be an endless supply (and it's renewable)

We could put them in special sound proof holding pens too. Just point a camera at them, (we don't have to tell them it doesn't work), set up a turbine and stand welllll back.

log man said...

The tide has turned PW. Gillard now has a positive statesman like message to sell that could make Abbotts position very wedged. Those opinion polls are a bit rich though, one lot I saw were saying 50% of greens voters were unhappy with Gillard. But we all know on election day they will all go Labor or Green. I reckon the backroom boys at Liberal HQ will be starting to thjink of plan B

I sincerely hope you are right loggy regarding the message. I think it is time to moooooovee foarwarid, from appalling and disgusting to just plain bad

Trant said...

Doesn't appear to have done the Swedes much harm. They've had a tax on Carbon for 20 years and it's set at $150 per tonne
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carbon_tax
www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2008/apr/29/climatechange.carbonemissions

The tax is credited with spurring a significant move from fossil fuels to biomass. As Swedish Society for Nature Conservation climate change expert Emma Lindberg said, "It was the one major reason that steered society towards climate-friendly solutions. It made polluting more expensive and focused people on finding energy-efficient solutions."[108]
"It increased the use of bioenergy," said University of Lund Professor Thomas Johansson, former director of energy and climate at the UN Development Programme. "It had a major impact in particular on heating. Every city in Sweden uses district heating. Before, coal or oil were used for district heating. Now biomass is used, usually waste from forests and forest industries."
Economic growth appears to be unaffected.[original research?] Between 1990 and 2006, Sweden's economy grew by 44 percent

And, if anyone's interested, China is starting to implement a carbon Emissions Trading Scheme now
news.smh.com.au/breaking-news-national/ets-the-lowest-cost-solution-china-20110330-1cf59.html

Do you know what they did with the tax money? They built nuclear and hydroelectric power stations!
I'm in favor of that too.

Sweden doesn't have abundant coal, we do.
Sweden has plenty of running water, we don't.
Sweden relies ~40% on nuclear power, we have a research reactor .

FlySurfer said...
Do you know what they did with the tax money? They built nuclear and hydroelectric power stations!
I'm in favor of that too.

Sweden doesn't have abundant coal, we do.
Sweden has plenty of running water, we don't.
Sweden relies ~40% on nuclear power, we have a research reactor .

We also have abundant uranium, wind and sun.

Would you be in favour of using those?

felixdcat said...

Co2 is the excuse for tax manipulation by the ALP. Look at it, you take money from the super (polluters?) rich, spread a bit on the low income population, a fair smaller amount on the middle class and almost nothing on the rich then you lower the free tax threshold to keep everyone happy, pocket a massive profit and blame the rising CO2 levels. Let get real that is the tax shake up we had to have

Pocket? How do the politicians pocket anything? They get paid the same regardless.

OH... pocket as in reduce deficits... make surpluses.

HEY! That's what some of you keep complaining that Labor doesn't do isn't it?

Or do you think it's only Liberals that should do that, while using their god given right to rule?

Trant said...

FlySurfer said...

Trant said...
e.g. If I run 'Trantpower' and it costs me $10 to generate 1MW using coal, but $9 to generate 1MW using solar, then I'm going to see greater profit potential using solar and will spend less on new coal power stations and more on new solar farms.*
Without a carbon tax, it's still cheaper to generate power using coal and therefore my incentive is to use coal and invest in coal power.

The tax is 'supposed' to make clean energy more attractive to industry. (or clean production methods etc.)

* figures pulled out of my a$se ;)

Wow dude... I see greater profit in being a plastic surgeon, now I'm gona be a plastic surgeon.

Would you give me a discount? Being a fellow breezer and all..

Sure buddy, you can be my first patient. Hell come round now I have some spare time.

FlySurfer said...

Trant said...
We also have abundant uranium, wind and sun.

Would you be in favour of using those?

Yes, and even more in favour of geothermal.

Our tax money isn't going to any of these .

Do you all realize that by exploiting geothermal energy we actually contribute to lowering our mother Earth core temperature!
Atmosphere warming seems to be nothing in comparison.
Imagine gigantic task inherited by future generations in necessity to reheat Earth core

^^^ I am glad you said that.

It is global warming that is leading to more earthquakes, as the earth expands.

