Wow, a bunch of hairy unicorn anal cocksucking fuckfaces trying to run this country, your a bunch of fucking fuckface liers and you have anal sex with all your gay poffta voters......
Wow, a bunch of hairy unicorn anal cocksucking fuckfaces trying to run this country, your a bunch of fucking fuckface liers and you have anal sex with all your gay poffta voters......
Wow, a bunch of hairy unicorn anal cocksucking fuckfaces trying to run this country, your a bunch of fucking fuckface liers and you have anal sex with all your gay poffta voters......
Wow, a bunch of hairy unicorn anal cocksucking fuckfaces trying to run this country, your a bunch of fucking fuckface liers and you have anal sex with all your gay poffta voters......
Wow, a bunch of hairy unicorn anal cocksucking fuckfaces trying to run this country, your a bunch of fucking fuckface liers and you have anal sex with all your gay poffta voters......
Wow, a bunch of hairy unicorn anal cocksucking fuckfaces trying to run this country, your a bunch of fucking fuckface liers and you have anal sex with all your gay poffta voters......
Wow, a bunch of hairy unicorn anal cocksucking fuckfaces trying to run this country, your a bunch of fucking fuckface liers and you have anal sex with all your gay poffta voters......
Wow, a bunch of hairy unicorn anal cocksucking fuckfaces trying to run this country, your a bunch of fucking fuckface liers and you have anal sex with all your gay poffta voters......
Wow, a bunch of hairy unicorn anal cocksucking fuckfaces trying to run this country, your a bunch of fucking fuckface liers and you have anal sex with all your gay poffta voters......
Wow, a bunch of hairy unicorn anal cocksucking fuckfaces trying to run this country, your a bunch of fucking fuckface liers and you have anal sex with all your gay poffta voters......
Channel 7 is a Labor channel. No surprise that they support Juliar Gillard and her socialist carbon tax. Channel 7 spreading socialist propaganda as usual.
@newsnational And you are a what channel? A Liberal channel. Grow up, kids. I see more than one TV station and I also see a total absence of irrefutable logic to back up such a petty and ludicrous statement.
This was such a wonderful, well organised and fun community day.
I felt so inspired to have seen all these awesome Australians rise above the negativity and rally - after having of course, taken some time to actually understand the meaning of pricing carbon. Because as soon as you really understand it, there's just no way anyone wouldn't not want it!
Say Yes is a phenomenal group and this video has really made my day. "Good on you!" to everyone involved x
@perthamy So you understand that all living things on Earth are carbon life forms? That the carbon tax will destroy small business. That there is NO evidence of man made global warming. That if we had a decarbonised planet, it would be Mars? Do you realise that YOU, and ALL of us are going to pay for the carbon tax? Your logic works... I used to be for the carbon tax but know I'm against it after researching it for a year 12 project. Watch "Joane Nova on the 2011 Lord Monckton Tour" on YouTube.
@BigAussieBloke69 Sorry, the video isn't there anymore. But I downloaded it before it went for my project, so I can send it to you via email if you want to see the truth. Unless you're too scared to understand reality.
@BigAussieBloke69 If your post is any indication, the amount of scientific content to be expected is minimal, The production of carbon dioxide and other 'greenhouse gases' - primarily by burning fossil fuels, (composed of carbon sequestered from thousands to billions of years ago), which once extracted and burnt, shift carbon from underground to the atmosphere. No other organism has ever done this, nor have such ancient reserves ever been burnt on this scale.
@BigAussieBloke69 It's better than nothing, but IMO, the Labor response to criticism from the Right has undermined its effectiveness significantly. Ideally, all revenue generated would be funnelled towards emission-reduction schemes, creating what economists call a 'double dividend' and simultaneously rewarding emission-cutters. By shifting away from that, they have undermined its creditability while doing nothing for its opposition.
So many turned out to say YES. All the stoner Uni students and Dole bludgers. The main people, that will be affected were at work. AUSTRALIA SAID NO. Gillard said there wouldn't be a CARBON TAX. Gillard got in for 1 reason only. The NBN, build that and LEAVE, take the sell out Greg Combat with you, Peter Garret and be sure to make sure Wayne Swan never has a chance of stuffing this country more. Second thoughts, hire a bus and fill it with the Labour party and Greens and drive off a cliff.
These are the same people who think humans are also bad for the enviroment... just wait till they start talking about shooting people for farting too much gas
Lets have an election and really see what Australia thinks!
My guess would be labour losing seats all over the country and all seats in QLD except Rudd's. Labour ousted for many years. Fair justice for lying to the Australian public and attempting to enforce a idiotic TAX upon us.
