Join up at Bet Easy - Click here - Bet Easy is Thoroughbred Village’s premier betting partner - Join here now
Forum Home Forum Home > All Sports - Public Forums > Joffs All Sports Bar
  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - carbon tax
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login


Click here for the Thoroughbred Village Home Page. For village news, follow @TBVillage on Twitter. For horseracing tips, follow @Villagebet on Twitter. To contact the Mayor by email: Click Here.

carbon tax

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1 104105106107108 174>
Author
Message
 Rating: Topic Rating: 4 Votes, Average 3.00  Topic Search Topic Search  Topic Options Topic Options
The Muffin Man View Drop Down
Champion
Champion
Avatar

Joined: 16 May 2007
Status: Offline
Points: 6396
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote The Muffin Man Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 01 May 2012 at 8:18pm
Just like the unions buy and pay for every Labor leader's arse BD? What's good for the goose buddy. Big smile
"Well, I will never post again, if the Oz dollar doesnt go below 80 cents within the year 2012." - Occy22
Back to Top
Sponsored Links
Click here to view the promotions at Bet Easy.


Back to Top
Browndog View Drop Down
Moderator Group
Moderator Group
Avatar

Joined: 30 Oct 2009
Location: Brunswick Hds N
Status: Offline
Points: 35556
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Browndog Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 01 May 2012 at 8:44pm
The tired old 'you're no better than us' Sleepy
Back to Top
Browndog View Drop Down
Moderator Group
Moderator Group
Avatar

Joined: 30 Oct 2009
Location: Brunswick Hds N
Status: Offline
Points: 35556
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Browndog Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 01 May 2012 at 9:18pm

Did Tony Abbott and the Coalition set Peter Slipper up?


Back to Top
The Muffin Man View Drop Down
Champion
Champion
Avatar

Joined: 16 May 2007
Status: Offline
Points: 6396
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote The Muffin Man Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 02 May 2012 at 10:03am
Well BD, if you're going to try and infer Abbott has been bought because of donations by a business leader then I'll respond with the exact same for Labor and the unions. So, what's the point you were trying to make again?
"Well, I will never post again, if the Oz dollar doesnt go below 80 cents within the year 2012." - Occy22
Back to Top
Browndog View Drop Down
Moderator Group
Moderator Group
Avatar

Joined: 30 Oct 2009
Location: Brunswick Hds N
Status: Offline
Points: 35556
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Browndog Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 02 May 2012 at 10:28am
I was responding in kind to a tongue in cheek post by Scamanda regarding Clive Palmer. You then butted in and went all 'princess' on me over something that had no real point or any relevance.  
Back to Top
The Muffin Man View Drop Down
Champion
Champion
Avatar

Joined: 16 May 2007
Status: Offline
Points: 6396
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote The Muffin Man Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 02 May 2012 at 10:49am
Mate, you keep taking this class warfare line, and mention how Palmer has bought big Tone, then can't seem to handle it when people mention Labor being effectively paid for by the unions. What's good for the goose...
"Well, I will never post again, if the Oz dollar doesnt go below 80 cents within the year 2012." - Occy22
Back to Top
Browndog View Drop Down
Moderator Group
Moderator Group
Avatar

Joined: 30 Oct 2009
Location: Brunswick Hds N
Status: Offline
Points: 35556
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Browndog Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 02 May 2012 at 11:03am
When have I EVER suggested that Labor is not financed by Unions Labor was formed from the Labor movement and are an extension of the Union Movement Why would I ever say they weren't?
Back to Top
scamanda View Drop Down
Champion
Champion
Avatar

Joined: 11 Oct 2008
Location: The Manor
Status: Offline
Points: 15607
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote scamanda Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 02 May 2012 at 11:17am
It's all good Browndog. Wink

Big Tony can predict the future because he is close to God.

James Ashby was merely asking Christopher Pyne for advice. Pyne even settled him down by having a drink with him.

I've got your mobile phone number too but I'm not trying to dethrone the PM or Peter Slipper.

The courts will decide the truth about Slipper. Not Labor or the government.

Labor hate it when the media focuses on the facts as Steve Lewis has.

James Ashby isn't compelled to notify Abbott about his drinking arrangements.

Did 'little' Clive pay the handsome amount of money? Just Labor trying to say "but Tony Abbott............" again.


