if you dont believe in global warming sign this

[johnc]

Firstly the sky wont fall in, in the short term the impact will be less than the GST, secondly for many businesses the concessions granted will mean little impact on pricing. It was only ever going to be energy intensive industry that would feel the brunt of an ETS and in most cases we don't actually have a lot of heavy industry, the standouts are companies such as those producing aluminium which we subsidise heavily anyway.

The aim of an ETS is to reduce the amount of harmful emissions into the atmosphere. The sky didn't fall in when the poms banned coal as a heating fuel in the 1950's, generally the more efficent and modern the plant the less pollution it emits and the more power produced per tonne of coal as the combustion process is better designed,

The fallacy is the belief that other sources can't produce cheaper power, they will in time, humans aren't stupid and the brightest amongst us will come up with cleaner more sustainable processes that will eventually replace coal as the major source of power. Nothing says we can't have some coal fired generators, its the quantum of emmissions that's a problem we need to reduce the coal we burn. The idea is to reduce the six major greenhouse gasses we create each year, no one suggests we can eliminate them.

Those advocating their prices will shoot up because of the ETS are overlooking one major point, you don't actually know what effect this will have on your inputs. There is as much given in concessions as taken, the economic impact will see some but not all costs impacted, for many price setters the impact will be so minor as to not be noticed. If you look at how much the price of materials like steel have soared in recent years as a result of demand created increases you would need to have rocks in your head to suggest that an ETS is going to destroy markets and business, if it was going to happen it would have happened during the mining boom. If demand lessens under an ETS we could even have price falls.

You can indulge in idle threats about price increases all you like, all it high lights is that there is a deep lack of understanding of how this is meant to work. The mechanism means if we can lower our domestic use of power and bring on lower polluting generating capacity the ETS will become redundant, this is not a permanent scheme, it is a lever that will last quite a few years but if we get on top of the problem it will be phased out. The economic system we operate under will allow that, it is also worth mentioning that transport costs are one of this countries greatest cost barriers, yet no one is complaining about massive taxes on fuel effecting our international competitiveness, but they do and the ETS is a drop in the bucket in comparrison.

I'm not suggesting we all agree, but I am suggesting that the last few posts show a level of emotion filled ignorance that serves no constructive purpose.

[robbo266317]

I agree john, most people/politicians are just too short sighted and put profits first.
I was recently made redundant from One of the Steel companies primarily because they only made $270 million profit.
When/If I get another job I will be putting solar panels on the roof to reduce my energy demand (and bills).

[.RC.]

When/If I get another job I will be putting solar panels on the roof to reduce my energy demand (and bills).

Then you have to go without something else to pay for that..Solar panels are not cheap, in fact they are extremely expensive..

So what will you go without??? Maybe a night out on the town.. This then hits the likes of restaurant owners or pubs.. See the slippery slope you get on... The ultimate ending is a lower standard of living for the people who have to pay..

Why is it poorer households are not responsible for their emissions and in fact will be compensated to the tune of 120%??

Not one of the pro ETS people will answer that question...

The legislation is a complete failure....It has been politicised that much that it is bad legislation and will be the downfall of australian society..

[johnc]

Then you have to go without something else to pay for that..Solar panels are not cheap, in fact they are extremely expensive.. They are a fraction of the cost of replacing the family car and have a pay back period of under 10 years on some of the plans.

So what will you go without??? Maybe a night out on the town.. This then hits the likes of restaurant owners or pubs.. See the slippery slope you get on... The ultimate ending is a lower standard of living for the people who have to pay.. An interesting view but don't make baseless assumptions of peoples spending patterns to support your own bias.

Why is it poorer households are not responsible for their emissions and in fact will be compensated to the tune of 120%?? Where on earth do you get this from. Poorer households are compensated so they can maintain basic services and are the least able to adjust to price pressure. who said this has anything to do with responsibility.