So if as the aust gov advise 29% of Oz carbon emissions are made by house holds, and 25% are made by big business WHO MAKES THE largest single portion 46%. Why is the fed gov Education Investment Fund web site NOT allowing access to CCS link? Could it be because CARBON CAPTURE is a pipe dream? WHY THE HELL should we fund LIMA treaty protected manufacturing countries? Let those countries lead the way! We dont make anything here any more, to create CARBON!
its all part of a big globel scam layed out to control us ,our industry food every thing .you will not be able to fart with out paying tax. farmers have to pay for there cows farting gas. gillard will be there with her hand out .lol its true ,
@450hp202turbo So you say its ok to pollute the air you breath that keeps you alive..? Also Isnt it time to change to a cleanner option, We need tho's Hybrids on our roads as for a hybrid you get more power from such less use of fuels plus every one job that lost another 2 more are build by renewable energy. So YOU say its a scam? Well i guess you no nothing about the carbon tax beside been brain washed by the media that are 2 faced kunts.
that is why i think its a scam. the other countrys keep pumping carbon out ,
we sell it to them why do you fools feel that this will change weather .or help in so many years to come
this needs to be world wide . for me to vote yes. not say yes . mandate the carbon tax you dictator gillard and then you will get your answer , but NO she would rather wast money on brain washing you fools.
Australia supplies China with the coal to fire 100 chinese coal fired power stations. Ausralia supplies 50% of the international steel industry with coal to produce steel. The chilean volcano spewed so much carbon dioxide in only 4 days of erupting that it totally negated everything we have ever done.
Why.......why is nobody bringing up these subjects? all of you are fools that is why , carbon tax lol money grab ,
humans account for 4% of co2 emissions the rest is natural,the sun is causing this "global warming"
what the tree huggers wont tell you is that every other planet in the solar system is warming so how are suv's and coal fired power staions causing this?!?
Wake up hippies!! if they get this tax through it will only go up & up!!.
it has already ruined NZ! dont let them fool you!!
Only those who agree turned up! Heres an idea, hold the tax until the NEXT election, then ask the WHOLE nation to vote based on this TAX! Guess what I bet Labor & the greens will BLOCK that idea!
@beamla coal power is cheap and always will be attractive for energy companies but you must realise they are not gonna stop using coal energy just because they have to pay some hill billy tax , they will just charge families more which will just put more pressure on them and the government isn't compensating for electricity bills
@UBAasain The story is about morals if you are selling something and you are saying that thing is bad and u should stop it shouldn't u stop selling it as well
@FpSAuThority No because we can't turn off coal power tomorrow. But we can transition away from it by making it more expensive. Therefore the alternatives become more attractive- like gas, renewables, energy efficiency etc.
@beamla Wind power has been proven to be useless in modern society where there a huge energy demands at all time. wind doesn't always blow. No wind = no electricity. Solar is useless at night. Geothermal is very good but only in certain places, however huge development of deep, hot, rocks usually results in the area becoming too cold for electricity, tidal power is good, however you have the problem of those perfectly still oceans. Not to mention they are no substitute for coal.
@wolfy9005 Solar thermal with molten salt heat storage can provide baseload power. Efficient combined cycle gas plants can provide power when the wind is not blowing. However, if you have a truly national grid you can harness the wind in one part of the country, when the other part isn't blowing. Geothermal needs more investment (SA is a promising area). All these areas need investment to further bring costs down. That is what a carbon price does, it shifts investment slowly away from coal.
@beamla Yeh there are many good renewable sources for Australia, but the molten salt needs to be kept hot over night, and it becomes a much bigger problem in the winters(temperatures frequently get below 0 celcius in the desert). Geothermal is being investigated out in the desert where there are still economical reserves of hot rocks(however geothermal isn't 100% renewable). don't you think we should give incentive to change the power production, instead of forcing them? it hurts the people more
@wolfy9005 Most of the price rises we have seen so far for electricity are due to the costs of maintaining and upgrading the grid. Governments can do more than one thing at the same time. I think a carbon price in combination with incentives is the best option. Just one or the other is not as effective. Besides who cares if they (the market) get forced (albeit slowly by price)? The alternative is to heavily subsidize the alternatives which would be too expensive and cost taxpayers even more.
@beamla According to the Victorian EPA website, Australia emitted 551.2Mt CO2 in 2000. A 5% reduction is only 27Mt approx. 27Mt for the cost of a large amount of Australian businesses already struggling? I fail to see how wrecking our economy is worth it. If you believe 0.29% of the worlds total emissions will do anything, then you should ask the government to provide better education, don't you think?