Labor once again fighting with their backs to the wall. Gillard in a leadership crisis again, Rudd being named as her executioner, 'little' Clive giving Swanny nightmares, Thommo having to face the courts without Labor's support, Slipper allegedly being a little bit too toey for his own good with his staff............................

Gee, Big Tony is doing a great job. He has to be one of the best opposition leaders in Australian political history.
Back to Top
questions View Drop Down
Champion
Champion
Avatar

Joined: 20 Feb 2007
Location: Australia
Status: Offline
Points: 9858
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote questions Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 02 May 2012 at 12:55pm
the irony of having clive palmer involved with politics at the same time as the slipper issues is very quite interesting.

the government was happy to promote slipper to a prestiges position within our federal parliament just as the FFA was happy to give clive palmer the gold coast license and take all his money. the problem is that when you put problem people in important position you cannot control what they will do and you can expect them to do what they have always done. for the FFA it was dealing with palmer and his attacks on the establishment, as he has always done, with Slipper, you knew he was a dodgy character and you knew these things would come up. 

the fact that the liberals had been hiding this is par for the course. i am sure both sides try to hide their negative stories and have skeletons in the closet. and if you promote them and they all of a sudden do not have the protection, these things will come up.

you have a situation with thomson where the labor government have been fighting to slow down the process through the ineffective joke of an organisation in fair work australian and have dragged it out over 4 years. there is no greater tragedy in our national parliament at the moment in how this situation has been handled. we all know that the unions are corrupt and live of the wages of their people who are forced to cough up a percentage of their pay for the largess living. it is just that we do not have this type of proof and hopefully a liberal government will get into power and be able to work for the union workers who have been milked over the years.

the best a union payer can do at the moment is vote in abbott and hope he cleans up this mess. 



"it's not gambling if you're absolutely sure you're gonna win" Barney Stinson
Back to Top
Browndog View Drop Down
Moderator Group
Moderator Group
Avatar

Joined: 30 Oct 2009
Location: Brunswick Hds N
Status: Offline
Points: 35556
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Browndog Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 02 May 2012 at 1:03pm
I don't give a toss about Slipper being investigated if he is stealing from me, but I would hate to think that the moral superiority is only being selectively exercised and only for political vantage 

The more interesting thing is if Pyne had no political motive in meeting Ashby 3 times, what is the married with kids 'poodle' doing meeting with homosexual men late at night for 2 hour cocktail sessions when, by his claim  he has no connection? He then rings and emails back to get his mobile phone number. Not that there's anything wrong with a little over the desk extra curricular activity of the mutual gender kind......just saying!!!! 
Back to Top
Browndog View Drop Down
Moderator Group
Moderator Group
Avatar

Joined: 30 Oct 2009
Location: Brunswick Hds N
Status: Offline
Points: 35556
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Browndog Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 02 May 2012 at 2:42pm

Craig Thomson says Kathy Jackson and Michael Williamson, unlike he re Eco. Ctte and Crossbenches, have not moved aside pending investig.

Craig Thomson suggests Kathy Jackson concentrate on the alleged criminal activity that's been alleged about her in Victoria.

Craig Thomson says even at the HSU East predecessor branch, he had no financial authority and couldn't even buy a newspaper.

Craig Thomson - I was a member of predecessor HSU East branch - but haven't been there for 10 yrs.

Craig Thomson says the Police's point that the FWA investigation (relating to him) doesn't involve criminality is consistent with his view.

Craig Thomson says the police raids are an issue for the union leadership Kathy Jackson and Michael Williamson. Says unrelated to him.

Back to Top
questions View Drop Down
Champion
Champion
Avatar

Joined: 20 Feb 2007
Location: Australia
Status: Offline
Points: 9858
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote questions Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 02 May 2012 at 6:32pm
Originally posted by Browndog Browndog wrote:

I don't give a toss about Slipper being investigated if he is stealing from me, but I would hate to think that the moral superiority is only being selectively exercised and only for political vantage 

The more interesting thing is if Pyne had no political motive in meeting Ashby 3 times, what is the married with kids 'poodle' doing meeting with homosexual men late at night for 2 hour cocktail sessions when, by his claim  he has no connection? He then rings and emails back to get his mobile phone number. Not that there's anything wrong with a little over the desk extra curricular activity of the mutual gender kind......just saying!!!! 

that is a laugh. moral superiority being exercised for political vantage. say hello to the carbon tax.

a tax that has been pushed by those that believe they know better about what is best for our children. if you are against the carbon tax, you were seen as against the environment and against the world.

slipper was a dodgy character promoted by our prime minister into an esteemed position for political advantage. slipper took that job and it seems he likes to use his political advantage to steal from the system and make staff feel uncomfortable. 

you need to accept when your vantage had a bad taste to it from the start and it was proved to be correct. and stupid if you thought the liberals, or any party would let someone that they know and would have inside information about go to the other side and nothing would be spilt. 




