Forum

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

Pages: 1 2 3 
Send Topic Print
Energy Sources Shape Up As An Election Battle (Read 1104 times)
whiteknight
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 7782
melbourne
Gender: male
Energy Sources Shape Up As An Election Battle
Feb 26th, 2024 at 3:56am
 
Bowen gives Dutton’s nuclear plans a blast as energy sources shape up as an election battle

South Western Times
Thu, 22 February 2024

Climate Change and Energy Minister Chris Bowen called on Opposition Leader Peter Dutton to release plans for nuclear power ahead of the next election.

Climate Change and Energy Minister Chris Bowen has demanded Opposition Leader Peter Dutton release information on his party’s plans to embrace nuclear energy.

Talking to the media in Bunbury, Mr Bowen called out Mr Dutton on what he described as a “fantasy” plan.

“I’d say this, the time for talk is over,” he said.


“If the Liberal Party wants to propose a nuclear reactor for Bunbury we’d let them come out and announce their policy and the people of Bunbury will have their say on it.

“Come on, come on Mr Dutton, the next election is getting closer, tell us what your policies are, don’t say ‘oh, we’re going to think about nuclear,’ show us where they’re gonna be, show us what the cost is, then we’ll have a debate about it.”


Talking to media last week, Mr Dutton gave another indication his party would be taking its nuclear pitch to the polls.   Sad

“We need to have a mature conversation about nuclear,” he said.

“It’s the latest technology that has zero emissions and it can firm up renewables in the system.”

Mr Bowen slammed the idea.

“It’s a fantasy, I mean, they might as well issue a Golden Book, that’s how realistic nuclear power is for Australia,” he said.

“We don’t have a nuclear industry in Australia, it will take years to get one up and running, years, decades.

“It’s the most expensive form of energy available in the world, renewable is the cheapest, nuclear is the most expensive, coal and gas come in between.

“Why anybody would propose an answer for Australia which is slow to build, expensive to build and does not have social licence to use is beyond me.”

The idea of embracing nuclear power is not new for Mr Dutton with the Liberal leader having brought it up last year during a speech at the Institute of Public Affairs, a conservative-leaning think tank.

At the July event he said nuclear was the way forward.

“If the Government wants to stop coal-fired power and phase out gas-fired power, the only feasible and proven technology which can firm up renewables and help us achieve the goals of clean cost effective and consistent power is next generation nuclear technologies,” he said.

“My old friend Chris Bowen has burrowed so deeply down the renewable rabbit hole that he refuses to consider these new nuclear technologies to be any part of the solution of our energy problems.”

According to the CSIRO, nuclear power is not an “economically competitive solution” in Australia and by the time costs of small modular reactors improved it would be too late to make a difference for a net zero emissions goal.   Sad
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
AusGeoff
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Sage of Gippsland

Posts: 5999
Victoria
Gender: male
Re: Energy Sources Shape Up As An Election Battle
Reply #1 - Feb 26th, 2024 at 4:37am
 
Quote:
“We don’t have a nuclear industry in Australia, it will take years to get one up and running, years, decades".

Seriously Mr Bowen?

Australia's uranium has been mined since 1954, and our uranium
reserves are the world's largest, with 28% of the total.

Re Dutton's stance, it's ironic that Gough Whitlam's Labor party
was in favour of developing nuclear power generation in Australia
until the tree-huggers of the day kyboshed it.   Sadly.



Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
Jovial Monk
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Dogs not cats!

Posts: 44931
Gender: male
Re: Energy Sources Shape Up As An Election Battle
Reply #2 - Feb 26th, 2024 at 6:00am
 
If it takes so long to get a nuke power plant up and running then we should start now.
Back to top
 

Get the vaxx! 💉💉

If you don’t like abortions ignore them like you do school shootings.
 
IP Logged
 
Frank
Gold Member
*****
Online


Australian Politics

Posts: 42703
Gender: male
Re: Energy Sources Shape Up As An Election Battle
Reply #3 - May 18th, 2024 at 10:38am
 
There is obvious anger at the Albanese government’s rolling out of an across-the-board $300 handout for power relief.

