Julia's New Carbon Price

Discussion in 'The big picture' started by eco4560, Feb 24, 2011.

  1. milifestyle

    milifestyle New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2008
    Messages:
    1,573
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Yep, I get the basic processes Len, what I don't get is HOW?

    Mr & Mrs Average at Home Dad works for one of the mines, mum has a part time job and looks after the family. Parents are busy and substitute time for the latest technological game or gadget for kids to play with. TV sets 6 feet wide, 2 refrigerators, 3 freezers, a smaller television in each bedroom, 2 V6 cars and a 4WD, houses that big even a quarter acre block only has a 6 foot wide backyard. These people don't want to change their lifestyles... if anything they want life made easier still.

    Without something to forcefully put the brakes on, maybe 10% max of the majority of consumers are going to change out of personal want... Life has become too easy for people and they don't want to let that go.

    To rephrase David Suzuki... The voluntary approach to "consumer" social responsibility has failed in Most cases...
     
  2. gardenlen

    gardenlen Group for banned users

    Joined:
    May 14, 2004
    Messages:
    3,464
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    g'day eric,

    well one way that won't ge it either is through political affiliation, in the hope to make it school carriculum. when molleson first introduced it on tv about 30 years ago (this is where before someone here suggested i must watch far to much tv, great judgement to hang their hat on, someone else called them incoherent ramblings another great judgement hey?), anyhow 30 years ago, was when the agenda should have been, to introduce it to the gassroots level, you know nurture the egg that is going hatch the goose that might lay the golden egg. just like the bloke who devised clean up australia day, he worked with the grassroots level and still does, he's not there pushing a political agenda or trying to sell courses.the way it is now well accepted in the australian community and spread naturally overseas, he could probably do anything he likes.

    so bill introduced it then it fell flat until one supposed stalwart pranced the tv stage one day(no i usually didn't watch this entertainment event but glad i did that day), well apart from self ego boost it did nothing for pemaculture. then as i understand it molleson and possibly holgrem took it overseas and hey it was well accepted, then it appeared they returned home here pennyless, so hereafter the drive to sell permaculture started, and i had a lot of people over the time tell me, that the pressure to do acourse or you not pemaculture was well noticable, there is even one person here who believes that if you haven't done acourse then you don't understand permaculture, and now it is pilitially aligned, that then si all but the end. unless something can be scrapped out of the citizens forum where they can put inflence to make people sit up and take notice, through those political affiliations.

    so while i understand you saying mr & mrs average don't want to know and the mr& mrsaverage i know are not the ones with the double suv's and the latest mod cons. it is not they don't want it they don't know about it for the main, imagine what would have happend if mr clean up australia went the way of permaculture?

    and in this forum there is personal attacks that go on and the moderators do nothing, no skin off my nose but there are the lurkers who are watching and deciding that this pemaculture is not for them.

    now overseas there are followers who believe their authors on the subject are the ones who started this pemaculture thing. another said doing a course was like paying to be a whoofer all learning come out of doing the teachers projects and reading books. if what i say is not liked i'm sorry i can't help that. certainly aiming at the messenger is no fix at all.

    so the goose that may have laid the golden egg has gone, flown the coup, sunday roast.

    len
     
  3. milifestyle

    milifestyle New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2008
    Messages:
    1,573
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I don't think there have been personal attacks here Len, Certainly attacks of personal opinion... but that helps debates like this doesn't it ?

    If anyone has been personally harassed please bring it to our attention. I certainly don't aim to that personally.

    BTW... The goose cost too much to feed so we replaced it with a more sustainable chicken ;o)
     
  4. springtide

    springtide Junior Member

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2008
    Messages:
    359
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I am ok with the whole concept of tax, even a new one. We need roads and schools and stuff, the idea or taxing pollution i think is good, even a tax to help the ppl who live below 1 in 50 flood levels i can probably justify.
    My main problem is where the money goes, as said previously in this thread a lot of our money goes overseas and i can imagine that it assists in political stability in a few countries near to us, but to spend so much overseas when we don't have enough schools here is stupid.
    I don't see why CC and a carbon tax have to be so closely knotted together, look at the air quality in Melbourne in summer, cyanide leaching into the groundwater on a mine site in Kalgoorlie, there is another long list.
    Tax the people who are making a mess and keep the money in Australia to kelp clean up previous mistakes.
     