"it's not gambling if you're absolutely sure you're gonna win" Barney Stinson
Back to Top
Browndog View Drop Down
Moderator Group
Moderator Group
Avatar

Joined: 30 Oct 2009
Location: Brunswick Hds N
Status: Offline
Points: 35556
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Browndog Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 02 May 2012 at 7:35pm
questions, before you over commit yourself there, you do realise that the Carbon Pricing starts in a couple of months. 

It is no longer political bull*hit arguments. CPI and GDP are quantifiable in relation to the pricing and will start to flow through from October

Don't look silly by overstating your politically biased rhetoric  
Back to Top
mowie View Drop Down
Champion
Champion
Avatar

Joined: 18 Dec 2009
Location: echuca flyer!
Status: Offline
Points: 5126
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote mowie Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 03 May 2012 at 8:10am
HEALTH Services Union national secretary Kathy Jackson says she was offered a seat in Federal Parliament to "hush her up
 
 
the goverment is beyound a joke now,time to go Pm 
chris Armstrong waller, *drugs are bad mkay
Back to Top
questions View Drop Down
Champion
Champion
Avatar

Joined: 20 Feb 2007
Location: Australia
Status: Offline
Points: 9858
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote questions Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 03 May 2012 at 8:40am
Originally posted by Browndog Browndog wrote:

questions, before you over commit yourself there, you do realise that the Carbon Pricing starts in a couple of months. 

It is no longer political bull*hit arguments. CPI and GDP are quantifiable in relation to the pricing and will start to flow through from October

Don't look silly by overstating your politically biased rhetoric  

i dont see how i was overcommitting myself. i know when the carbon tax is coming in and i know it will not be the end of the world. i know it is designed to slow activity and handicap the economy.

i would put it in the category of super imposes last doncaster tilt. he did not win and was 1.9lengths of the winner. he carried 62.5kg and soho square carried 47.5kg on to win.

it was not the end of the world for super, it just meant he had been handicapped to perform less and allowed another horse to win. and we only remember the winner for that race.

i dont want to be handicapped to bring ourselves back tot he pack. it just means we all run a slower time and the best economy does not win. great for racing and not good for the economy. 
"it's not gambling if you're absolutely sure you're gonna win" Barney Stinson
Back to Top
Browndog View Drop Down
Moderator Group
Moderator Group
Avatar

Joined: 30 Oct 2009
Location: Brunswick Hds N
Status: Offline
Points: 35556
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Browndog Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 03 May 2012 at 9:37am
Originally posted by mowie mowie wrote:

HEALTH Services Union national secretary Kathy Jackson says she was offered a seat in Federal Parliament to "hush her up
 
 
the goverment is beyound a joke now,time to go Pm 

She was offered the position by her ex husband Michael Williamson who was trying to stop her going to police over his criminal activity. What does that have to do with the Union movement? 

I note that at the end of that statement she quickly qualified her statement by saying that not everyone is guilty of this.
Back to Top
Browndog View Drop Down
Moderator Group
Moderator Group
Avatar

Joined: 30 Oct 2009
Location: Brunswick Hds N
Status: Offline
Points: 35556
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Browndog Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 03 May 2012 at 9:45am
questions, just run me through the Abbott/Hockey plan to cut thousands of jobs, slash services and programs to claw back the $70b hole in their numbers. Also run us through the rolling back of all the Carbon policy legislation, including putting a million people back into the tax system and cutting a thousand dollars a year from tax cuts and pensions. 

What effect will this have on the economy? It will send us into a deep depression. Obviously these are all lies from them, so what is actually going to happen. All I have heard from them is measures to drive the economy backwards
Back to Top
The Muffin Man View Drop Down
Champion
Champion
Avatar

Joined: 16 May 2007
Status: Offline
Points: 6396
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote The Muffin Man Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 03 May 2012 at 10:15am
Rolling back the Carbon Policy will put everyone back to the situation we are currently in, and there is no deep depression, so you'll have to elaborate there BD.

