Does that mean that all what we do should be cost driven?
Climate Change - The Economic Debate
(77 posts) (12 voices)-
Geno
MemberThe lever of a carbon tax is to shift consumption and by making polluters pay for their CO2 waste the consumer will shift to cleaner product. Well that is the theory anyway, I would agree with Thatmosis at the end of his last post that more should be done to educate consumers and force producers to maufacture more energy efficient goods. Both the Americans and Europeans have been doing that with their homes and cars for decades. At the moment their homes are not only more efficient than ours they are cheaper as well (thanks to the GFC) A laptop uses only a fraction of the power as a standalone thanks to extra effort put in to reduce demand on the battery. The same sort of effort could be put in to other goods.
We have been brainwashed into believing that anything we do to reduce CO2 will be a tax on jobs, yet if anything the opposite often applies. There is probably much to be gained by reducing the amount of power waste in our homes and factories in the short term, and long term in actually producing cleaner power. It would seem at present the power companies are using climate change as an excuse to raise power prices whilst not actually investing anything much in either greater efficiencies or alternatives. In this country a number of our coal fired power stations are reaching the end of their design lives, it would make sense to consider what we need do to replace the capacity of stations such as Hazelwood with cleaner producers.
Posted Friday 1 Oct 2010 @ 12:26:11 pm from IP # -
I think everything is cost driven. Rural PV systems are usually there because it's cheaper than diesel or long power lines. And I think just using that model alone has driven the use of renewables a long way.
Looking at the posts, despite disagreement on a few things, most agree that renewables and saving fossil fuels is a good thing. From an economic perspective any business model will support increased efficiency, so energy efficiency will improve the bottom line.
As always the 'tax' word frightens everyone but we are levied, surcharged, dutied, feed, fined, tariffed and tolled on everything we do in life, they just give it another name. Everything has to be paid for. Roads, hospitals, schools, dams and power stations won't appear without those 'taxes' we all hate. But despite the cost of living it is still popular.
So a tax that discourages waste is a good thing. I argue that the highest taxes should be voluntary. Other taxes discourage poor behaviour, speeding for example, so why not a waste tax. Both to make finite resources last longer and to reduce pollution. Climate change is a just one part of the equation.
I think a tax on fossil fuels is coming and I am preparing to minimise my fossil fuel use everywhere I possibly can. Walking, biking and management of car use is saving me a lot already. My solar array and energy efficient appliances are saving heaps more.
Good video here with a pie chart of the problems we all are facing in the future. Only 18 mins.
http://www.ted.com/talks/johan_rockstrom_let_the_environment_guide_our_development.html
Posted Friday 1 Oct 2010 @ 10:17:47 pm from IP # -
swanning_it
MemberAnother interesting side to taxing carbon, is subsidies for renewables. I've read some suggest that renewables should be able to stand on their own merit without subsidies. Fair enough, but then shouldn't that go for all energy production? Nuclear requires subsidisation, so does fossil fuel.........reportably a combined amount of about US$500 Billion worldwide every year (Source Miller McCune http://www.miller-mccune.com/environment/busting-myths-about-photovoltaics-22718/ ).
Posted Friday 1 Oct 2010 @ 11:59:48 pm from IP # -
dymonite69
Member"Does that mean that all what we do should be cost driven?"
Ten percent of Australia's working population earns less than $317 per week $16484 pa. How much after rent, food, transport and bills?
http://www.abs.gov.au/AUSSTATS/abs@.nsf/ProductsbyCatalogue/5F4BB49C975C64C9CA256D6B00827ADB
Posted Saturday 2 Oct 2010 @ 1:40:08 pm from IP # -
dymonite69
Member"There is probably much to be gained by reducing the amount of power waste in our homes and factories in the short term, and long term in actually producing cleaner power."
