What is this thing called carbon tax?

[Graeme M]

Nathan, to some extent that is true - it would do us well to be more circumspect about non-renewable resources. But also to some extent, these things ARE being dealt with, and in particular are driven to some extent by supply and demand market forces even without carbon taxes.

It seems to me that as resources become harder to find and/or harder (more expensive) to produce, then those products become more expensive and there is then a pressure to find cheaper or more sustainable alternatives. As well, people are far more informed about environmental matters and will (are) exerting pressure on governments and industry to improve practices. We can see that in practice with the efforts worldwide to clean up industry and more effective controls over a range of environmental activities.

[oldfart]

We can banter on here as much as we like, but the bone heads in Can bear ah  are hell bent using this to raise money .... a new form of tax.
As with rotten John and his  GST we had to have...... And the Next government will dream up a new tax and so on.      

Just to name a few that have been introduced in the last four budgets .
 
Mineral tax
student tax
Petroleum resource rent tax

and so on raising $45 billion dollars.

Are any of you familiar with the " Henry tax review''    

[VMX247]

As well, people are far more informed about environmental matters and will (are) exerting pressure on governments and industry to improve practices. We can see that in practice with the efforts worldwide to clean up industry and more effective controls over a range of environmental activities.

Here here !!! Long live the vegie patch,rain water tank and a good rifle 
cheers A

[Curly3]

We produce a poofteenth of the worlds polutants but as we are one of the worlds most prosperous nations I agree we should be setting an example to the rest of the world and reducing our extravagant use of resources.
The biggest problem we face as a nation is that Bob Brown and his team of Watermelons are driving the bus and the chinless & spineless Juliar and her party of dimwits are sitting up the back.

[Mike52]

Here here !!! Long live the vegie patch,rain water tank and a good rifle 
cheers A

Sorry mate that,s not allowed.

Here here !!! Long live the vegie patch,rain water tank
cheers A

Sorry mate Sunwater owns that water .

Here here !!! Long live the vegie patch;D
cheers A

Nitrate can be used as an explosive so you can,t use that either.
Good luck with the veges.

[Graeme M]

I'm not sure I know how we become less extravagant. The whole basis of our society is exactly that. We'd have to accept a contraction of the economy to achieve it as we stop consuming for the sake of it. Who will be the first to lower their standard of living?

[mx250]

A bit long winded, but worth the effort (I think ).  Decide for yourself.

http://www.scribd.com/doc/55155713/Reply-to-Climate-Change-Denier-Gregg-D-Thompson

It still remains, will the Carbon Tax address the issue (I doubt it) and do we need to be in the vanguard (our absolute contribution is minimal).

[Nathan S]

I lived for 20 years using no electricity .  I,ve done my bit. Well I have done more that the people who accuse me of being a polluter.
We had 1500acres of trees and the government said we were not allowed to cut them down.
The reason the trees were there was because we did NOT cut them down.
Had we cut them down then we would NOT have had a problem with the new green laws.
Ironic.
We were punished for doing the right thing. (The green rules scared buyers and we got a Lower  price at sale )

The carbon tax won,t change a thing because there is no viable alternative.
I don,t want to wreck the planet so give me an alternative and I,ll use it.
Until then piss off.

That's a big part of the point. If "the market" is left to its own devices, we'll be at crisis point as cheap supplies of coal/gas/petrol run out, and then suddenly we'll realize we're deeply in the pooh. The would wreak far more economic and social havoc than any realistic tax on carbon emissions.
The idea is to do something before crisis point. In the absence of any serious effort from the highly polluting industries, then a carbon tax (or ETS) is the most effective and financially efficient way for a government to push toward reduced emissions/consumption.

[mx250]

I'm not sure I know how we become less extravagant. The whole basis of our society is exactly that. We'd have to accept a contraction of the economy to achieve it as we stop consuming for the sake of it. Who will be the first to lower their standard of living?

+1

And if you don't use dirty crass Capitalism to decide what mechanism do you use to decide the have's and the have not's?

[mx250]

That's a big part of the point. If "the market" is left to its own devices, we'll be at crisis point as cheap supplies of coal/gas/petrol run out, and then suddenly we'll realize we're deeply in the pooh. The would wreak far more economic and social havoc than any realistic tax on carbon emissions.
The idea is to do something before crisis point. In the absence of any serious effort from the highly polluting industries, then a carbon tax (or ETS) is the most effective and financially efficient way for a government to push toward reduced emissions/consumption.

You might notice it's already happening without Carbon Tax .

And you might notice today the Retailers Association is wringing it hands because there has been a .6% down turn in sales -  it means jobs will go .

[Nathan S]

I'm pretty sure that history will remember the post WW2 era as the time the human race lived dramatically beyond its means.
I think a decline in apparent living standards is inevitable - but taking real steps now will make the areas where we have to make compromises much less painful than pretending we can keep the pedal to the metal forever and slamming into the wall at the end....

[Graeme M]

I think both of those posts pro and anti CO2/global warming are about as misleading as each other. The bottom line is that none of us here know enough about radiative physics to be able to make a really informed choice - most of us will decide based on our gut sense.

CO2 is a greenhouse gas, and it's been accepted for over a century that it is a major player in heating the atmosphere. In simple terms, most of the atmosphere lets the sun and heat through to the surface, where it warms and then radiates heat back up from the surface in long wavelengths. Greenhouse gases absorb that heat, warm up and reradiate heat back to the surface. In effect, it slows the rate at which the earth cools and thereby raises the effective temperature . However, CO2 on its own doesn't have that big an effect, it's the claimed positive feedback from water vapour that causes the potential for significant warming.

The degree to which these two things combine is called the climate sensitivity, and the IPCC claim that is fairly high, while sceptics suggest the IPCC claim is exaggerated.

My view - gut sense wise - is that the sensitivity is low. I think the fact that so many of the claimed likely effects are nowhere near as severe as have been suggested, or predicted, is good observational evidence in favour of that.

[mx250]

I'm pretty sure that history will remember the post WW2 era as the time the human race lived dramatically beyond its means.
I think a decline in apparent living standards is inevitable - but taking real steps now will make the areas where we have to make compromises much less painful than pretending we can keep the pedal to the metal forever and slamming into the wall at the end....

Different subject, different cause.

And I agree. There are a lot of changes we collectively have got to make to live sustainably and happy amongst ourselves and with the environment.

I think most of the changes that are mooted for CO2 are the same changes needed for sustainability as well. But that doesn't make Carbon Tax a good idea. 

[Graeme M]

It also surprises me that where once the very industries that give us our economic success and our standard of living were viewed as significant contributors to our country's well-being are now called 'big polluters' on the basis of their CO2 emissions. CO2 may indeed be a problem but it is hardly pollution. And those industries are not wilfully polluting, at least not in terms of CO2.

[mx250]

My view - gut sense wise - is that the sensitivity is low. I think the fact that so many of the claimed likely effects are nowhere near as severe as have been suggested, or predicted, is good observational evidence in favour of that.

My view is similar. I think there are various academics and professionals who are prepared to use a half truths, scare tactics, guilt and emotions, to force changes which they deem or belief necessary and for the greater good of 'unthinking' masses.

I think the total rational, objective and definitive isn't part of the public debate yet. And indeed, I'm sure some of the solutions such as Carbon subquesting is BS.