Also, what's this $70Bn hole you talk about? How has it supposedly been created?
"Well, I will never post again, if the Oz dollar doesnt go below 80 cents within the year 2012." - Occy22
Back to Top
Browndog View Drop Down
Moderator Group
Moderator Group
Avatar

Joined: 30 Oct 2009
Location: Brunswick Hds N
Status: Offline
Points: 35556
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Browndog Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 03 May 2012 at 10:34am
Muffy, 
1 Rolling back the carbon pricing means rolling back tax cuts and pension increases-not budget bottom line but confidence
2 Bringing budget back to surplus next year as promised(remember the claim that we will do it but we will do it responsibly)requires finding at least $50b

How will they achieve those cuts without stopping growth?

If Swan bringing budget back to surplus is an error, why are the opposition promising to replicate the error?
Back to Top
The Muffin Man View Drop Down
Champion
Champion
Avatar

Joined: 16 May 2007
Status: Offline
Points: 6396
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote The Muffin Man Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 03 May 2012 at 10:41am
1. And rolling back energy costs, for both business and domestic users. Sorry, I can't accept that winding back a tax on business which will lower their input costs will have a deep depressionary effect. It'll have the opposite effect. Weigh lower confidence or rolling back an  effective tax cut for low income earners against higher confidence of both domestic and business users regarding lower costs.

2. If Labor is bringing it back to surplus then they have to be finding these massive savings also, so are you saying their policy of getting to a budget surplus this year will have a deep depressionary effect? You must be. I thought Swan was the greatest treasurer alive? I don't agree that it particularly needs to get back to surplus this year or even next, but Labor painted themselves into this corner so it's of their own doing.
"Well, I will never post again, if the Oz dollar doesnt go below 80 cents within the year 2012." - Occy22
Back to Top
Browndog View Drop Down
Moderator Group
Moderator Group
Avatar

Joined: 30 Oct 2009
Location: Brunswick Hds N
Status: Offline
Points: 35556
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Browndog Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 03 May 2012 at 11:04am
No muffy, I think Swanny is doing a good job in bringing us a fairer Australia

You are just highlighting some of the lies your leader and his potential treasurer are spreading. I hope you are taking the inconsistencies on-board

BTW, in rolling back energy costs, how do you address the infrastructure costs that power companies claim is the majority of their price increases. 

Is it better to continue this endless price increasing to prop up a failing derelict system, or is it better to invest in a more efficient and ultimately cost reduced and cleaner future?
Back to Top
questions View Drop Down
Champion
Champion
Avatar

Joined: 20 Feb 2007
Location: Australia
Status: Offline
Points: 9858
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote questions Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 03 May 2012 at 11:11am
the labor government want to tax the ocup cakery and extra $70billion and giver half of it back to low inco me earners and the rest to be sent overseas to purchase carbon credits and they want to then call it a black hole.

people dont need compensation if they are not being taxed higher. it is a fairly simple concept that labor party struggle with. and we wonder why they have struggled and done such a terrible job of managing the country.


"it's not gambling if you're absolutely sure you're gonna win" Barney Stinson
Back to Top
Browndog View Drop Down
Moderator Group
Moderator Group
Avatar

Joined: 30 Oct 2009
Location: Brunswick Hds N
Status: Offline
Points: 35556
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Browndog Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 03 May 2012 at 11:21am
More bad news for you questions, and muffy. Another major economy onboard just last night with a 148-0 vote in S.Korean parliament

South Korean Parliament Approves Carbon Trading System

By Sangim Han - May 2, 2012

South Korea approved a cap-and-trade system to cut carbon emissions as President Lee Myung Bak seeks support from factories and power plants in the fastest-growing producer of greenhouse gases among industrialized democracies.

The National Assembly passed a bill to establish a cap-and- trade system in the country by 2015 with the backing of both ruling and opposition parties, according to the assembly’s webcast of the main session yesterday.

“The bill is needed to cope with global climate change and, domestically to reduce emissions of greenhouse gas efficiently,” Kim Jae Kyung, a member of the ruling New Frontier Party, said in the assembly’s plenary session before voting. The bill was passed in a 148-0 vote, with 3 abstentions.