People cannot fathom why millionaires, billionaires and the generally well-off households are getting a handout they don’t need.

Everybody has forgotten about another much larger group who have no right to it as well – the hundreds of thousands of households that have solar power on their roofs, households like mine. I installed solar when the top feedback rebate was available.

Since then, my bills have always been small or in credit with my power provider. I am currently in credit for $2200. It was much higher before power prices took off under this government.

In addition to the Albanese government’s $300 gift, the Miles government is going to top that up with another $1000 for Queenslanders, bringing my power credit up to $3500.

If this is the best plan Labor governments can come up with for helping people doing it tough, then there is no hope for them.

A commenter
Back to top
 

Estragon: I can’t go on like this.
Vladimir: That’s what you think.
 
IP Logged
 
philperth2010
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 19722
Perth
Gender: male
Re: Energy Sources Shape Up As An Election Battle
Reply #4 - May 18th, 2024 at 11:20am
 
Frank wrote on May 18th, 2024 at 10:38am:
People cannot fathom why millionaires, billionaires and the generally well-off households are getting a handout they don’t need.


Yet the Coalition were prepared to raise taxes for low and middle income earners whilst giving the wealthy a much larger tax break....You are a hypocrite and a smacking dickhead Fwank!!!

Quote:
Stage 3 Tax Cuts Go to Wealthy Occupations, Low & Middle Income Earners Miss Out:

New economic research reveals that the Stage 3 tax cuts proposed by the Federal Government will give Bank CEOs, surgeons, and federal politicians a windfall tax cut of $9075, while low-income workers like
aged care workers, disability careers and minimum wage employees get $0.


The proposed Stage 3 tax cuts will see those earning more than $200,000 raking in the biggest benefit, while those on less than $45,000 will receive nothing, according to new report from the Australia Institute entitled Fair Go Gone: Stage 3 tax cuts & LMITO by Occupation.

When the Low- and-Middle-Income Tax Offset (LMITO) ends, middle-income earners like teachers, nurses and midwives will pay $1080 more in tax.


Were was your concern when the Coalition gave billionairs a tax cut and screwed low income earners arsehole???

Huh Huh Huh

https://australiainstitute.org.au/post/stage-3-tax-cuts-go-to-wealthy-occupation...
Back to top
 

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


Australian Politics

Posts: 9031
Melbourne
Gender: male
Re: Energy Sources Shape Up As An Election Battle
Reply #5 - May 18th, 2024 at 12:31pm
 
philperth2010 wrote on May 18th, 2024 at 11:20am:
Frank wrote on May 18th, 2024 at 10:38am:
People cannot fathom why millionaires, billionaires and the generally well-off households are getting a handout they don’t need.


Yet the Coalition were prepared to raise taxes for low and middle income earners whilst giving the wealthy a much larger tax break....You are a hypocrite and a smacking dickhead Fwank!!!

Quote:
Stage 3 Tax Cuts Go to Wealthy Occupations, Low & Middle Income Earners Miss Out:

New economic research reveals that the Stage 3 tax cuts proposed by the Federal Government will give Bank CEOs, surgeons, and federal politicians a windfall tax cut of $9075, while low-income workers like
aged care workers, disability careers and minimum wage employees get $0.


The proposed Stage 3 tax cuts will see those earning more than $200,000 raking in the biggest benefit, while those on less than $45,000 will receive nothing, according to new report from the Australia Institute entitled Fair Go Gone: Stage 3 tax cuts & LMITO by Occupation.

When the Low- and-Middle-Income Tax Offset (LMITO) ends, middle-income earners like teachers, nurses and midwives will pay $1080 more in tax.


Were was your concern when the Coalition gave billionairs a tax cut and screwed low income earners arsehole???

Huh Huh Huh

https://australiainstitute.org.au/post/stage-3-tax-cuts-go-to-wealthy-occupation...


The answer is implied in the question.