@wolfy9005 A 5% reduction on 2000 levels is actually a 25% reduction on 2020 business as usual emissions (if we did nothing to reduce emissions). So it is actually a substantial effort and result as it stops our emissions growing. This talk of 1.5% of the world's emissions as a reason that we shouldn't doing anything is short sighted. The UK emits a similar amount each year. It's also about restructuring the economy so it's on a proper footing to deal with future reductions as required.
@beamla If the UK emits similar amounts as us, then the only logical answer is the fact it has removed most of its industry to other countries. It uses nuclear power. Without import, the UK would have nothing. A collapse of the channel tunnel, a fierce storm, anything like that and people in England would starve by the end of the week. If the sole purpose is to remove our major industries, why don't they just say so?
@wolfy9005 I also don't accept the premise of the question that it will be some pain for no gain. In the short term we get cheap reductions in emissions. In the long term we get our economy restructured to be more energy efficient and more renewable energy. It's way more cost effective in the short and long term to do this ETS than any other scheme. Businesses and families get compensated and we get the economic changes we need.
@beamla I don't want to sound like someone who doesn't want to change, but the only viable option in this day and age, is nuclear power. The recent problem in Japan was always going to happen - a geologically unstable region, prone to huge earthquakes and tsunamis. Australia is geologically sound, has a very low chance of tsunamis, and we have abundant uranium and places to dump it safely. In fact, we have a reactor at Lucas Heights. We could invest in the CANDU system from Canada,
@wolfy9005 Personally, I think we could safely use nuclear energy in Australia but it would never happen politically. People are too scared of nuclear and no politician is going to want a nuclear power plant in their electorate. So that is why I look to renewables which I was at first very skeptical of... but looking at the advances they have made and the potential for further advances and cost reductions it has become a real option. But of course, you can't expect 100% renewables in 5 years.
@beamla People have been fed propaganda against nuclear for a long time. They only see the negatives. With a carbon tax, it will be extremely cost competitive against coal. If we buy the CANDU systems from Canada, we could in fact, accept nuclear waste to be used in our reactors. We could send them a bill for the disposal of it, whilst we are generating electricity with it. The average reactor is $2.5-4 billion, the carbon tax estimates $15 billion in the first year alone.
@wolfy9005 The point of a carbon tax or emissions trading scheme is to let the market decide the cheapest way to reduce emissions, not for the govt to pick one technology. The carbon tax revenue (about $11 billion) will mostly be spent on compensation for consumers and trade exposed businesses so those funds won't be available to build nuclear power. With a market price on carbon maybe nuclear could happen...
@beamla So if they will compensate the consumers and businesses, is there really a point to tax it? In the end Australia is responsible for between 0.1 and 1% of the total global emissions, China emits more than that in 3 weeks than we do in a year. In a 100% efficient combustion, the only by products are CO2 and water vapour
Australia has large hydroelectric systems but the greens are strongly opposed because of "damage" to the environment(a rock fall will do the same thing, and is natural).
@wolfy9005 Yes it doesn't matter that the money gets sent back to consumers and business. The market price for emitting carbon dioxide is raised to ($20-$30) so it still changes the economy over the long term. The scheme will turn into an ETS with a floating carbon price in a couple of years. We have told other countries that we will reduce our emissions by 5% on 2000 levels- we're not going to go back on that. Having an ETS framework makes it easier for future reductions over the decades.
@beamla which is a proven safe nuclear reactor design. It gives us a way to dispose of all of our radioactive waste from conventional fast breeder reactors, which means even less waste is disposed of in the environment. This power type is very safe when all precautions are taken. Chernobyl was an inferior reactor design with incompetent staff. 3 mile island was a mistake with all radiation contained by its own design. The recent one in Japan, as already stated, was always going to happen.
@wolfy9005 I agree that it is unfair to point to Japan as a failure of nuclear power. The moral of the story is don't build nuclear power plants in earthquake or tsunami prone areas. Chernobyl had the worst management and they broke so many safety rules. But before we get ahead of ourselves another barrier against nuclear (apart from unpopularity) is the cost. Australia is way behind on nuclear and we only have one small reactor at Lucas Heights. The cost of building and maintaining the plant..
@beamla average Australian families such as those in New South Whals are already paying though the roof prices for electricity and this carbon tax will just push them higher and there is no comoensation for single earners earning more than 100 k which is not enough to supourt two kid with all of these taxes and rising power bills
@FpSAuThority the compensation package hasn't been released yet so I don't think you can make that judgement. It's not the environment or anyone else's fault that people in Sydney have over extended themselves with huge mortgages.
the price for pollution is too hard on average families and single earners and single carers . At least these people should be exempt from this . A more effective way to stop global warming would be to limit the amount of coal we sell overseas and force big countries like china and India to change there ways instead of taxing Australians . Thumbs up so they can see this
@FpSAuThority what do you know? china and india are doing the most about climate change after germany. what has australia done? if we stop selling coal to other countrys less good than bad will come of it. coal prices will rise and australias economy will shatter. another thing, why should "average" families not have to pay? a tax is a percent of what you earn and this will be on how much electricity you use. the carbon tax is a good thing for the future generations and the planet.
