Quote:I'm saying that there is a basal energy requirement, and this is a constant.
There is no fundamental minimum requirement. If there was, you could tell us what it is. But you can't, can you?
Quote:I'm not talking about wastage or efficiency. Yes we can save a hell of a lot of energy by being more efficient, but this will not reduce the basal requirement (being the pea).
So you are complaining about the last 1% before we eliminate the first 99%? Is that what you mean by pea?
Quote:As long as fossil fuels are the cheaper alternative, then they will be used. The only way to stop that cycle is to make clean fuels the cheaper alternative.
Taxes are the most appropriate way to make renewable alternatives cheaper. Their benefit is that they also capture the car cheaper options of emissions reductions. The fact is, people would prefer to reduce their consumption of electricity than to use the same amount and pay a lot more for it. Who are you to decide whether they go with reducing consumption or paying more for alternatives, and to what extent they choose each? You are in effect limiting their choice by saying the government should dictate the extent to which each option is implimented. An emissions tax on the other hand would let the end consumer decide.
Quote:More taxes are a load of garbage unless they are there for the sole purpose of bringing about a more sustainable future. I'd be very suspicious of that one.
That is what they are there for. The difference is they do this by correcting the price signals in the market, rather than increasing government revenue so that they can go on elaborate spending sprees for the environment.
Quote:It's a bandaid. The acceptable submission to government demands is a constant and always has been.
This doesn't even make sense.
Quote:So 0% is the extiguishment of life
No. 0% is the elimination of anthropogenic emissions.
Quote:and 100% is a total full-on wastage that is probably not attainable
100% is 'business as usual'.
Quote:Where's the happy medium?
I think that is what the IPCC is getting at. Maybe 50% in 50 years. I'm not sure on the details. Obviously it will depend on the long term cost. If it is easier than expected to reduce emissions, people will want to reduce them more. If it is harder than expected, people will put up with the climate change.
Quote:NSW is having 60% added to their electricity bills due to the CPRS
Excellent.
Quote:a lot of people will not be able to afford this type of rise in price
They should lower other taxes.