Not one of the pro ETS people will answer that question...

really? maybe that's because they would prefer to answer questions of people who actually appear to have a basic understanding of the issue rather than those who simply push nonsensical and baseless rubbish.

The legislation is a complete failure....It has been politicised that much that it is bad legislation and will be the downfall of australian society..

A sign of those with worthless opinion is to demonise others by using names for the PM like Dudd this is usually done in the absense of anything substantial to support a claim, the other is that the world will end, economies collapse or in your case the downfall of Australian Society. In reality upward price pressures create inflation, we have had it with commodity pricing and housing in recent years but society doesn't seem to have collapsed as a result. No one is talking about punitive punishment or marginalisation of sectors of the community. We are talking about a pricing mechanism allowing community and business based change. This is not the grounds for anarchy, it is the base for change we can all take a part in. sensible discussion should be reasoned and balanced not emotive and hysterical.

[damian]

Kiwigeo: It sounds to me like you were doing some interesting stuff there, and that makes me question my own sanity

Johnc:Less impact than the GST ? Good luck with that. I'll check in in 5 years and see how everyone is getting on.

Amazing, I look away for 5 minutes and another 3 pages To those who object to this thread going on and on and on...perhaps you should just...not...read ...it ?

You know it occurred to me this morning that the gas companies are the logical people to finance bluegen units. I am sure they could make the numbers work to pay for the purchase and installation of the units in clients houses and sell them electricity, hot water and gas below current levels and make a profit on the whole shebang. It'd aleviate the upfront costs to consumers and of course reduce pollution. Might even make the grid less prone to failure...

Maybe I should send some letters to some gas companies and see if they are looking at it.

[Waldo]

secondly for many businesses the concessions granted will mean little impact on pricing. It was only ever going to be energy intensive industry that would feel the brunt of an ETS

How the heck to do you get that one?

There have been no concessions made for small business, I turn on a switch to fire computers on etc. and it will cost me. Watch the likes of Lateline Business and you will hear that, and rightly so, that those who produce our energy will not be able to continue to bear their costs of an ETS and will have to pass them on. That means you and I will be paying more, which means everyone will pay more. As my operating costs go up so does what you get charged.

Logic dictates the outcome. A wise man wrote something along the lines that, to every cause there is an affect.

[johnc]

The reference is to large businesses, at the moment it looks as if the heaviest users of power are not really going to have their bottom line effected, certainly not in the near term anyway. As a small business owner I know how much our electricity bill is in relation to other business costs. Even if it doubles the impact on final prices is fairly minor, wages costs and the like are where the real money goes. If large business is largely uneffected we shouldn't seem any of our business input costs rise.

The main ones effected will be middle income earners, and most will be in a position to bring about changes to minimise that impact. That's what it is about.

I actually am not that keen on the proposed ETS myself, its just that a number of people seem to be writing ill informed and unsubstantiated rubbish about its impact. All this does is raise the fear factor when what we all need is to understand what it means to us. That is still to be set out in a manner we can apply to our daily lives.

The worst outcome is that the power companies may use this as a lame excuse to jack up prices, and that is something to watch for.

[Waldo]

Yes, but cost increases from electricity have an affect which flows on for the short term they are exempted (from what I understand) but for how long will the $7 Billion dollars last. It can't go up the chain and it has to come down, as to will any other industry affected by the ETS - be it coal, desal, oil etc. Any product or service, which in some part of it's manufacture or delivery of relies on the above in the transportation or other will see those costs rise.

No-one can be expected to wear the costs and not pass them on.

The only one thing exempted from the ETS is primary producers, which was the only one smart thing that has been done - but for how long. And why should they have been included at the start of all this, because their cow ?

[Gingermick]

We would have to put the cows out to pasture to feed on grass to curtail their emissions. That would mean we wouldn't get the steroids and antibiotics and other crap the feed livestock. We'd have to pay more though, and I'm happy to for meat that's better for you.

[.RC.]