It is retarded to think humans are responsible for climate change when there is evidence of higher levels of CO2(not even a good greenhouse gas), higher temperatures(not really a problem), and much much cooler temperatures(think....-15C over the whole earth).
@wolfy9005 Higher average temperatures effect biodiversity drastically. We can alter our environments, every other living thing can't except by migrating if they can and there is already evidence of that occurring.
@beamla The world has had a constantly evolving and changing climate for the past 2 billion years. To say that we have caused such a huge increase in 100 years is to throw logic out the door and ignore 1,999,999,900 years of climate history. The sun itself causes more heating and cooling of the earth in 1 day than humans are responsible for. CO2 is also a horrible greenhouse gas. Plus, with an abundance of heat and CO2, plants grow faster, thus adsorbing it at a faster rate. Google it.
@wolfy9005 Your arguments have been considered and disproved by the consensus scientific opinion. Of course the climate has changed over millions of years. Scientists are aware of that, they're the people who discovered that fact amongst other things. The sun has been discounted as the cause of the climate change we are seeing presently. The evidence shows that the Earth is not taking up the excess carbon dioxide, and we're making it worse through deforestation.
@wolfy9005 Furthermore, if your theory was correct that the sun was the problem and not the atmospheric gas changes then we would expect to see that excess heat escaping the atmosphere into space. It is not.
Poor bogans, they are so butthurt that the majority of people support the carbon tax.
Spacenoodle 5 months ago
No Carbon Tax
Firefly0100 5 months ago
So you like pollution, I pollute your wall cunts
MrChowTheTroll 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Wow, a bunch of hairy unicorn anal cocksucking fuckfaces trying to run this country, your a bunch of fucking fuckface liers and you have anal sex with all your gay poffta voters......
MrChowTheTroll 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Wow, a bunch of hairy unicorn anal cocksucking fuckfaces trying to run this country, your a bunch of fucking fuckface liers and you have anal sex with all your gay poffta voters......
MrChowTheTroll 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Wow, a bunch of hairy unicorn anal cocksucking fuckfaces trying to run this country, your a bunch of fucking fuckface liers and you have anal sex with all your gay poffta voters......
MrChowTheTroll 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Wow, a bunch of hairy unicorn anal cocksucking fuckfaces trying to run this country, your a bunch of fucking fuckface liers and you have anal sex with all your gay poffta voters......
MrChowTheTroll 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Wow, a bunch of hairy unicorn anal cocksucking fuckfaces trying to run this country, your a bunch of fucking fuckface liers and you have anal sex with all your gay poffta voters......
MrChowTheTroll 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Wow, a bunch of hairy unicorn anal cocksucking fuckfaces trying to run this country, your a bunch of fucking fuckface liers and you have anal sex with all your gay poffta voters......
MrChowTheTroll 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Wow, a bunch of hairy unicorn anal cocksucking fuckfaces trying to run this country, your a bunch of fucking fuckface liers and you have anal sex with all your gay poffta voters......
MrChowTheTroll 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Wow, a bunch of hairy unicorn anal cocksucking fuckfaces trying to run this country, your a bunch of fucking fuckface liers and you have anal sex with all your gay poffta voters......
MrChowTheTroll 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Wow, a bunch of hairy unicorn anal cocksucking fuckfaces trying to run this country, your a bunch of fucking fuckface liers and you have anal sex with all your gay poffta voters......
MrChowTheTroll 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Wow, a bunch of hairy unicorn anal cocksucking fuckfaces trying to run this country, your a bunch of fucking fuckface liers and you have anal sex with all your gay poffta voters......
MrChowTheTroll 5 months ago
No....................................
broosycruise 5 months ago
You forgot to mention that there are more people who are against the carbon tax. It's around 150,000 out of about 21 MILLION Australians.
You're logic works...
BigAussieBloke69 5 months ago
45,000? same additions that generated getups 600,000 "members"?
barracudau 5 months ago
Bullshit I never said YES
unreal22000 6 months ago
Channel 7 is a Labor channel. No surprise that they support Juliar Gillard and her socialist carbon tax. Channel 7 spreading socialist propaganda as usual.
newsnational 6 months ago
@newsnational And you are a what channel? A Liberal channel. Grow up, kids. I see more than one TV station and I also see a total absence of irrefutable logic to back up such a petty and ludicrous statement.