  5. milifestyle

    milifestyle New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2008
    Messages:
    1,573
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
    good one springtide... well said!
     
  6. Terra

    Terra Moderator

    Joined:
    May 16, 2007
    Messages:
    757
    Likes Received:
    23
    Trophy Points:
    18
    As Springtide has said where is the money going , Given that earth is a bubble and eventually everything in it will be recycled by natures incredible relentless power , one would think that IFF we have TOO much co2 in the atmosphere the smart money or maybe even the carbon tax would be spent on turning the co2 into oxygen , and i wonder how we could do that , any junior primary child could advise on that one . Not hearing of any large projects to achive same , if we reversed the problem and knocked down houses and replanted vegetation on a vast scale all over the world for the next 50yrs im tipping that the percieved problem would sort its self out .
     
  7. gardenlen

    gardenlen Group for banned users

    Joined:
    May 14, 2004
    Messages:
    3,464
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    yes terra,

    rehabilitation of the habitat's would deliver more and cheaply as well, we could pay farmers to rehabilitate, but it must be endemic native habtat that is ceaed no agri-forestry to create another earner. i'm no tree hugger but common sense dictates here, plant trees instead of windmills. but sadly terra there is no money or position in it for science. it si deforestation that is causing the extinctions to use their words the beginning of the domino effect.

    let sense and common sense rule.
     
  8. matto

    matto Junior Member

    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2009
    Messages:
    685
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Alot of people are tipping the same, although I read that you would need to plant the area of Australia with trees to see some result. !5 of us spent 7 weeks in WA doing a carbon offset tree project and planted a bit over 3 million trees. We worked out at 2 metre spacing that we crossed Australia. There is a lot of work to be done, but done wisely and we may see good results.
    I remeber hearing somewhere that we need that wartime mobitlity and urgency, or better yet, we could just get the army to do it. Bomb the world with trees. preferably not eucalypts.
     
  9. gardenlen

    gardenlen Group for banned users

    Joined:
    May 14, 2004
    Messages:
    3,464
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    yes but planting habitat only incurs and initial cost, there is no need for follow up money once planted let nature take is course, all planting have to be endemic so it that includes eucalypts then eucalypts it is.

    yes we pay huge amounts to military personal some of that could be better utilised in doing real time things for the australian community, people on jobless welfare draw the line at slavery, and also if there is a job there then these people should be offered the job and to be seen to be working for welfare, would do heaps for the self esteem of ausralians, give them a light at the end of the tunnel, repairing the habitat won't happen over night it would almost be a career.

    edited in burials could be done in these destroyed habitats, and at each burial a major forest tree planted then later seed balls for the minor plants, it has to be at a price to attract people this then would take away the pessure of councils providing open park land fo cemetery purposes. there are some that do this but the price is rediculous even down the cardboard coffin. would need to get rid of some of the protectionism in the industry.

    len
     
  10. Glenn18

    Glenn18 Junior Member

    Joined:
    Jan 25, 2011
    Messages:
    37
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Sorry Eric. When I quoted this.."We have to stop thinking in a reactive, after the fact way and start thinking in a preventative, no reason for it to happen in the first place way... IMO!"

    I thought it was pertaining to the Carbon Tax,My mistake.
    Anyone that thinks the preventative approach is wrong would be silly.I should have payed more attention to what you were actually saying,again,sorry.
     
