Forum

 
  Back to OzPolitic.com   Welcome, Guest. Please Login or Register
  Forum Home Album HelpSearch Recent Rules LoginRegister  
 

Pages: 1 ... 3 4 5 
Send Topic Print
Carbon levy has failed overseas (Read 10050 times)
Maqqa
Gold Member
*****
Offline


14% - that low?!

Posts: 15932
Re: Carbon levy has failed overseas
Reply #60 - May 7th, 2011 at 11:41am
 
freediver wrote on May 7th, 2011 at 11:27am:
Quote:
Can any name a tax system in the world that has achieve 100% in reduction or change in habits


A tax was used to achieve a 100% reduction in the use of white phosphorous in match sticks. A tax can easily achieve anywhere between a 0% and 100% reduction. I am still not sure why this is so hard to understand.




we are talking about 100% carbon reduction in every thing that man uses

so using a match stick example is irrelevant
Back to top
 

Bill 14% is not the alcohol content of that wine. It's your poll number
 
IP Logged
 
philperth2010
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 10741
Perth
Gender: male
Re: Carbon levy has failed overseas
Reply #61 - May 7th, 2011 at 11:42am
 
What are the Coalition promising???

Scientists question Coalition's climate change policy


JULIA GILLARD, PRIME MINISTER: We're going to have a system where they can get a new stream of income through carbon credits, through things like soil carbon.

STEVE CANNANE: But the Gillard Government doesn't count soil carbon in its targets because it's not Kyoto compliant.

The Coalition does count soil carbon. They're banking on it to deliver 60 per cent of their targets, up to 85 million tonnes in the year 2020.

STEVE CANNANE: Greg Hunt has altered the transcript of the original Lateline interview and posted it on his website to reflect what he says was his intended definition of 100 square kilometres.

Based on this altered figure, Greg Hunt believes 150 million tonnes of carbon dioxide can be abated in one year over one million hectares.

But using the CSIRO's best estimate, you'd need a land mass of at least 75 million hectares to do this. And if you take the CSIRO's figures at the lower end of the scale, then you'd need 500 million hectares, or 65 per cent of the land mass of Australia.

But Greg Hunt questions the CSIRO figures.

GREG HUNT: Well there is a debate, and what we're seeing is that people such as Christine Jones, probably the pre-eminent soil carbon scientist in Australia and one of the world's leading soil carbon scientists, has a very different view. Her view is that Australia can capture an extraordinary part of its overall emissions, far greater than we've proposed. We've been very conservative in our estimates of what Australia as a whole through incentives to farmers could absorb.

STEVE CANNANE: The CSIRO does not take into consideration the field work of Dr Christine Jones because it's yet to be peer reviewed.

Peter Cosier says the Coalition is being irresponsible with their target.

PETER COSIER: We're very much in favour of soil carbon, but I think it's irresponsible to set a carbon reduction target based on information which is not sufficient to give you that target. So I think they're creating false expectations, I think farmers will be very reluctant to enter that market even if it did happen, and when they do,
I don't think you'll achieve the volumes that have been promised in the Coalition's policy.


http://www.abc.net.au/lateline/content/2011/s3179336.htm
Back to top
« Last Edit: May 7th, 2011 at 1:19pm by philperth2010 »  

If knowledge can create problems, it is not through ignorance that we can solve them.
Isaac Asimov (1920 - 1992)
 
IP Logged
 
longweekend58
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 48948
Gender: male
Re: Carbon levy has failed overseas
Reply #62 - May 7th, 2011 at 11:49am
 
while not denying the value of peer-review, to utterly exclude the work of one of the top scientists in the field that is signifcantly at odds to CSIRO's position is hardly a credible position to take. See this is what happens so often in this whole carbon debate. the hysterics ask 'where are the scientists' and son as they step up, their opinions are either riduculed or denied press.