Perhaps the change in per capita energy consumption is a better indicator of whether we are moving in a more sustainable direction rather than the amount of solar panels we putting on our roofs.
http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/abs@.nsf/46d1bc47ac9d0c7bca256c470025ff87/cb95991492253ca6ca256dea00053a12!OpenDocument
Posted Sunday 3 Oct 2010 @ 12:03:28 am from IP # -
dymonite69, I don't think that our opinions are that far apart. I just find it confusing that you throw in this argument of low income Australians in a way that seems to suggest that we cannot do anything about climate change.
Of course the vulnerable in society must be protected. And that was one of the flaws of the last carbon pollution reduction scheme (CPRS). The polluters were protected instead of people with low income.And who do you think will suffer most from the impacts of climate change, the rich who can move as they please or the poor who don't have an option?
In addition I suggest that you check your numbers more carefully. The data you mentioned were from 2007/2008 but you did not mention that. The actual data must be higher. In addition many people on low income get a number of benefits that must be counted as well, like for instance assistance with electricity bills (up to $140 a quarter, that's more than half of my bill) and pensioner rebates.
Posted Sunday 3 Oct 2010 @ 12:09:53 am from IP # -
dymonite69
Member"The actual data must be higher. In addition many people on low income get a number of benefits that must be counted as well, like for instance assistance with electricity bills (up to $140 a quarter, that's more than half of my bill) and pensioner rebates."
Whether we continue to use dwindling fossil fuels or switch to RE nationally, energy prices will still rise to pay of the capital cost to install the new systems.
Energy prices have a flow on effect in everything we buy. Agriculture, mining, manufacturing and commercial transport all need energy and this adds to the cost of goods and services.
The fairer comparison of household electricity bills are for people who dependent on the same energy network. $692/week for the median wage ($36K per year) who use on average 12 kWh/year ($2300/year)
Posted Sunday 3 Oct 2010 @ 12:24:05 am from IP # -
Andy Chee
MemberMost things we do are always driven by costs. Economics 101: Scarcity rules.
A carbon price is based on the scarcity of CO2 sequestration in the biosphere. If you don't believe biospheric CO2 sequestration capacity is finite, then it shouldn't be surprising that you wouldn't want to pay for it.
And then, there's the matter of how finite the resource is, and this will ultimately dictate the cost. The greater the supply, the lower the cost, and vice versa.
Posted Sunday 3 Oct 2010 @ 2:29:59 am from IP # -
In wise decision making there should not only be cost as the single criterium.
At least we should also distinguish between short term and long term interest.One example is what happened in the UK a few decades ago when they found a lot of oil in the North Sea. The oil fields were developed and were producing full speed at a sales price of about $2/barrel with the UK being a major oil exporter. Now the oil price is at about $80/barrel. But production is far below its peak and the UK is an importer of oil.
So this has not even been saving for further generations. The wealth was wasted in less than one generation. Sacrificed on short term cost and income oriented thinking.
Posted Sunday 3 Oct 2010 @ 5:22:49 am from IP # -
Buzzman
Membersun2steam
I'd like to know how people on "low income" get "up to $140" off their electricity bills????I regularly assess pensioners who only receive a $32 rebate from their energy retailer (which I assume is picked up by the taxpayer at State level). NSW that is.
Are there other rebates I could advise them of?