1nown 5 months ago
This was such a wonderful, well organised and fun community day.
I felt so inspired to have seen all these awesome Australians rise above the negativity and rally - after having of course, taken some time to actually understand the meaning of pricing carbon. Because as soon as you really understand it, there's just no way anyone wouldn't not want it!
Say Yes is a phenomenal group and this video has really made my day. "Good on you!" to everyone involved x
perthamy 6 months ago
@perthamy So you understand that all living things on Earth are carbon life forms? That the carbon tax will destroy small business. That there is NO evidence of man made global warming. That if we had a decarbonised planet, it would be Mars? Do you realise that YOU, and ALL of us are going to pay for the carbon tax? Your logic works... I used to be for the carbon tax but know I'm against it after researching it for a year 12 project. Watch "Joane Nova on the 2011 Lord Monckton Tour" on YouTube.
BigAussieBloke69 5 months ago
@BigAussieBloke69 Sorry, the video isn't there anymore. But I downloaded it before it went for my project, so I can send it to you via email if you want to see the truth. Unless you're too scared to understand reality.
BigAussieBloke69 5 months ago
@BigAussieBloke69 If your post is any indication, the amount of scientific content to be expected is minimal, The production of carbon dioxide and other 'greenhouse gases' - primarily by burning fossil fuels, (composed of carbon sequestered from thousands to billions of years ago), which once extracted and burnt, shift carbon from underground to the atmosphere. No other organism has ever done this, nor have such ancient reserves ever been burnt on this scale.
1nown 5 months ago
@1nown Are you for or against the carbon tax?
BigAussieBloke69 5 months ago
@BigAussieBloke69 It's better than nothing, but IMO, the Labor response to criticism from the Right has undermined its effectiveness significantly. Ideally, all revenue generated would be funnelled towards emission-reduction schemes, creating what economists call a 'double dividend' and simultaneously rewarding emission-cutters. By shifting away from that, they have undermined its creditability while doing nothing for its opposition.
1nown 5 months ago
So many turned out to say YES. All the stoner Uni students and Dole bludgers. The main people, that will be affected were at work. AUSTRALIA SAID NO. Gillard said there wouldn't be a CARBON TAX. Gillard got in for 1 reason only. The NBN, build that and LEAVE, take the sell out Greg Combat with you, Peter Garret and be sure to make sure Wayne Swan never has a chance of stuffing this country more. Second thoughts, hire a bus and fill it with the Labour party and Greens and drive off a cliff.
davesstr 6 months ago
Actually, only the spineless one said yes. That being one Juliar Dullard, the installed - not elected - Prime Minister.
Enricom23 6 months ago
Ummmm yeah, Australia said NO.
Next fail corporate political movement please!
MrArtiststouch 6 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
These are the same people who think humans are also bad for the enviroment... just wait till they start talking about shooting people for farting too much gas
jezagee 6 months ago
SayYesAustralia ... haha ... what a joke.
Lets have an election and really see what Australia thinks!
My guess would be labour losing seats all over the country and all seats in QLD except Rudd's. Labour ousted for many years. Fair justice for lying to the Australian public and attempting to enforce a idiotic TAX upon us.
N3tIdiot 6 months ago
SAY NO.
This stupid video says tens of thousands of supporter, where as the other "Say yes Australia" crud ad video says 3 million. Oh the inconsistencies.
MarinersArmsHotel 7 months ago
So if as the aust gov advise 29% of Oz carbon emissions are made by house holds, and 25% are made by big business WHO MAKES THE largest single portion 46%. Why is the fed gov Education Investment Fund web site NOT allowing access to CCS link? Could it be because CARBON CAPTURE is a pipe dream? WHY THE HELL should we fund LIMA treaty protected manufacturing countries? Let those countries lead the way! We dont make anything here any more, to create CARBON!
unreal22000 7 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Some IDIOTS below dont want to see the turning point of Australia's future. If we dont CHANGE now we'll NEVER CHANGE!!
GayBoyRunning 7 months ago
its all part of a big globel scam layed out to control us ,our industry food every thing .you will not be able to fart with out paying tax. farmers have to pay for there cows farting gas. gillard will be there with her hand out .lol its true ,
450hp202turbo 7 months ago
Comment removed
GayBoyRunning 7 months ago
@450hp202turbo Oh to add to the List the Carbon taxt is only target at the Biggest Polluters so dont get ur knickers in a twist. lolz
GayBoyRunning 7 months ago
@GayBoyRunning 1 word FAG,
450hp202turbo 7 months ago
Comment removed
GayBoyRunning 7 months ago
@450hp202turbo 1 word for you mate: Bogan :)
GayBoyRunning 7 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@450hp202turbo So you say its ok to pollute the air you breath that keeps you alive..? Also Isnt it time to change to a cleanner option, We need tho's Hybrids on our roads as for a hybrid you get more power from such less use of fuels plus every one job that lost another 2 more are build by renewable energy. So YOU say its a scam? Well i guess you no nothing about the carbon tax beside been brain washed by the media that are 2 faced kunts.