It was stage 3 tax cuts. Stage 1 and Stage 2 tax cuts addressed the lower income groups.
Back to top
 

The 2025 election could be a shocker.
WWW  
IP Logged
 
Grappler Truth Teller Feller
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 81955
Proud pre-1850's NO Voter
Gender: male
Re: Energy Sources Shape Up As An Election Battle
Reply #6 - May 18th, 2024 at 2:07pm
 
We've got solar - and the cash is for costs of living.... some bloke got it right as I did years ago with my Guinness Quotient - he said once you could buy 100 schooners of beer for $300 (or something) - now you can only buy 45 (or something) ... anything left over goes into other things - the car needs an oil change and the oil costs up to $100 - I could be back in my Jaguar, FCS...

My Guinness Quotient of Comparative Prosperity meant that I could drink five pints a day @ $20 a day..... now you're lucky to get two... that's inflation for you.
Back to top
 

“Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passion, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence.”
― John Adams
 
IP Logged
 
Frank
Gold Member
*****
Online


Australian Politics

Posts: 42703
Gender: male
Re: Energy Sources Shape Up As An Election Battle
Reply #7 - May 18th, 2024 at 2:27pm
 
This is a dysfunctional government: the Treasurer subsidises the electorate’s ever-rising energy bills to counter the efforts of his colleague, the Minister for Energy and Climate Change, who is hellbent on increasing them.

Back to top
 

Estragon: I can’t go on like this.
Vladimir: That’s what you think.
 
IP Logged
 
Frank
Gold Member
*****
Online


Australian Politics

Posts: 42703
Gender: male
Re: Energy Sources Shape Up As An Election Battle
Reply #8 - May 18th, 2024 at 2:30pm
 
Captain Nemo wrote on May 18th, 2024 at 12:31pm:
philperth2010 wrote on May 18th, 2024 at 11:20am:
Frank wrote on May 18th, 2024 at 10:38am:
People cannot fathom why millionaires, billionaires and the generally well-off households are getting a handout they don’t need.


Yet the Coalition were prepared to raise taxes for low and middle income earners whilst giving the wealthy a much larger tax break....You are a hypocrite and a smacking dickhead Fwank!!!

Quote:
Stage 3 Tax Cuts Go to Wealthy Occupations, Low & Middle Income Earners Miss Out:

New economic research reveals that the Stage 3 tax cuts proposed by the Federal Government will give Bank CEOs, surgeons, and federal politicians a windfall tax cut of $9075, while low-income workers like
aged care workers, disability careers and minimum wage employees get $0.


The proposed Stage 3 tax cuts will see those earning more than $200,000 raking in the biggest benefit, while those on less than $45,000 will receive nothing, according to new report from the Australia Institute entitled Fair Go Gone: Stage 3 tax cuts & LMITO by Occupation.

When the Low- and-Middle-Income Tax Offset (LMITO) ends, middle-income earners like teachers, nurses and midwives will pay $1080 more in tax.


Were was your concern when the Coalition gave billionairs a tax cut and screwed low income earners arsehole???

Huh Huh Huh

https://australiainstitute.org.au/post/stage-3-tax-cuts-go-to-wealthy-occupation...


The answer is implied in the question.

It was stage 3 tax cuts. Stage 1 and Stage 2 tax cuts addressed the lower income groups.

Exactly.

But blustering Poison Pill Phil is too addled to remember or understand that.

Back to top
 

Estragon: I can’t go on like this.
Vladimir: That’s what you think.
 
IP Logged
 
philperth2010
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 19722
Perth
Gender: male
Re: Energy Sources Shape Up As An Election Battle
Reply #9 - May 18th, 2024 at 4:54pm
 
Frank wrote on May 18th, 2024 at 2:30pm:
Captain Nemo wrote on May 18th, 2024 at 12:31pm:
philperth2010 wrote on May 18th, 2024 at 11:20am:
Frank wrote on May 18th, 2024 at 10:38am:
People cannot fathom why millionaires, billionaires and the generally well-off households are getting a handout they don’t need.