  11. Glenn18

    Glenn18 Junior Member

    Joined:
    Jan 25, 2011
    Messages:
    37
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    matto WITF did I say to insult YOUR amazing visionaries,or permaculture in general.I actually don't have a "Chapter 1 in permiculture principals" Too re-read,and didn't think it was a main requirement to be here.I am not and have never stated that I was a "Permiculture activist",so I could not even be a sicktivist(Whatever that is).This ,I thought,was a thread on Dillards carbon price.Regardless of the miriad ways in which to have averted the need for one,the fact remains that ..1.Her "TAX" will not achieve a reduction of carbon emmissions around the planet,it will just push up the cost of "Living" for the average joe blow in Australia.Fact 2.Nobody here has even mentioned the quota of carbon emmissions released by fire's yearly from around the world and that alone would minimalize their(The govt.'s) projections.Lets not even get into volcanic eruptions will we.
    Fact 3.You charge the polluters $30 per ton,they pass the cost onto the consumer(YOU) the govt offsetts the skyrocketing prices of electricity to the people with the majority of the revenue raised by the carbon tax(She stated this)...where is the input level into renewable energy R&R.Actually,what is the $$$ value of the money set asside for R&R.

    It's a crock,and I for one have never stated that permi systems would not be benificial.Now unless you or your vissionaries live 100% self sustainable then you and them will be paying a tax for just about ZIP return in regards to carbon reduction,as will the rest of the people out there that live their day to day existance within the system.

    Would I like to see the world get it's act together,hell yeah.It's just a pitty that the ppl you vote for to organise it are ruled by the same ppl that couldn't give two hoots and the majority of the ppl want or are use too what they are selling.Like I said,the best you can do is lesson your own footprint,it will happen quicker than some make believe mirical TAX.

    I really think the collective intelligence on this forum is unique,I deffinately believe there is a grass roots understanding in the ways to prevent the degredation of the planet,I just believe the dreggs that govern the planet are too embeded in the system to get it right.Your kids might not get to see it but,hopfully your grandkids might.

    Pay Ceaser his dues,there's another crock.

    Edit..spelling.
     
  12. gardenlen

    gardenlen Group for banned users

    Joined:
    May 14, 2004
    Messages:
    3,464
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    g'day glenn,

    yes it matters not about principals or best practises of key-line, fukuoka, mandela, gaia and even organic, not even sustainablity matters if this is not all done from the grass roots level, with no pressure to buy books or courses or whatever, definately should be absolutely nil political affiliation, than beating people around the head with a new tax won't work either it will be more disastrous. the golden egg of which the goose that might have laid it that has been summarily dealt with does not mean wealth, wealth, power and position all come to one person at other peoples expense.

    all is lost i feel, the grassroots would reject it now as many have done who come along and see what drives the forums, newsgroups have folded, other forums draw so little input they might as well shut down, what happens when i mention this i get slapped about in this cloistered thinking. permacultue is an amassing of sustainable ideas, it is not a religion, it is not a political party and it can't be foced onto the community, and it does not rely on the need to do a course before one can say they understand it. out of the very many groups of a decade or more ago there might only be about 2 now that have some viability.

    too much self interest from above. humanitarianism above profit and any sort of political inerests.

    len
     
  13. Glenn18

    Glenn18 Junior Member

    Joined:
    Jan 25, 2011
    Messages:
    37
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    "Permacultue is an amassing of sustainable ideas, it is not a religion, it is not a political party and it can't be foced onto the community, and it does not rely on the need to do a course before one can say they understand it."

    Len I really think you have it there mate.
    1 good example of the retards that run the show is Steally Conealy cutting the solar gross payback for grid conect.Obviously part of her sweet deal for the new power Co. owners,what a crock hey!What I can't fathom is,why in the hell are they spending S**T loads of money debating/advertising the carbon tax(That cost is deffinatly "Non renewable"),when they could be putting solar panels on most Aussie homes for the same cost,it would elleviate the load from coal powered systems.