GayBoyRunning 7 months ago
that is why i think its a scam. the other countrys keep pumping carbon out ,
we sell it to them why do you fools feel that this will change weather .or help in so many years to come
this needs to be world wide . for me to vote yes. not say yes . mandate the carbon tax you dictator gillard and then you will get your answer , but NO she would rather wast money on brain washing you fools.
450hp202turbo 7 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Australia supplies China with the coal to fire 100 chinese coal fired power stations. Ausralia supplies 50% of the international steel industry with coal to produce steel. The chilean volcano spewed so much carbon dioxide in only 4 days of erupting that it totally negated everything we have ever done.
Why.......why is nobody bringing up these subjects? all of you are fools that is why , carbon tax lol money grab ,
450hp202turbo 7 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
humans account for 4% of co2 emissions the rest is natural,the sun is causing this "global warming"
what the tree huggers wont tell you is that every other planet in the solar system is warming so how are suv's and coal fired power staions causing this?!?
Wake up hippies!! if they get this tax through it will only go up & up!!.
it has already ruined NZ! dont let them fool you!!
pheonixrising789 7 months ago
Only those who agree turned up! Heres an idea, hold the tax until the NEXT election, then ask the WHOLE nation to vote based on this TAX! Guess what I bet Labor & the greens will BLOCK that idea!
unreal22000 7 months ago
Ha ha, Michael Caton and Cate Blanchett produce more carbon than 100 normal aussies combined with their big houses, cars and international travel!
fredfunky12 7 months ago 3
In the end this all leads to money
Katkin97 7 months ago
Why dont they put a tax on other sorts of more serious pollution?
aRAUSEr7 8 months ago
@aRAUSEr7 because to target the big polluters 'big mining' individually will not be as successful as an overall scheme!!!
mbrayne01 7 months ago
@beamla coal power is cheap and always will be attractive for energy companies but you must realise they are not gonna stop using coal energy just because they have to pay some hill billy tax , they will just charge families more which will just put more pressure on them and the government isn't compensating for electricity bills
FpSAuThority 8 months ago
@FpSAuThority Families will be compensated. We will move away from coal power over time and national emissions will be reduced.
beamla 8 months ago
:)
chattopj 8 months ago
@UBAasain The story is about morals if you are selling something and you are saying that thing is bad and u should stop it shouldn't u stop selling it as well
FpSAuThority 8 months ago
@FpSAuThority No because we can't turn off coal power tomorrow. But we can transition away from it by making it more expensive. Therefore the alternatives become more attractive- like gas, renewables, energy efficiency etc.
beamla 8 months ago
@beamla Wind power has been proven to be useless in modern society where there a huge energy demands at all time. wind doesn't always blow. No wind = no electricity. Solar is useless at night. Geothermal is very good but only in certain places, however huge development of deep, hot, rocks usually results in the area becoming too cold for electricity, tidal power is good, however you have the problem of those perfectly still oceans. Not to mention they are no substitute for coal.
wolfy9005 8 months ago
@wolfy9005 Solar thermal with molten salt heat storage can provide baseload power. Efficient combined cycle gas plants can provide power when the wind is not blowing. However, if you have a truly national grid you can harness the wind in one part of the country, when the other part isn't blowing. Geothermal needs more investment (SA is a promising area). All these areas need investment to further bring costs down. That is what a carbon price does, it shifts investment slowly away from coal.
beamla 8 months ago
@beamla Yeh there are many good renewable sources for Australia, but the molten salt needs to be kept hot over night, and it becomes a much bigger problem in the winters(temperatures frequently get below 0 celcius in the desert). Geothermal is being investigated out in the desert where there are still economical reserves of hot rocks(however geothermal isn't 100% renewable). don't you think we should give incentive to change the power production, instead of forcing them? it hurts the people more
wolfy9005 8 months ago
@wolfy9005 Most of the price rises we have seen so far for electricity are due to the costs of maintaining and upgrading the grid. Governments can do more than one thing at the same time. I think a carbon price in combination with incentives is the best option. Just one or the other is not as effective. Besides who cares if they (the market) get forced (albeit slowly by price)? The alternative is to heavily subsidize the alternatives which would be too expensive and cost taxpayers even more.