Yet the Coalition were prepared to raise taxes for low and middle income earners whilst giving the wealthy a much larger tax break....You are a hypocrite and a smacking dickhead Fwank!!!

Quote:
Stage 3 Tax Cuts Go to Wealthy Occupations, Low & Middle Income Earners Miss Out:

New economic research reveals that the Stage 3 tax cuts proposed by the Federal Government will give Bank CEOs, surgeons, and federal politicians a windfall tax cut of $9075, while low-income workers like
aged care workers, disability careers and minimum wage employees get $0.


The proposed Stage 3 tax cuts will see those earning more than $200,000 raking in the biggest benefit, while those on less than $45,000 will receive nothing, according to new report from the Australia Institute entitled Fair Go Gone: Stage 3 tax cuts & LMITO by Occupation.

When the Low- and-Middle-Income Tax Offset (LMITO) ends, middle-income earners like teachers, nurses and midwives will pay $1080 more in tax.


Were was your concern when the Coalition gave billionairs a tax cut and screwed low income earners arsehole???

Huh Huh Huh

https://australiainstitute.org.au/post/stage-3-tax-cuts-go-to-wealthy-occupation...


The answer is implied in the question.

It was stage 3 tax cuts. Stage 1 and Stage 2 tax cuts addressed the lower income groups.

Exactly.

But blustering Poison Pill Phil is too addled to remember or understand that.



Why do you and ballsack compete so hard to be the biggest dickhead on the forum....The $300 is peanuts compared to what the Coalition wanted to gift millionaires until Labor made it fairer!!!

Quote:
Sorry, but Stages 1 and 2 did not make Stage 3 fairer. Only changing Stage 3 did that

Stage 1 increased the threshold for the 37% tax rate from $87,000 to $90,000 – this did nothing for those on low-middle incomes, given the current median full-time income is $83,200. Stage 1 also included the introduction of the low-middle income tax offset. That might have been “immediate” to use Senator McKenzie’s words, but it was also only temporary. It is no longer in place. Thus the only thing remaining from Stage 1 all goes to those earning above the median full-time income.

Stage 2 included changes that assisted those on low and middle incomes, such as the 32.5% threshold increase from $37,000 to $45,000. But it also included an increase of the 37% threshold again, this time to $120,000, which once again this part provided no benefit at all to low or middle-income earners.


Don't let the truth get in the way of your ignorance arseholes!!!

Roll Eyes Roll Eyes Roll Eyes

https://australiainstitute.org.au/post/sorry-but-stages-1-and-2-did-not-make-sta...
Back to top
 

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


Australian Politics

Posts: 42703
Gender: male
Re: Energy Sources Shape Up As An Election Battle
Reply #10 - May 18th, 2024 at 5:20pm
 
philperth2010 wrote on May 18th, 2024 at 4:54pm:
Frank wrote on May 18th, 2024 at 2:30pm:
Captain Nemo wrote on May 18th, 2024 at 12:31pm:
philperth2010 wrote on May 18th, 2024 at 11:20am:
Frank wrote on May 18th, 2024 at 10:38am:
People cannot fathom why millionaires, billionaires and the generally well-off households are getting a handout they don’t need.


Yet the Coalition were prepared to raise taxes for low and middle income earners whilst giving the wealthy a much larger tax break....You are a hypocrite and a smacking dickhead Fwank!!!

Quote:
Stage 3 Tax Cuts Go to Wealthy Occupations, Low & Middle Income Earners Miss Out:

New economic research reveals that the Stage 3 tax cuts proposed by the Federal Government will give Bank CEOs, surgeons, and federal politicians a windfall tax cut of $9075, while low-income workers like
aged care workers, disability careers and minimum wage employees get $0.


The proposed Stage 3 tax cuts will see those earning more than $200,000 raking in the biggest benefit, while those on less than $45,000 will receive nothing, according to new report from the Australia Institute entitled Fair Go Gone: Stage 3 tax cuts & LMITO by Occupation.