President Lee Myung Bak is struggling to sell the plan at home after pledging in December 2009 at the United Nations climate summit in Copenhagen to cut carbon emissions by 30 percent from forecast levels by 2020. The country’s largest companies said the plan will hurt competitiveness.

Korea’s decision follows an agreement at climate talks in December among about 200 countries including the U.S. and China to wait until 2015 to sign a global accord on emission reductions that would take effect as late as 2020.

“Korea becomes an early adopter in Asia” of a cap-and- trade program, Kang Hee Chan, a senior researcher at the Korea Environment Institute, said by phone. “Korea joins Australia and China, which plan to introduce the program in 2015.”

Fastest-Growing

South Korea is the world’s eighth-largest carbon emitter, based on 2009 figures from the International Energy Agency. The country’s greenhouse-gas emissions jumped to about 640 million metric tons in 2011 from 350 million tons in 1990, making it the fastest-growing emissions source among 34 nations in the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, Bloomberg New Energy Finance said in a Feb. 9 report.

Australia voted last year to start a cap-and-trade system in 2015. New Zealand started emissions trading in 2009, and the European Union has operated the world’s biggest emissions market since 2005.

South Korea imposed reduction goals in October 2011 on 458 polluters starting this year. They range from factories, buildings and livestock farms that produce at least 25,000 tons of carbon dioxide a year.

The Federation of Korean Industries and the Korea Chamber of Commerce & Industry, the nation’s top two business lobbies, asked the government to delay introducing the plan, saying it will increase costs and make industry less competitive against countries that don’t impose charges on emissions.

Unsettled Business

Kim Tae Yoon, head of the strategic industries team at the federation, which has about 500 members including steelmaker Posco (005490)and Samsung Electronics Co., said companies remain opposed to any implementation carbon trading that’s done faster than rival countries.

“Our position remains the same,” Kim said by phone today. “We are worried about the impact on our competitiveness and are committed to finding a compromise in consultation with the government.”

Companies may face an additional 5.6 trillion won ($5 billion) of costs if a carbon market is implemented, according to data from state-ownedKorea Energy Management Corp., which handles emissions reductions and promoting renewable energy.

“It might be challenging for Korea to cut carbon emissions as requested by the government,” Kang said. “Its major industries, by nature, are emitting lots of the gas.” Korea largely depends on heavy industries such as steelmaking and petrochemicals, he said.

Free Permits

The government is already providing tax and financial incentives to encourage companies to cut their discharges, including a supplementary payment, or feed-in tariff, for renewable energy generated from 2002 until 2011.

These tariffs were replaced with a 2 percent renewable portfolio standard, starting this year. The country’s 14 power generators and other energy producers are required to derive a fixed quota of their energy output from renewable sources, including solar and wind. The mandatory cap will be raised to 10 percent by 2022.

The Korean government may give companies more than 95 percent of their permits for free for three to six years, according to the bill. Companies would get 100 percent of their permits for free depending on their contribution to the country’s trade, according to an e-mailed statement from the Knowledge Economy Ministry.

742 Million Tons

The government has yet to announce any rules governing compliance, such as how many so-called international offsets would be allowed in the program.

The government needs to see a lot of studies about the bill’s impact on people, Yim Jong Yong, minister of the Prime Minister’s Office, told lawmakers in Seoul yesterday before the vote.

South Korea would emit 742 million tons in 2020 without a program to cut emissions, Andrea Du Rietz, a London-based analyst at New Energy Finance, said in the note on Feb. 9.

The penalty for non-compliance is set at three times the prevailing market price with a maximum of 100,000 won ($89.17) per ton. The government raised the free allocation from the original 90 percent, and lowered the upper limit on penalties five times during consultations with industries. “The approved South Korean ETS could provide price support for CERs in the long run and contribute to the longevity of the global carbon market,” Du Rietz said in an e-mail yesterday. “Any links with the UN offset market are highly uncertain, but we currently assume that approximately 20 percent of abatement needed out to 2020 could be met by about 130 million CERs over the six years.”

