Skeptic Project

Did y'all like Gillard's speech to Congress?

No. It was boring and rather banal. Just like every other political speech given by any other foreign emissary.

Carbon taxes are terrible ideas.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S4flQYdAeo8

Yeah r00l bad. [/humouring the idea]

What's the point of a carbon tax, and why is it bad?

That only happens if it's not structured properly. You sound like the right-wingers out here. LOL.

Well, at least in Australia a part of the reasoning for a carbon tax is to directly tax polluters and essentially use that money to implement renewable energy technologies - lowering our emissions by 50% in the next ten years and then on from there. Part of the tax which major industries will pay (not the public) will also be used to compensate those affected by price rices, etc which will obviously be mainly low-income earners.

And, I can't stand Che shirts. If anyone ever gave me one I'd be tempted to tear it in half in front of them and scream "you don't know me!". Just kidding but, that's how I feel about those shirts.

Normally I'd agree. Climate change I think is a different issue because we should've acted on it in like, 1997.

I'm all for moving away from fossil fuels to more environmentally friendly and renewable energy sources. Every time something happens in the Middle East oil prices go up and you have some people like Iran who you can't quite trust who might try and cut off supplies (even though the US get most of their oil from Canada apparently)

I don't agree with carbon taxes though, I think necessity helps innovation alot more. At the moment it isn't really profitable to change to renewable sources. Things like wind farms require massive amounts of space to generate enough electricity. (To generate enough power for the UK, half the country would need to be put aside for wind farms)

What do you think of nuclear power? (putting the recent events in Japan aside)

Australia adopting such a measure is unlikely to have drastic impact whatsoever. The countries that really need to do something are China, the US, India, and the European member states. Its a great, feel good for Australia, but internationally its not really much of a ripple. The industrial powerhouses need to get their act together.

^^^ whose, not who's.

It's also hard to get one's act together with a political party willing to throw the MAXIMUM amount of bullshit possible to slander the opposite party, especially on matters of cost-effective infrastructure.

I think your image of Australia in the eyes of other major industrial nations is greatly distorted. If we consider Australia's position on international whaling, for example, we find that few nations are willing to adopt a similar position just because of Australia's "prestige." There is not much international political capital from Australia for their actions to serve as a viable standard upon which other major countries would act. Consider that China and India have both thumbed their noses at US proposals, a country with far more political clout in their regions, at limiting Carbon Dioxide emissions. There is little indication that anyone, especially not developing nations like China and India who far outstrip Australia in CO2 emissions, will follow Australia's lead should it pass.

Lets also be very clear that Australia is the fourth largest producer of coal, but is far out paced by China's estimated 3,000 million tons of production. The United States produces an estimated 970 Million tons whereas Australia produces 409 million tons. So not only do you have the problem that Australia's production is less than half the US' production, but that its a mere fraction of what China produces. And again, why would China care what Australia does in regards to its CO2 emissions? You claim that Australia has an enviable economic status, but so does most of Europe, the US, and Canada. Why would China and India, or anyone else, want to follow Australia's model when the European and American models have produced much more impressive climbs. This is not a case of what form of development model is best, but rather a skeptical view on the way in which you appear to be applying arguments of international political prestige.

So perhaps I'm over-stating Australia's influence, sure. I'll accept that, you've certainly made a very good case for it. However, I do feel that for such a prosperous country (in-fact, economically the strongest economy in the Western world at this time - the only one to create half-a-million jobs during the GFC, that's for sure) to act on climate change will, if not encourage the Governments of other nations will certainly encourage activists in other nations on the path to acting on climate change. Now, probably not China and India but certainly the US and other developed nations.

And the thing about climate activists (because they're predominately from "the left" (even though it's not a left issue), at least that's true of Aus) they're very very very good at mobilising even if their opposition is statistically larger.

I think that if an Australian carbon tax encourages other Western nations to move toward one, that China/India/etc will have to do so to remain competitive and to bring it's infrastructure predominately into this centuries' renewable technology. I don't know personally whether a carbon "tax" would be most appropriate for economies like China and India, though.

Anyway, the second pro of a carbon tax being that the funds collected are/can of course be used to implement 100% renewables. Which for us, is the goal. -ANY- economy that can achieve 100% renewables will be quite enviable to economies that do not have that. Our desire is to achieve that within the next 25 years, and to be 50% of the way within 10. Realistically we could go 100% of the way in 10, but that's probably a little too idealistic.

I can't be bothered proof-reading this, so apologies if it's jumping all over the place.

In terms of the world-stage Matt, we really -are- highly respected. That cannot be denied. We have the best education system on the planet (Un Edu Index) and the highest levels of individual wealth, and to say that other economies don't want to learn from that is a little surprising to me.