When the Low- and-Middle-Income Tax Offset (LMITO) ends, middle-income earners like teachers, nurses and midwives will pay $1080 more in tax.


Were was your concern when the Coalition gave billionairs a tax cut and screwed low income earners arsehole???

Huh Huh Huh

https://australiainstitute.org.au/post/stage-3-tax-cuts-go-to-wealthy-occupation...


The answer is implied in the question.

It was stage 3 tax cuts. Stage 1 and Stage 2 tax cuts addressed the lower income groups.

Exactly.

But blustering Poison Pill Phil is too addled to remember or understand that.



Why do you and ballsack compete so hard to be the biggest dickhead on the forum....The $300 is peanuts compared to what the Coalition wanted to gift millionaires until Labor made it fairer!!!

Quote:
Sorry, but Stages 1 and 2 did not make Stage 3 fairer. Only changing Stage 3 did that

Stage 1 increased the threshold for the 37% tax rate from $87,000 to $90,000 – this did nothing for those on low-middle incomes, given the current median full-time income is $83,200. Stage 1 also included the introduction of the low-middle income tax offset. That might have been “immediate” to use Senator McKenzie’s words, but it was also only temporary. It is no longer in place. Thus the only thing remaining from Stage 1 all goes to those earning above the median full-time income.

Stage 2 included changes that assisted those on low and middle incomes, such as the 32.5% threshold increase from $37,000 to $45,000. But it also included an increase of the 37% threshold again, this time to $120,000, which once again this part provided no benefit at all to low or middle-income earners.


Don't let the truth get in the way of your ignorance arseholes!!!

Roll Eyes Roll Eyes Roll Eyes

https://australiainstitute.org.au/post/sorry-but-stages-1-and-2-did-not-make-sta...


Greg Jericho and the Australia Institute/Grauniad are not on my list of credible. More like the pinch-of-salt-or-three brigade.



So why did Labor promise before the 20232 lection to deliver the Stage 3 tax cuts unchanged??

They opposed it under Shorten in 2019. Lost the election. So they changed their position. Won the 2022 election. Then broke their election promise and did change it.

Albo. Fighting Tories while saddling the barbed wire fence, the little yeah-but-no-but pseodo-PM.



Back to top
« Last Edit: May 18th, 2024 at 5:52pm by Frank »  

Estragon: I can’t go on like this.
Vladimir: That’s what you think.
 
IP Logged
 
Frank
Gold Member
*****
Online


Australian Politics

Posts: 42703
Gender: male
Re: Energy Sources Shape Up As An Election Battle
Reply #11 - Jun 27th, 2024 at 10:20am
 
the Australian Greens Party  launched its new “No coal. No Gas. No Nuclear” campaign. I couldn’t help but fill in the next logical item in the series: “No economy”.


The marketing genius of referring to wind and solar power as “renewable”, when the associated infrastructure needs to be replaced more often than for nuclear or fossil fuel power stations, is wearing off.
...

The Labor government’s childish anti-nuclear campaign built around three-eyed animals should be regarded as an international embarrassment. The number of nuclear reactors in the US, which provide around 20 per cent of the country’s electricity, declined from a peak of 111 in the late 1980s to 93. But as the anti-nuclear hysteria wears off, more reactors are being proposed. Now the Biden administration has embraced nuclear power as the only realistic way to provide reliable zero-carbon dioxide energy.

France, which has safely produced the bulk of its electricity via nuclear fission for years, has announced it is building at least six and up to 14 new nuclear power stations in coming years. India is building at least 18 by the early 2030s, and China is planning at least 100 new reactors by 2035.

Yes, new nuclear power stations will be expensive until the tempo of production increased and local industry climbed the learning curve. In any case, the cost argument is laughable given state and federal governments just sprayed around $400bn of borrowed money against the wall during Covid-19 for a cumulative excess deaths outcome that was scarcely different from Sweden’s, a country that spent barely anything by comparison.