To contact the reporter on this story: Sangim Han in Seoul at sihan@bloomberg.net

To contact the editor responsible for this story: Amit Prakash at aprakash1@bloomberg.net

Back to Top
The Muffin Man View Drop Down
Champion
Champion
Avatar

Joined: 16 May 2007
Status: Offline
Points: 6396
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote The Muffin Man Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 03 May 2012 at 11:50am
Originally posted by Browndog Browndog wrote:

No muffy, I think Swanny is doing a good job in bringing us a fairer Australia

You are just highlighting some of the lies your leader and his potential treasurer are spreading. I hope you are taking the inconsistencies on-board

BTW, in rolling back energy costs, how do you address the infrastructure costs that power companies claim is the majority of their price increases. 

Is it better to continue this endless price increasing to prop up a failing derelict system, or is it better to invest in a more efficient and ultimately cost reduced and cleaner future?


But if both parties are wanting to bring the budget back to surplus why is it not also your position that Swan's goal will bring deep depressionary forces to the economy?

Taking the Carbon Tax off the agenda will reduce energy prices. Fact.

Those infrastructure costs you speak of are far greater for maintaining a renewables system. Think about it, renewables get their inputs for free, but it still costs more than coal fired power and natural gas, where the inputs have to be paid for. Now, fire up that tiny piece of grey matter in your head and ask yourself, what does that tell you? Infrastructure and transmission costs for renewables are currently far higher than for coal and natural gas. So, this failing and derelict system is still more cost effective than renewables. Funny that. Why not wait until research and development makes the infrastructure and transmission much cheaper, and then invest? Currently, the renewables sector is nowhere near more efficient. If it were more efficient it would be cheaper. Stop lying. Why not wait until it is more efficient and costs the same or less?
"Well, I will never post again, if the Oz dollar doesnt go below 80 cents within the year 2012." - Occy22
Back to Top
Browndog View Drop Down
Moderator Group
Moderator Group
Avatar

Joined: 30 Oct 2009
Location: Brunswick Hds N
Status: Offline
Points: 35556
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Browndog Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 03 May 2012 at 12:02pm
I am not arguing that muffy, I support the economy coming back to surplus 

I am questioning the duplicity of the oppositions position of criticising the govt while holding the same objectives and will probably use the same mechanism 


Back to Top
Browndog View Drop Down
Moderator Group
Moderator Group
Avatar

Joined: 30 Oct 2009
Location: Brunswick Hds N
Status: Offline
Points: 35556
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Browndog Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 03 May 2012 at 12:03pm
More bad news for you boys with Australia's biggest energy company Origin giving a 'ringing endorsement' of the govts 'Carbon Tax'

Abbott's cutting carbon already

Rob Burgess

Published 7:52 AM, 3 May 2012 Last update 7:52 AM, 3 May 2012


< allowtransparency="true" border="0" ="0" marginheight="0" marginwidth="0" scrolling="no" ="0" ="0" width="100%" id="I1_1336009949461" name="I1_1336009949461" ="https://plusone.google.com/_/+1/fast?=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.businessspectator.com.au%2Fbs.nsf%2FArticle%2FCoalition-energy-policy-Tony-Abbott-Origin-Energy--pd20120503-TWT37%3F%26%3Didp%26utm_source%3Dexact%26utm_medium%3Demail%26utm_%3D37442%26utm_campaign%3Dkgb%26modapt%3Dcommentary&size=medium&count=false&hl=en-US&jsh=m%3B%2F_%2Fapps-static%2F_%2Fjs%2Fgapi%2F__features__%2Frt%3Dj%2Fver%3DZevMLzJoODc.en_GB.%2Fsv%3D1%2Fam%3D!UAItGHWvjEqItmX_Hw%2Fd%3D1%2Frs%3DAItRSTPenpFGjYXEs0hgLDR2xJVT1YAw6g#id=I1_1336009949461&parent=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.businessspectator.com.au&rpctoken=175829176&_methods=onPlusOne%2C_ready%2C_%2C_%2C_resizeMe%2C_renderstart" title="+1" style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; width: 32px; border-top-style: none; border-right-style: none; border-bottom-style: none; border-left-style: none; height: 20px; : static; left: 0px; top: 0px; visibility: ; ">
< allowtransparency="true" border="0" scrolling="no" ="http://plat.twitter.com/widgets/tweet_.1335513764.#_=1336009949295&count=none&count=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.businessspectator.com.au%2Fbs.nsf%2FArticle%2FCoalition-energy-policy-Tony-Abbott-Origin-Energy--pd20120503-TWT37&id=twitter-widget-0&lang=en&original_referer=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.businessspectator.com.au%2Fbs.nsf%2FArticle%2FCoalition-energy-policy-Tony-Abbott-Origin-Energy--pd20120503-TWT37%3F%26%3Didp%26utm_source%3Dexact%26utm_medium%3Demail%26utm_%3D37442%26utm_campaign%3Dkgb%26modapt%3Dcommentary&size=m&text=Abbott's%20cutting%20carbon%20already%20%7C%20Rob%20Burgess%20%7C%20Commentary%20%7C%20Business%20Spectator%3A&=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.businessspectator.com.au%2Fbs.nsf%2FArticle%2FCoalition-energy-policy-Tony-Abbott-Origin-Energy--pd20120503-TWT37%3F%26%3Didp%26utm_source%3Dexact%26utm_medium%3Demail%26utm_%3D37442%26utm_campaign%3Dkgb%26modapt%3Dcommentary%23.T6Hk3D6e2jY.twitter" ="twitter-share- twitter-count-none" title="Twitter Tweet " style="margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; width: 59px; height: 20px; ">Share