CSIRO has become increasingly politicised over the last 10-20 years and their value as an independent scientific organisation greatly diminished.
Back to top
 

AUSSIE: "Speaking for myself, I could not care less about 298 human beings having their life snuffed out in a nano-second, or what impact that loss has on Members of their family, their parents..."
 
IP Logged
 
Maqqa
Gold Member
*****
Offline


14% - that low?!

Posts: 15932
Re: Carbon levy has failed overseas
Reply #63 - May 7th, 2011 at 12:00pm
 
philperth2010 wrote on May 7th, 2011 at 11:42am:
What are the Coalition promising???

Scientists question Coalition's climate change policy


JULIA GILLARD, PRIME MINISTER: We're going to have a system where they can get a new stream of income through carbon credits, through things like soil carbon.

STEVE CANNANE: But the Gillard Government doesn't count soil carbon in its targets because it's not Kyoto compliant.

The Coalition does count soil carbon. They're banking on it to deliver 60 per cent of their targets, up to 85 million tonnes in the year 2020.

STEVE CANNANE: Greg Hunt has altered the transcript of the original Lateline interview and posted it on his website to reflect what he says was his intended definition of 100 square kilometres.

Based on this altered figure, Greg Hunt believes 150 million tonnes of carbon dioxide can be abated in one year over one million hectares.

But using the CSIRO's best estimate, you'd need a land mass of at least 75 million hectares to do this. And if you take the CSIRO's figures at the lower end of the scale, then you'd need 500 million hectares, or 65 per cent of the land mass of Australia.

But Greg Hunt questions the CSIRO figures.

GREG HUNT: Well there is a debate, and what we're seeing is that people such as Christine Jones, probably the pre-eminent soil carbon scientist in Australia and one of the world's leading soil carbon scientists, has a very different view. Her view is that Australia can capture an extraordinary part of its overall emissions, far greater than we've proposed. We've been very conservative in our estimates of what Australia as a whole through incentives to farmers could absorb.

STEVE CANNANE: The CSIRO does not take into consideration the field work of Dr Christine Jones because it's yet to be peer reviewed.

Peter Cosier says the Coalition is being irresponsible with their target.

PETER COSIER: We're very much in favour of soil carbon, but I think it's irresponsible to set a carbon reduction target based on information which is not sufficient to give you that target. So I think they're creating false expectations, I think farmers will be very reluctant to enter that market even if it did happen, and when they do, I don't think you'll achieve the volumes that have been promised in the Coalition's policy.

http://www.abc.net.au/lateline/content/2011/s3179336.htm




REASON


If Rudd hadn't ratified Kyoto then we would not be in this mess

Any solution to fix Rudd's mess will be ineffective at best and damaging to the Aust economy at worse eg Carbon Tax

So instead of focusing on which side is more effective we should be looking at

(1) Punishing the party that created this mess - LABOR & Greens

(2) Vote out the Party that will do maximum damage to the economy - LABOR

Back to top
 

Bill 14% is not the alcohol content of that wine. It's your poll number
 
IP Logged
 
philperth2010
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 10741
Perth
Gender: male
Re: Carbon levy has failed overseas
Reply #64 - May 7th, 2011 at 1:16pm
 
longweekend58 wrote on May 7th, 2011 at 11:49am:
while not denying the value of peer-review, to utterly exclude the work of one of the top scientists in the field that is signifcantly at odds to CSIRO's position is hardly a credible position to take. See this is what happens so often in this whole carbon debate. the hysterics ask 'where are the scientists' and son as they step up, their opinions are either riduculed or denied press.

CSIRO has become increasingly politicised over the last 10-20 years and their value as an independent scientific organisation greatly diminished.