As for safety, far more people tragically died at a South Korean electric battery manufacturing plant last week, at least 22, than have died from nuclear power related accidents since the poorly run and designed Chernobyl plant broke down in the 1980s.

Transition to “net zero” by 2050 is a delusion. As eminent Canadian scientist Vaclav Smil pointed out in a recent essay, it hasn’t even started – despite all the trillions spent. “Since the world began to focus on the need to end the combustion of ­fossil fuels we have not made the slightest progress in the goal of ­absolute global decarbonisation,” he points out.

Since 1997, fossil fuel consumption in absolute terms has increased 55 per cent. Its share of the total has declined from 86 per cent to 82 per cent. “All we have managed to do halfway through the ­intended grand global energy transition is a small relative decline,” Smil writes.

For affluent nations to achieve the net-zero carbon goals outlined in the international treaties they have signed, they would have to commit to annual expenditure of at least 20 per cent of GDP, for decades. To put it in perspective this is even more than the Soviet Union spent for a few years in its existential struggle to defeat Germany in World War II.

https://www.theaustralian.com.au/commentary/europes-electoral-earthquake-sounds-...


Back to top
 

Estragon: I can’t go on like this.
Vladimir: That’s what you think.
 
IP Logged
 
freediver
Gold Member
*****
Offline


www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 48504
At my desk.
Re: Energy Sources Shape Up As An Election Battle
Reply #12 - Jun 27th, 2024 at 10:26am
 
AusGeoff wrote on Feb 26th, 2024 at 4:37am:
Quote:
“We don’t have a nuclear industry in Australia, it will take years to get one up and running, years, decades".

Seriously Mr Bowen?

Australia's uranium has been mined since 1954, and our uranium
reserves are the world's largest, with 28% of the total.

Re Dutton's stance, it's ironic that Gough Whitlam's Labor party
was in favour of developing nuclear power generation in Australia
until the tree-huggers of the day kyboshed it.   Sadly.


It might have been a good idea back then. But since then, nuclear has gone from the cheapest to the most expensive option. Does that makes sense to you? Labour support nuclear when it is the cheapest option, the coalition supports it when it will send the country broke. And you think this makes Labor look like hypocrits? The coalition might have actually been able to get nuclear up and running in this country if they had not spend decades with their head in the sand on climate change.
Back to top
 

People who can't distinguish between etymology and entomology bug me in ways I cannot put into words.
WWW  
IP Logged
 
Frank
Gold Member
*****
Online


Australian Politics

Posts: 42703
Gender: male
Re: Energy Sources Shape Up As An Election Battle
Reply #13 - Jun 27th, 2024 at 11:38am
 
freediver wrote on Jun 27th, 2024 at 10:26am:
AusGeoff wrote on Feb 26th, 2024 at 4:37am:
Quote:
“We don’t have a nuclear industry in Australia, it will take years to get one up and running, years, decades".

Seriously Mr Bowen?

Australia's uranium has been mined since 1954, and our uranium
reserves are the world's largest, with 28% of the total.

Re Dutton's stance, it's ironic that Gough Whitlam's Labor party
was in favour of developing nuclear power generation in Australia
until the tree-huggers of the day kyboshed it.   Sadly.


It might have been a good idea back then. But since then, nuclear has gone from the cheapest to the most expensive option. Does that makes sense to you?


What/who makes you think it went from cheapest to most expensive in 50 years?  Apart from Chris Bowen.
Back to top
 

Estragon: I can’t go on like this.
Vladimir: That’s what you think.
 
IP Logged
 
JC Denton
Gold Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 5436
Gender: female
Re: Energy Sources Shape Up As An Election Battle
Reply #14 - Jun 27th, 2024 at 11:43am
 
the whole question sidesteps the immigration debate. would all these new stations even be a huge priority with a stable or even gradually declining population? i bet not. immigration is the ultimate nexus issue; all other issues simply revolve around and emerge from it, but no one wants to talk about it (at least in serious detail) or make the obvious connections.
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
Pages: 1 2 3 
Send Topic Print