There are a couple of political bombshells buried in a presentation Origin Energy chief executive Grant King made to the Macquarie Australia Conference in Sydney yesterday.

The first is a ringing endorsement of the Gillard government's approach to carbon pricing – one problem, one national solution to replace myriad state and federal emission reduction programs.

The second is to reveal a bit more wriggle room for a future Abbott government in hitting the '5 per cent by 2020' cut in carbon emissions – a target agreed to by both sides of parliament.

Both these points stem from a key theme in King's presentation – that as a nation we've done a bit too well in installing renewable energy, and cutting energy use. 

Well, that was always going to be the view of our largest energy retailer, but the facts are independently verified nonetheless. Estimates published by the Australian Energy Market Operator – which runs the National Energy Market to trade power through interstate transmission lines known as 'interconnectors' – show that we won't be using as much power in coming years as we expected in 2009. 

There's a nice chart on page 13 of the presentation, published as an ASX announcement yesterday, showing forecasts for the years ahead being revised up each year until 2009, but being revised down each year since then. 

King's point in the presentation is that if we're using less energy, then the government's renewable energy target (RET) needs to be reduced. Currently the RET target is fixed at 20 per cent of our electricity to be supplied by renewable energy sources by 2020 – but when that target was set, it was calculated on AEMO's forecasts at the time, not the now-reduced forecasts for energy use.

Compounding the problem, as Origin sees it, is that wildly successful state and federal subsidies have seen solar panels popping up on rooftops across the country. Their contribution is not counted under the RET program, so when we hit '20 per cent' renewables in 2020 (which we are on-track to do), the small-scale renewables will bump that figure up to '26 per cent by 2020'.

King yesterday called on the government to call a spade a spade – to recognise that 20 per cent of our overall power from renewables is enough at 2020, and the 26 per cent imposes unnecessary costs on power consumers who are already struggling to pay their bills. 

To get back to the political implications, King's endorsement of the Gillard carbon pricing model was clear: "Rationalisation of carbon reduction policy in Australia would help mitigate cost pressures for households and businesses ... Unaligned and multifaceted carbon reduction policy results in sub-optimal long-term investment decisions [and] increased costs for consumers ... Policy consolidation is now possible with the introduction of the carbon price on 1 July, 2012."

King called for policy makers to: "Rationalise state-based energy efficiency schemes; rationalise/abolish state-based carbon reduction policies; confirm or bring forward current planned reductions in the small-scale renewable energy scheme (SRES) multiplier."

The SRES scheme, King pointed out, was planned to generate 8 million carbon abatement certificates a year, but is in fact generating 45 million a year – in crude terms we've stuck about five times as many solar panels on our roofs (give or take a small-scale wind generator or two) as was planned. 

The Clean Energy Futures package – known fondly by the national media as the 'carbon tax' – is a relatively simple and least-cost way to sweep aside all the itty-bitty carbon reduction schemes. One problem, one national solution that responds to market conditions – after 2015, that is, when the fixed-price 'tax' of $23 a tonne switches to a floating price that, as the European trading scheme has shown recently, makes permits very cheap indeed during times of economic hardship.