The research is not peer reviewed and therefore cannot be considered by an official report.....However as soil carbon is not officially counted towards targets I fail to see how this is a credible policy from the opposition!!!
Back to top
 

If knowledge can create problems, it is not through ignorance that we can solve them.
Isaac Asimov (1920 - 1992)
 
IP Logged
 
longweekend58
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 48948
Gender: male
Re: Carbon levy has failed overseas
Reply #65 - May 7th, 2011 at 1:19pm
 
philperth2010 wrote on May 7th, 2011 at 1:16pm:
longweekend58 wrote on May 7th, 2011 at 11:49am:
while not denying the value of peer-review, to utterly exclude the work of one of the top scientists in the field that is signifcantly at odds to CSIRO's position is hardly a credible position to take. See this is what happens so often in this whole carbon debate. the hysterics ask 'where are the scientists' and son as they step up, their opinions are either riduculed or denied press.

CSIRO has become increasingly politicised over the last 10-20 years and their value as an independent scientific organisation greatly diminished.



The research is not peer reviewed and therefore cannot be considered by an official report.....However as soil carbon is not officially counted towards targets I fail to see how this is a credible policy from the opposition!!!


we've seen how the peer review system has been undermined of recent days. But just because something has not been peer-reviewed does not automatically exclude its value as this has been. And given that it is significantly different from CSIRO's convenient position that is also interesting.
Back to top
 

AUSSIE: "Speaking for myself, I could not care less about 298 human beings having their life snuffed out in a nano-second, or what impact that loss has on Members of their family, their parents..."
 
IP Logged
 
philperth2010
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 10741
Perth
Gender: male
Re: Carbon levy has failed overseas
Reply #66 - May 7th, 2011 at 1:33pm
 
longweekend58 wrote on May 7th, 2011 at 1:19pm:
philperth2010 wrote on May 7th, 2011 at 1:16pm:
longweekend58 wrote on May 7th, 2011 at 11:49am:
while not denying the value of peer-review, to utterly exclude the work of one of the top scientists in the field that is signifcantly at odds to CSIRO's position is hardly a credible position to take. See this is what happens so often in this whole carbon debate. the hysterics ask 'where are the scientists' and son as they step up, their opinions are either riduculed or denied press.

CSIRO has become increasingly politicised over the last 10-20 years and their value as an independent scientific organisation greatly diminished.



The research is not peer reviewed and therefore cannot be considered by an official report.....However as soil carbon is not officially counted towards targets I fail to see how this is a credible policy from the opposition!!!


we've seen how the peer review system has been undermined of recent days. But just because something has not been peer-reviewed does not automatically exclude its value as this has been. And given that it is significantly different from CSIRO's convenient position that is also interesting.


Yes it does.....it cannot be considered in an official report if it has not been peer reviewed.....It is up to the author to submit there research for peer review.....It is peer review that exposes flaws in the data.....Without analysis the research is still a theory!!!

This still does not answer the fact that soil carbon is not counted towards emission targets!!!
Back to top
 

If knowledge can create problems, it is not through ignorance that we can solve them.
Isaac Asimov (1920 - 1992)
 
IP Logged
 
longweekend58
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 48948
Gender: male
Re: Carbon levy has failed overseas
Reply #67 - May 7th, 2011 at 1:36pm
 
philperth2010 wrote on May 7th, 2011 at 1:33pm:
longweekend58 wrote on May 7th, 2011 at 1:19pm:
philperth2010 wrote on May 7th, 2011 at 1:16pm:
longweekend58 wrote on May 7th, 2011 at 11:49am:
while not denying the value of peer-review, to utterly exclude the work of one of the top scientists in the field that is signifcantly at odds to CSIRO's position is hardly a credible position to take. See this is what happens so often in this whole carbon debate. the hysterics ask 'where are the scientists' and son as they step up, their opinions are either riduculed or denied press.

CSIRO has become increasingly politicised over the last 10-20 years and their value as an independent scientific organisation greatly diminished.



The research is not peer reviewed and therefore cannot be considered by an official report.....However as soil carbon is not officially counted towards targets I fail to see how this is a credible policy from the opposition!!!


we've seen how the peer review system has been undermined of recent days. But just because something has not been peer-reviewed does not automatically exclude its value as this has been. And given that it is significantly different from CSIRO's convenient position that is also interesting.


