Maybe we should be part of the solution instead of part of the problem if we would like other, much less wealthy, countries to do the same. The cost to do so is pretty small after all.
So much for global warming
- Thread starter Propertunity
- Start date
Maybe we should be part of the solution instead of part of the problem if we would like other, much less wealthy, countries to do the same. The cost to do so is pretty small after all.
This is the part i dont agree with.
The major polluters of our country are also the major employers and also the backbone of our economy. Make it more expensive to do business here, and the money will go somewhere else (ie. china).
Australia suffers terrible economic dundrums.
The effect on world CO2 levels is NILL.
.... yeah i dont like that solution.
spot on - it ain't a CRS (carbon reduction scheme), it's an ETS (emissions trading scheme).
it assigns a value to carbon. those who see value want to increase value from trading it. they can get more value easier by increasing it than assigning an intrinsic value to it.
yeah i'm not saying folk wouldn't use less - i'm saying that the power bill won't change
yeah i'm not saying folk wouldn't use less - i'm saying that the power bill won't change
that's the issue i have.
If you are using LESS power, then you should be paying less on the power bill.
But if you are using to excess still, you should be charged extra for it.
Im talking about households here though.
but no power company will wear a loss of revenue because you're being "green".
they'll just bump up the unit price to match what you were paying - or more.
so it's clearly not about saving money.
they'll just bump up the unit price to match what you were paying - or more.
so it's clearly not about saving money.
It doesn't really matter about our domestic power bills going up. It will be an annoyance and we will feel done over but we will survive.
What if your employer decides to quit and go o/s? Lets be sure of one thing: Many will!
Townsville's biggest private employer will close and while the company itself won't move to Indonesia, the refining process and the "emissions" will. The net gain to the environment will probably be -ve because the Townsville plant has spent a lot of money to pick up it's game in the last decade. Will the Indos spend the money to bring their old, moth balled plant up to date?
Another big part of Qld's economy is alumina mining and smelting into aluminium. Aluminium is "coagulated electricity". Without cheap electricity it will move offshore too. By definition, whoever takes up the slack will be operating a "cheaper" operation than ours. Tell me how this benefits the world at large?
it'll be more lucrative to on-sell your emissions from a country like australia to - i dunno, the phillippines - than to employ people.
a new wave of UE?
hmmm - actually, that makes sense now. why would they....ah rambling. you'll all hear me rant later about it anyway.
a new wave of UE?
hmmm - actually, that makes sense now. why would they....ah rambling. you'll all hear me rant later about it anyway.
i cant disagree with you Sunfish... in fact i TOTALLY agree.
Which is why i suggested that my proposal is really only applicable to households. I dont think we should mess with industry and employers unless the rest of the world (incl. the "developing" world) is doing the same.
All in all... the ETS is a piece of poo, and i dont like it.
Which is why i suggested that my proposal is really only applicable to households. I dont think we should mess with industry and employers unless the rest of the world (incl. the "developing" world) is doing the same.
All in all... the ETS is a piece of poo, and i dont like it.
Hopefully by the time the senate sits again, the Climategate revelations will have had time to be fully digested by the scientific community (even if our media & politicians are currently turning a blind eye to the rammifications of it). In this case, the ETS will be irrelevant & hopefully we will see the end of all the BS propaganda we've had to endure from the climate doomsayers.
Totally agree.
Here's more BS propaganda for you.
http://www.smh.com.au/environment/c...ychology-of-climate-denial-20091202-k5r8.html
Cheers,
Well, what about this for a laugh then,....
http://women.timesonline.co.uk/tol/life_and_style/women/celebrity/article6931572.ece
See ya's.
http://women.timesonline.co.uk/tol/life_and_style/women/celebrity/article6931572.ece
See ya's.
Here's more BS propaganda for you.
http://www.smh.com.au/environment/c...ychology-of-climate-denial-20091202-k5r8.html
Cheers,
There are literally thousands of scientists who do not agree that climate change is man made, let alone caused by mans CO2 emissions, so this one article makes nil difference to my opinion, which is the result of extensive and continuing research into both sides of the debate. Research that goes somewhat further than trite SMH articles with no named author FFS.
REALLY????? sounds like another sweeping generalisation to me.
try fitting my 4 kids and a wife that doesn't drive in a corolla.
and most massive four wheel drives are around 2.5 tonnes and use less fuel than many medium to large cars because they're on diesel.
the new land rover discovery is 2.5 tonne and a combined fuel consumption of 9.3L.
actually thinking about it - I own a 10yr old land barge falcon wagon...fairly sure it doesn't weigh 2.5 tonnes - more like 1.5
yes I love my old land barge too!!
yes I love my old land barge too!!
Similar threads