beamla 8 months ago
@beamla According to the Victorian EPA website, Australia emitted 551.2Mt CO2 in 2000. A 5% reduction is only 27Mt approx. 27Mt for the cost of a large amount of Australian businesses already struggling? I fail to see how wrecking our economy is worth it. If you believe 0.29% of the worlds total emissions will do anything, then you should ask the government to provide better education, don't you think?
wolfy9005 8 months ago
@wolfy9005 A 5% reduction on 2000 levels is actually a 25% reduction on 2020 business as usual emissions (if we did nothing to reduce emissions). So it is actually a substantial effort and result as it stops our emissions growing. This talk of 1.5% of the world's emissions as a reason that we shouldn't doing anything is short sighted. The UK emits a similar amount each year. It's also about restructuring the economy so it's on a proper footing to deal with future reductions as required.
beamla 8 months ago
@beamla If the UK emits similar amounts as us, then the only logical answer is the fact it has removed most of its industry to other countries. It uses nuclear power. Without import, the UK would have nothing. A collapse of the channel tunnel, a fierce storm, anything like that and people in England would starve by the end of the week. If the sole purpose is to remove our major industries, why don't they just say so?
wolfy9005 7 months ago
@wolfy9005 I also don't accept the premise of the question that it will be some pain for no gain. In the short term we get cheap reductions in emissions. In the long term we get our economy restructured to be more energy efficient and more renewable energy. It's way more cost effective in the short and long term to do this ETS than any other scheme. Businesses and families get compensated and we get the economic changes we need.
beamla 8 months ago
@wolfy9005 But it is a start
mbrayne01 7 months ago
@beamla I don't want to sound like someone who doesn't want to change, but the only viable option in this day and age, is nuclear power. The recent problem in Japan was always going to happen - a geologically unstable region, prone to huge earthquakes and tsunamis. Australia is geologically sound, has a very low chance of tsunamis, and we have abundant uranium and places to dump it safely. In fact, we have a reactor at Lucas Heights. We could invest in the CANDU system from Canada,
wolfy9005 8 months ago
@wolfy9005 Personally, I think we could safely use nuclear energy in Australia but it would never happen politically. People are too scared of nuclear and no politician is going to want a nuclear power plant in their electorate. So that is why I look to renewables which I was at first very skeptical of... but looking at the advances they have made and the potential for further advances and cost reductions it has become a real option. But of course, you can't expect 100% renewables in 5 years.
beamla 8 months ago
@beamla People have been fed propaganda against nuclear for a long time. They only see the negatives. With a carbon tax, it will be extremely cost competitive against coal. If we buy the CANDU systems from Canada, we could in fact, accept nuclear waste to be used in our reactors. We could send them a bill for the disposal of it, whilst we are generating electricity with it. The average reactor is $2.5-4 billion, the carbon tax estimates $15 billion in the first year alone.
wolfy9005 8 months ago
@wolfy9005 The point of a carbon tax or emissions trading scheme is to let the market decide the cheapest way to reduce emissions, not for the govt to pick one technology. The carbon tax revenue (about $11 billion) will mostly be spent on compensation for consumers and trade exposed businesses so those funds won't be available to build nuclear power. With a market price on carbon maybe nuclear could happen...
beamla 8 months ago
@beamla So if they will compensate the consumers and businesses, is there really a point to tax it? In the end Australia is responsible for between 0.1 and 1% of the total global emissions, China emits more than that in 3 weeks than we do in a year. In a 100% efficient combustion, the only by products are CO2 and water vapour
Australia has large hydroelectric systems but the greens are strongly opposed because of "damage" to the environment(a rock fall will do the same thing, and is natural).
wolfy9005 8 months ago
@wolfy9005 Yes it doesn't matter that the money gets sent back to consumers and business. The market price for emitting carbon dioxide is raised to ($20-$30) so it still changes the economy over the long term. The scheme will turn into an ETS with a floating carbon price in a couple of years. We have told other countries that we will reduce our emissions by 5% on 2000 levels- we're not going to go back on that. Having an ETS framework makes it easier for future reductions over the decades.
beamla 8 months ago
@beamla which is a proven safe nuclear reactor design. It gives us a way to dispose of all of our radioactive waste from conventional fast breeder reactors, which means even less waste is disposed of in the environment. This power type is very safe when all precautions are taken. Chernobyl was an inferior reactor design with incompetent staff. 3 mile island was a mistake with all radiation contained by its own design. The recent one in Japan, as already stated, was always going to happen.