Pugwash said...

log man said...

The tide has turned PW. Gillard now has a positive statesman like message to sell that could make Abbotts position very wedged. Those opinion polls are a bit rich though, one lot I saw were saying 50% of greens voters were unhappy with Gillard. But we all know on election day they will all go Labor or Green. I reckon the backroom boys at Liberal HQ will be starting to thjink of plan B

I sincerely hope you are right loggy regarding the message. I think it is time to moooooovee foarwarid, from appalling and disgusting to just plain bad

I think you may have misunderstood my point. If Gillard is not too badly damaged political before the Carbon Tax announcement then the level of support will only go one way after the announcement, towards labor. Gillard now has a message that says "we're saving the world,..... and we're giving you all a tax break" where as Abbots message is "no ya not". Add to this the fact that an election is 2 years away which gives the scheme a year to bed down and I really can't see the conservatives being too pleased on election night. Trying my best to be objective(very hard) my advice to the opposition would be, forget trying to bring on an election every 5 minutes and start to beat labor on policy. It's 2 years to the election and the fake tidal wave of hate will prove to be a ripple over that time.

FlySurfer said...

Macroscien said...

FlySurfer said...

Trant said...
We also have abundant uranium, wind and sun.

Would you be in favour of using those?

Yes, and even more in favour of geothermal.

Our tax money isn't going to any of these .

Do you all realize that by exploiting geothermal energy we actually contribute to lowering our mother Earth core temperature!
Atmosphere warming seems to be nothing in comparison.
Imagine gigantic task inherited by future generations in necessity to reheat Earth core

Nah, less core energy, less movement, less movement, less earthquakes

Vice verse. When cooling down it contracts , and crumpling of the crust on the surface only increase.
Next, when cooling down - magnetic field is disappearing (caused by rotating melted core ) then we will be in microwave oven not protected from cosmic radiation any more.
Our global warming by CO2 is bleak by comparison to microwave that heat you from inside out.
Lets introduce second tax - for reheating core. So one will be to cool atmosphere and second to heat the core-both good at this same time to save our planet.
Well , presented with such scenario I am ready to emigrate to the Moon- no atmosphere to warm up and core already cold mean - LESS TAXES.
Lets go to the Moon. I can see on the Moon's maps more sea's are there then on the Earth so I will take my windsurfing with me.

And they say humans are the smart ones on the planet?

log man said...

felixdcat said...

Co2 is the excuse for tax manipulation by the ALP. Look at it, you take money from the super (polluters?) rich, spread a bit on the low income population, a fair smaller amount on the middle class and almost nothing on the rich then you lower the free tax threshold to keep everyone happy, pocket a massive profit and blame the rising CO2 levels. Let get real that is the tax shake up we had to have

So is the carbon price in other countries also a plot but the Labor government. Is the conservative parties carbon scheme in England also tax manipulkation?

I know nothing about carbon tax in the UK all I can see is labor looking after their base support, the libs would probably go the other way around as per giving money to the big business hoping they would be able to use it to implement co2 saving procedures and the low income earner would get a pat in the back. The middle class would be screwed as well as it is the milking cow of every government every where in the world!
And don't get me wrong I am disappointed by Gillard performance but would never vote for the other mob of ”wonkers” as they have their head to high up in their “Harssses”[}:)].

I think they're all pretty useless but heard a great interview with Mr Abbot yesterday morning.

: " So Mr Abbot, you say that if you come to power you'll remove the carbon tax?"
: "Yes"
: "Would you then also then remove the tax breaks and compensation payments that went with it?"
: "...."
: "I'll take that as a yes"

Well, it made me laugh.
(don't get me wrong, I'm no fan of Julia either but Abbot is a much easier target)

Trant said...

I think they're all pretty useless but heard a great interview with Mr Abbot yesterday morning.

: " So Mr Abbot, you say that if you come to power you'll remove the carbon tax?"
: "Yes"
: "Would you then also then remove the tax breaks and compensation payments that went with it?"
: "...."
: "I'll take that as a yes"

Well, it made me laugh.
(don't get me wrong, I'm no fan of Julia either but Abbot is a much easier target)

Abbot as nochance to get to power! i am so certain that if he will you can change my namme to "Fat garden gnome"