Posted Sunday 3 Oct 2010 @ 7:36:13 am from IP # -
thatmosis
MemberAnother problem that nobody has bought up is the fact that demand easily outstrips supply both on good solar panels and good batteries. The main company in Australia that supplied these batteries is now overseas and the waiting list is about 6 months whilst solar panels are about 6 to 12 months. There are cheap alternatives but they are not worth the trouble as the implied warranty isnt worth the paper its printed on. Add to this the demand for ethanol and its been stated just this week that the amount of ethanol we now want has outstripped demand. Re we to take more and more food crops and turn them to ethanol production or do we want to eat? A decision has to be made and its in the interests of all concerned that this is not taken lightly and that all sides of the arguement are considered. Its great that Governments etc are going RE but the cost of all these items is being pushed up daily by the demand from overseas. We can subsidise till the cows come home but it will place such a burden on the financial structure of this country that other worthwhile projects will suffer as money is taken from them to pay the subsidies. The Government has already been told by Treasury that spending will have to be reduced to meet its budget estimates in 2012 and this includes pensions, military and infrastructure spending. Currently we are borrowing $150,000,000 a day to pay for this Governments spending regime. Education is the way to go at first without the doom and gloom histrionics that have accompanied the Climate Change debate up until the present time. Turn off everything that you dont use. In our home we have only the fridge and freezer going at night and of course the 12vDC water pump and turn everything else off at the wall. Simple and easy but in the too hard basket for some, even my own children but they are learning. Just imagine the power that could be saved if all non essential appliance were turned off during the day and night, the difference here is from 4.3KWH a day to 2.5KWH a day and thats just for two people. This is where the Climate Change faithful should be directing their efforts, in their homes, their childrens/friends/neighbours homes, at work etc. Big changes come from small beginnings people.
Posted Sunday 3 Oct 2010 @ 9:12:41 am from IP # -
My sincere apologies for a having supplied a wrong piece of information. The maximum NSW Energy Rebate for electricity is not $140 per quarter, but $145 per year. This certainly makes a difference. I found the information on my electricity bill from Integral Energy. And I took the citation a few days later from memory, which was wrong.
Here is a link: http://www.industry.nsw.gov.au/energy/customers/rebates
Posted Sunday 3 Oct 2010 @ 9:52:14 am from IP # -
thatmosis, I appreciated and nearly enjoyed your last contribution, ... until I stumbled over 'the doom and gloom histrionics' and 'the Climate Change faithful'. Could we settle on a milder tone and just play the ball, not the people?
I have the impression from your contributions that you believe that everybody who uses PV needs batteries. This is only true if you are off-grid. But there is a much higher number of on-grid applications around which don't need batteries. Hence the hint that PV cannot power heavy machinery which is correct in your case, is not true for the majority of solar applications. Also, and I see this as a good thing, you are much more energy and cost conscious because you can only consume the electrical energy that you have produced.
Posted Sunday 3 Oct 2010 @ 10:07:53 am from IP # -
Geno
MemberIs is also worth noting that in this country Goverments have provided power infrastructure up until recent years, if we want to go RE with large scale plants one way or another we will be picking up the tab at both state or national level through tax subsidies or as with the Victorian desal plant with minimum income guarantees to the private operators. I would agree that the first place to look is household and business consumption, but it is not adequate on a state or federal planning level to accept just anything going. Business does look to government for direction on most things, it needs to know the financial enviroment and the regulations it will deal with so it can plan.
When BHP asked to get some direction on a carbon tax etc it is asking Government to be fiscally responsible and outline to business its vision for the future. Small power plants on the roof make us feel good and do something but it will be a combination of large scale plants and investment in getting lower per capita power consumption that really brings about change. The non sensical argument that we can't afford it flies in the face of reality, large properly planned investment in infrastructure bring about greater efficiences, repairing old infrastructure brings about a financial drain and loss of relaibility that holds back development. Plants like the old Hazelwood power plant should have been decommissioned rather than extended beyond their design life.
As for the claim that Labor is borrowing $150,000,000 that is absolute rubbish, the Coalition press releases say $100,000,000 for starters, it is a crude number produced from a shallow look at the national accounts and does not relate to actual debt but a shortfall in spending. About 75% of the shortfall is a drop in tax receipts, blame the Libs for ballooning rents on Commonwealth property they sold and now lease back or the huge increase in welfare payments or generous tax concessions to retirees it makes as much sense. The Australian economy is in good shape, Labor could have managed spending a bit better but essentially the policy, revenue and spending settings are not that different to when the blue brigade held power, the leaders may well now be wearing the red guernsy but other than that financial management is pretty much the same. A bit more honesty from both sides and commentators that do more than just parrot political propaganda would be better for all of us.
Posted Sunday 3 Oct 2010 @ 12:10:05 pm from IP #
Reply
You must log in to post.