wolfy9005 8 months ago
@wolfy9005 I agree that it is unfair to point to Japan as a failure of nuclear power. The moral of the story is don't build nuclear power plants in earthquake or tsunami prone areas. Chernobyl had the worst management and they broke so many safety rules. But before we get ahead of ourselves another barrier against nuclear (apart from unpopularity) is the cost. Australia is way behind on nuclear and we only have one small reactor at Lucas Heights. The cost of building and maintaining the plant..
beamla 8 months ago
@beamla average Australian families such as those in New South Whals are already paying though the roof prices for electricity and this carbon tax will just push them higher and there is no comoensation for single earners earning more than 100 k which is not enough to supourt two kid with all of these taxes and rising power bills
FpSAuThority 8 months ago
@FpSAuThority the compensation package hasn't been released yet so I don't think you can make that judgement. It's not the environment or anyone else's fault that people in Sydney have over extended themselves with huge mortgages.
beamla 8 months ago
Great video! Yes to renewable energy and to action on climate change.
beamla 8 months ago
what a load of shit
Renegade30 8 months ago
@insanic1 what if u were one of the 1000 people and u had a family to support then what would you say
FpSAuThority 8 months ago
the price for pollution is too hard on average families and single earners and single carers . At least these people should be exempt from this . A more effective way to stop global warming would be to limit the amount of coal we sell overseas and force big countries like china and India to change there ways instead of taxing Australians . Thumbs up so they can see this
FpSAuThority 8 months ago
@FpSAuThority what do you know? china and india are doing the most about climate change after germany. what has australia done? if we stop selling coal to other countrys less good than bad will come of it. coal prices will rise and australias economy will shatter. another thing, why should "average" families not have to pay? a tax is a percent of what you earn and this will be on how much electricity you use. the carbon tax is a good thing for the future generations and the planet.
UBAasain 8 months ago
@FpSAuThority That is why average families will be compensated.
beamla 8 months ago
Is it true many of the big mining industries companies have already negotiated to be exempt from carbon tax?
casmayhew 8 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Covering a whole room in Post-it notes!!!
/watch?v=zt2UM5mcatE
ChallengeExpected 8 months ago
those 1000 people are the tiny radical fraction of australia. Dont be fooled
insanic1 8 months ago
Carbon tax is a scam, anyone who supports it is an uninformed retard
hardstyledisco 8 months ago
@hardstyledisco and what's your conspiracy theory
keliand 8 months ago
I only accept anything proposed by our liberal party !
Boxerk333 8 months ago 2
Who said 'Yes'? 45,000 people (allegedly), a few superannuated politicans', a collective of celebrities, and a bevy of self important wankers'.
What about the other 22,000,000+ inhabitants of this country?
This little black duck says: NO to a Carbon Dioxide Tax!
OzDelphi 8 months ago
Awesome video! Yes to renewable energy!
beamla 8 months ago
@beamla
Yes to jobs being shifted overseas.
kingmafi6699 8 months ago
@kingmafi6699 Yes to compensation for trade exposed industries.
beamla 8 months ago
Australia says no.
beefking69er 8 months ago
It is retarded to think humans are responsible for climate change when there is evidence of higher levels of CO2(not even a good greenhouse gas), higher temperatures(not really a problem), and much much cooler temperatures(think....-15C over the whole earth).
wolfy9005 8 months ago
@wolfy9005 you are a fucking idiot.
UBAasain 8 months ago
@wolfy9005 Higher average temperatures effect biodiversity drastically. We can alter our environments, every other living thing can't except by migrating if they can and there is already evidence of that occurring.
beamla 8 months ago
@beamla The world has had a constantly evolving and changing climate for the past 2 billion years. To say that we have caused such a huge increase in 100 years is to throw logic out the door and ignore 1,999,999,900 years of climate history. The sun itself causes more heating and cooling of the earth in 1 day than humans are responsible for. CO2 is also a horrible greenhouse gas. Plus, with an abundance of heat and CO2, plants grow faster, thus adsorbing it at a faster rate. Google it.
wolfy9005 8 months ago
@wolfy9005 Your arguments have been considered and disproved by the consensus scientific opinion. Of course the climate has changed over millions of years. Scientists are aware of that, they're the people who discovered that fact amongst other things. The sun has been discounted as the cause of the climate change we are seeing presently. The evidence shows that the Earth is not taking up the excess carbon dioxide, and we're making it worse through deforestation.
beamla 8 months ago
@wolfy9005 Furthermore, if your theory was correct that the sun was the problem and not the atmospheric gas changes then we would expect to see that excess heat escaping the atmosphere into space. It is not.
beamla 8 months ago
Share with family and friends, its the less we can do for future generations..
I am very proud of this crusade..
2011baires 8 months ago