    Here is another fact most ppl arn't aware of..Power stations produce(burn the same amount of coal) during every cycle,regardless of the amount consumed by the consumers.Those levels are way above average peak need.WTF!!!.Hypothetically,if a carbon tax was introduced,power stations would only need to cut back their cycle burning amount to what is actually require to service the grid,therefor the carbon released figures would show a decrease in emmissions.This then would obviously show a graph for the retards to be able to state their pollicy is working.The illusion of "Doing something".Some might say"Why dosen't the opposition tell it like it is?",thats because they would be useing the same illusionary tactics if they get back in and couldn't let the "Fat cat" out of the bag so to speak.Sheep don't realise the difference between two differen't dogs,they all bark the same.

    I see the dillard company,Penny Wong being the biggest illusionist of them all,still quoting and useing the East Anglia model(Even though it was exposed as a scam) as "The science" that carn't be denied.Not once have I seen her actually answer a direct question,unless it was asked by her own clowns.Why has over 80% of our tax funded $$'s on renewable energie R&D been awarded to American owned companies over the past 10yrs,why is the research SOLD back to us when we have already paid for it.

    Growing vegies might be one thing but,understanding political Indoctrination is a totally differen't ball game.
     
  14. gardenlen

    gardenlen Group for banned users

    Joined:
    May 14, 2004
    Messages:
    3,464
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    in light of current events and that this whole carbon issue is more about making nuclear power more affrodably acceptable, so we can buy the tech' from the US industry machine (that has been touted by the 2 leaders back a few years now), yes let the supporters call for simple changes first as with power stations over supplying, waht about the lights of our cities surely at least 80% of them are totally unnecissary, all our bridges not only have street light but are decorated like pagan xmas trees, why?? is it some sort of ego trip?

    the only safe reactor is the one that doesn't get built, the constructed one is only safe until it is tested, then the men of knowledge who promote these things just stand back and watch as nought can be done.

    lets stop this juggernaught before it is too late.

    len
     
  15. milifestyle

    milifestyle New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2008
    Messages:
    1,573
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I doubt there will ever be a Nuclear Power Plant built in Australia. After the current Japanese events I doubt there will be one built anywhere...

    I still don't understand why we have to have external power plants at all...
     
  16. Glenn18

    Glenn18 Junior Member

    Joined:
    Jan 25, 2011
    Messages:
    37
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    The nuke era isn't over yet folks,true in Australia it isn't on the cards but,it's in the deck.
    Japan..silly buggers put reactors on an Is that is active,they put their emergancy generators and water pumps below sea level knowing about sunamis.Nope it ain't over yet Eric.Several reactors are earmarked for Java,Go figure.

    I can't wait for the new "Radiation Tax"..LOL
    Now was it Marconi that asked "What do you want,free eletricity or radio"?.
     
  17. milifestyle

    milifestyle New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2008
    Messages:
    1,573
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Great idea on the Radiation Tax... 90% Tax should help stop an industry from getting started!
     
  18. Glenn18

    Glenn18 Junior Member

    Joined:
    Jan 25, 2011
    Messages:
    37
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Ditto Eric,never thought of that ROTFLMAO......

    We are on the grid,nearly got the full rebate/payback solar hook-up except for the sleepy dude organising it and the fact that Steally killed it o/night.We were devestated litrally but,we are doing our best to downsize our use.Just wondering what you are on down there in Tas? Big difference with Hydro(Cleaner) so ya probably don't feel as bad as we do if you are grid conected.

    We got a few ac's that slope from the Sth to the North,about 35ft.Been think of a perpetual hydro set-up with a Glockerman/pelem system but the schematics arn't really adding up(It could be bad maths but more likely power greed).It would work for 12v but,48 is a better return on the battries and the panels.

    Sorry,went OT.
     
  19. Terra

    Terra Moderator

    Joined:
    May 16, 2007
    Messages:
    757
    Likes Received:
    23
    Trophy Points:
    18
    There is a patch of cheap vacant land in Nth West South Australia that would be perfect for a reactor , after all its been cleaned up nice and safe after the last radioactive event .
     
  20. milifestyle

    milifestyle New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2008
    Messages:
    1,573
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
    There is a touch of sarcasm there isn't there Terra... :nod:
     

Share This Page

-->