T

The main ones effected will be middle income earners, and most will be in a position to bring about changes to minimise that impact. That's what it is about.

The only position they will be in will be broke..

Why do the bogans get compensated by 120%... Cmon John, why are the bogans not responsible for their emissions???

I wonder where the $7 billion in compo is coming from??? Oh that's right krudd is going to pull it out of his ####...

[Sebastiaan56]

Why is it poorer households are not responsible for their emissions and in fact will be compensated to the tune of 120%??

Not one of the pro ETS people will answer that question...

Thats the first time Ive seen the poor blamed for anything in this debate, who are the poor? The Vets who fought and died for us? Those troublesome pensioners who paid taxes all their lives? Those irresponsible scurrilous disabled people? The infirm, hospitalised, etc. The poor are being compensated as they have the least resources to face the price rises Waldo has identified. I think it is pathetic to resent those who have less than us.

Solar systems can be had for $7k, see here Solar Power Systems as the price of electricity goes up this will lead to a shorter payback period per installation. No, I havent done an NPV but here in NSW it is becoming compelling.

Both of the "L" parties went to the last election with a carbon trading system. If Howard would have won and kept an election promise (a dodgy if... ) his system would look very similar to Rudd's as they are both beholden to basically the same donors. In politics the piper must always be paid. But at least St Steve Fielding isnt making the decision for the country.

I think an extensive study will find that agriculture and especially forestry would be carbon sinks. The question is how do you measure it. CSIRO Is doing work to reduce bovine flatus, did you know most comes out of their mouths..... Cow kissing, a whole new kinky pastime.

[Vernonv]

Solar systems can be had for $7k, see here Solar Power Systems as the price of electricity goes up this will lead to a shorter payback period per installation.

Sorry but I don't think you would get much for your $7k. The system they had there for $7600 (after rebates) will only supply about 50% of the needs of an energy efficient house and how much extra will it cost to make your house energy efficient?. To fully run a house off solar you are looking at well over $20k and that is assuming you already have an energy efficient house.

[Sebastiaan56]

Vernon,

My house isnt energy efficient and Im getting some quotes to see how the numbers stack up. I havent done it for few years so I will be curious to see how much has changed. Last time it would have cost $12k based on our household consumption. I am also counting on Reese keeping his promise of wholesale input tariffs. We dont have air con but have insulation, we run gas, solar hot water, etc.

Just pondering, if the rebate to the "poor" is 120% is that the expected inflation rate? At least the inflation will keep interest rates down and the money collected will pay of the deficit.... great silver lining huh..

[johnc]

Vernon,

My house isnt energy efficient and Im getting some quotes to see how the numbers stack up. I havent done it for few years so I will be curious to see how much has changed. Last time it would have cost $12k based on our household consumption. I am also counting on Reese keeping his promise of wholesale input tariffs. We dont have air con but have insulation, we run gas, solar hot water, etc.

Just pondering, if the rebate to the "poor" is 120% is that the expected inflation rate? At least the inflation will keep interest rates down and the money collected will pay of the deficit.... great silver lining huh..

The only information I can find with any credibility show low income earners subsidised 100% not 120 % and food prices going up 5%.

As for the offensive notion that low income earners are bogans that takes us back to demonising a section of the community for no valid reason. Bogans are across all income sectors and will pay according to their income levels. I think the subsidy will be more like
the family payment, so if you make improvements you could make a profit.

A home once you calculate the feed in tarrifs should be cost positive at 2kw or around $12,000 installed when I last looked. But I stand to be corrected however I wonder if you get more bank for your buck if you look at improved insulation and draft control along with fluoro and LED lighting solutions. Retro fitting double glazing is an interesting concept, and one we are about to commence ourselves.

[.RC.]

Why doesn't the government force people to recycle??
Why doesn't the government cut paper usage and move to online transactions??

I am not against doing something to reduce emissions, but letting market forces dictate what happens is plain wrong and a cop out by the government..