That's the kind of mechanism that makes it easy for Grant King to do business – plan investments and meet a set renewable energy target without additional market distortions from small scale schemes. So whatever else Labor is doing, the CEF gets a tick from Origin.

But King's presentation is also good news for the opposition. As my colleague Tristan Edis has explained in recent days, the Direct Action policy being championed by Tony Abbott and shadow climate minister Greg Hunt, is comprised entirely of itty-bitty 'incentives' for companies not emitting something they might otherwise have emitted. 

Edis is right to call for "[a Coalition government to set up] an institution to audit Australia’s progress to its emissions targets, with the board appointed by parliament rather than the government ... [more detail from the Coalition on] the level of the financial penalty firms will face for exceeding agreed emissions baselines ... [and] a transparent, rules-based approach to acquiring abatement".

Without those three things, Direct Action is little more than a hoax. With those three things it would be as efficient, in costs terms, as possible – but still more expensive per tonne of carbon abatement than an ETS or carbon tax. Markets, it's fairly well accepted these days, deliver outcomes more cheaply than command-and-control style regulation (sigh).

But even assuming Abbott wins government, wins the double-dissolution election required to repeal the CEF legislation, and implements Edis's suggestions, Direct Action might not quite hit the 5 per cent target by 2020.

And that's why King's presentation will be music to Tony Abbott's ears – his 'carbon tax bogey man' act, which been so toxic for Labor in the opinion polls, might just have had a material effect in reducing energy consumption. With a tax THAT BIG coming, let's conserve power!

Hence the AEMO revisions? Those scaled down forecasts make it easier to hit both the RET target and the '5 per cent by 2020' – even with a command and control policy.


Back to Top
The Muffin Man View Drop Down
Champion
Champion
Avatar

Joined: 16 May 2007
Status: Offline
Points: 6396
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote The Muffin Man Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 03 May 2012 at 12:19pm
King wants a national approach and certainty so he can assess investment. Abbott can provide those things as well BD. King doesn't care whether it's a Carbon Tax or some other policy, he wants the above two characteristics to make up the policy. King doesn't care that Labor's particular policy will drive up input costs because he'll simply pass those costs on to the consumer. What I'm worried about, and have always been worried about, is the rising energy and other input costs that small businesses will face. 
"Well, I will never post again, if the Oz dollar doesnt go below 80 cents within the year 2012." - Occy22
Back to Top
Browndog View Drop Down
Moderator Group
Moderator Group
Avatar

Joined: 30 Oct 2009
Location: Brunswick Hds N
Status: Offline
Points: 35556
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Browndog Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 03 May 2012 at 12:28pm
Yes muffy there is the opportunity for Abbott to do what Liberals do best, slipstream Labor's efforts and then claim credit 

Keating foresaw problems in energy distribution and administration 2 decades ago He couldn't get States to give over control
Back to Top
scamanda View Drop Down
Champion
Champion
Avatar

Joined: 11 Oct 2008
Location: The Manor
Status: Offline
Points: 15607
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote scamanda Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 04 May 2012 at 6:39pm
I'm sure you'll have the answer to this question Browndog.

Swanny has said it's very important to return the budget to a surplus because it matters around the kitchen table.

Isn't this against their, and your prior party line and opinion? Something to do with spend it rather than save it?

Back to Top
mowie View Drop Down
Champion
Champion
Avatar

Joined: 18 Dec 2009
Location: echuca flyer!
Status: Offline
Points: 5126
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote mowie Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 06 May 2012 at 9:28am

WA MP moves into Coalition

 
 
Prime Minister Julia Gillard's grip on parliament has slipped even more, with news Nationals federal MP Tony Crook will formally be part of the Federal Nationals' party room in Canberra.

The leader of the Nationals, Warren Truss, says the decision by the member for O'Connor will ensure he can contribute to outcomes that benefit his constituency and the party.

Mr Crook says in a hung Parliament, he had believed regional Western Australia would be best served by his sitting on the cross-bench.

But he says parliament has changed, and the recent changes to the make-up of Parliament have tarnished the reputation of the cross-bench.

ClapClap
chris Armstrong waller, *drugs are bad mkay
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1 104105106107108 174>
  Share Topic   

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Forum Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 11.10
Copyright ©2001-2017 Web Wiz Ltd.

This page was generated in 0.156 seconds.