Yes it does.....it cannot be considered in an official report if it has not been peer reviewed.....It is up to the author to submit there research for peer review.....It is peer review that exposes flaws in the data.....Without analysis the research is still a theory!!!

This still does not answer the fact that soil carbon is not counted towards emission targets!!!


that is only relevant if you are seeking a target rather than a solution. I thought this whole CO2 hysteria was about SOLUTIONS??? Or am I wrong somehow?
Back to top
 

AUSSIE: "Speaking for myself, I could not care less about 298 human beings having their life snuffed out in a nano-second, or what impact that loss has on Members of their family, their parents..."
 
IP Logged
 
freediver
Gold Member
*****
Offline


www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 35538
I like fish
Re: Carbon levy has failed overseas
Reply #68 - May 7th, 2011 at 4:52pm
 
Maqqa wrote on May 7th, 2011 at 11:41am:
freediver wrote on May 7th, 2011 at 11:27am:
Quote:
Can any name a tax system in the world that has achieve 100% in reduction or change in habits


A tax was used to achieve a 100% reduction in the use of white phosphorous in match sticks. A tax can easily achieve anywhere between a 0% and 100% reduction. I am still not sure why this is so hard to understand.




we are talking about 100% carbon reduction in every thing that man uses

so using a match stick example is irrelevant


You may be. I was talking about anywhere between 0% and 100%. It is simple enough to understand.
Back to top
 

The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable one persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore, all progress depends on the unreasonable man - George Bernard Shaw
WWW  
IP Logged
 
BatteriesNotIncluded
Gold Member
*****
Offline


MediocrityNET: because
people died for this!

Posts: 26966
Re: Carbon levy has failed overseas
Reply #69 - May 7th, 2011 at 9:45pm
 
longweekend58 wrote on May 7th, 2011 at 11:49am:
while not denying the value of peer-review, to utterly exclude the work of one of the top scientists in the field that is signifcantly at odds to CSIRO's position is hardly a credible position to take. See this is what happens so often in this whole carbon debate. the hysterics ask 'where are the scientists' and son as they step up, their opinions are either riduculed or denied press.

CSIRO has become increasingly politicised over the last 10-20 years and their value as an independent scientific organisation greatly diminished.

Wink Wink
Back to top
 

*Sure....they're anti competitive as any subsidised job is.  It wouldn't be there without the tax payer.  Very damned difficult for a brainwashed collectivist to understand that I know....  (swaggy) *
 
IP Logged
 
BatteriesNotIncluded
Gold Member
*****
Offline


MediocrityNET: because
people died for this!

Posts: 26966
Re: Carbon levy has failed overseas
Reply #70 - May 7th, 2011 at 9:47pm
 
philperth2010 wrote on May 7th, 2011 at 1:16pm:
longweekend58 wrote on May 7th, 2011 at 11:49am:
while not denying the value of peer-review, to utterly exclude the work of one of the top scientists in the field that is signifcantly at odds to CSIRO's position is hardly a credible position to take. See this is what happens so often in this whole carbon debate. the hysterics ask 'where are the scientists' and son as they step up, their opinions are either riduculed or denied press.

CSIRO has become increasingly politicised over the last 10-20 years and their value as an independent scientific organisation greatly diminished.



The research is not peer reviewed and therefore cannot be considered by an official report.....However as soil carbon is not officially counted towards targets I fail to see how this is a credible policy from the opposition!!!

oh, yeh..... Greg Hunt anticipates like a mad man... vote for him!!!!

C'mon Tony Abbott: you don't want to throw it all away because of a freak like Greg Hunt do ya!??!   Roll Eyes Roll Eyes
Back to top
 

*Sure....they're anti competitive as any subsidised job is.  It wouldn't be there without the tax payer.  Very damned difficult for a brainwashed collectivist to understand that I know....  (swaggy) *
 
IP Logged
 
Pages: 1 ... 3 4 5 
Send Topic Print