MTNTOUGH - Use promo code RANDY for 30 days free

Carbon tax - Solution or political agenda?

I think the argument revolves around the bolded word. Would it?
I can point specifically to tangible pieces of ground and specific access projects and individual elk that have been put in specific people’s freezers and provided x amount of protein as a direct result of PR/DJ

Convince me. Give me the formula of tax revenues correlation to mean global temperature.
That’s where I’m skeptical. If x amount of carbon tax will benefit us y amount to make hunting z much better isn’t x^2 or x^4 even more superior?

You can point to examples of PR and DJ because they already exist. If the carbon tax existed on the scale they intend it to, there may (or may not) be examples to point to for that as well. at this point it's speculation.

My original post was suggesting it would hinder warming because there would be a reduction in carbon emissions. of course, this is because I am of the opinion that people would reduce their use of fossil fuels because of the increased cost. I'm sure there are examples to both support and counter this opinion, that's just how I think it will go.

Your argument I think is on the other side. that is, the extra revenue brought in for those continuing to use fossil fuels. I have not heard if that revenue would go to offsetting the destruction that the warming planet is causing, or if it will go to some other government program, etc. that will have no impact. I hope the latter isnt the case.
 
You might want to read this link if you truly want to understand why energy costs are so high in Austrailia.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/arti...ustralia-ended-up-with-world-s-priciest-power

Power prices in australia are a big ticket item, talked about a lot in our media and far more nuanced than one american article would like to believe. We're currently under a liberal government (our right wing party) and they love to bash renewable in favour of coal. Before turnbull overthrew Abbott, once he ran out of ideas for bashing renewable energy he said "well wind farms are just an eyesore".

For what it's worth we had a carbon tax in aus, it didn't do anything other than increase people's bills so it was axed.
 
Last edited:
I think that some sort of tax is the basic economic solution to the problem. Perhaps offset by lowering other taxes particularly on people who spend a large portion of their income on energy (poor people, lower middle class).

I think there is an additional political solution of adopting policies that reduce carbon output fairly and with more clarity and certainty. Many corporations would actually welcome evenly applied environmental regulation but uncertainty in regards to this regulation leads to lower investment in environmentally strong practices.

There are further diplomatic issues with some production offshoring to escape regulation. I think this is real but could easily be exaggerated. There are many things companies consider when they locate and carbon taxes are likely to be reasonably small if economically supported. However, China has been more willing to compromise with its recent air quality issues and increase its own efforts. This could be exploited a lot more.

Good discussion.
 
You can point to examples of PR and DJ because they already exist. If the carbon tax existed on the scale they intend it to, there may (or may not) be examples to point to for that as well. at this point it's speculation.

My original post was suggesting it would hinder warming because there would be a reduction in carbon emissions. of course, this is because I am of the opinion that people would reduce their use of fossil fuels because of the increased cost. I'm sure there are examples to both support and counter this opinion, that's just how I think it will go.

Your argument I think is on the other side. that is, the extra revenue brought in for those continuing to use fossil fuels. I have not heard if that revenue would go to offsetting the destruction that the warming planet is causing, or if it will go to some other government program, etc. that will have no impact. I hope the latter isnt the case.

Here is an example of what the carbon offset fees are being used for in California. If used properly, it can finnance beneficial projects. It also purposely raises the price of energy, and could easily lead to corrupt political distribution.

https://www.nature.org/magazine/archives/carbon-cache.xml
 
"It is not too much to expect that our children will enjoy in their homes electrical energy too cheap to meter"

Lewis Strauss

"I want our people to know that these provisions are designed eventually to relieve the taxpayer of the enormous cost of the commercial aspects of the enterprise, while fully protecting the public interest in atomic energy."

Dwight Eisenhower

Both quotes from 1954

Remember when nuclear energy was going to solve all of our problems.


Government makes up problems and pretends to come up with solutions for the made up problems (actual problems and solutions need not apply). Generally the solutions end up costing the citizen through taxes, fines, fees and licences. Remember companies DO NOT PAY TAXES. This grows the government. More government=more made up problems=more taxes=more government...

The earth will be fine without "renewable energy". I'd be a lot more comfortable paying a lot less taxes.
 
Here is an example of a more carbon neutral energy source that I would like to see more of. Technology is sound, but the economics need to be improved upon. Smart people are working on the economics as we speak.

https://youtu.be/6kQoHpNJh8g

Western Reserach in Laramie tried that a while back and could not make it work financially. They called it Cowboy Coal but from that research equipment was created that could turn wood into biochar. I have seen others, one recently who shipped round pieces of charcoal in pipelines which was intersting. Hopefully one of these will make sense one day as we certainly have a lot of bimass in this country.

Replacing coal with biomass makes a lot of sense in the mountain west but if we really want to remove carbon from the atmosphere biochar is one option. We heat our home/shop with wood chips which were headed for the landfill, and create heat and biochar as a waste product.
 
We put a man on the moon yet we cant produce a CO2 sorbent or catalyst? Of course we can and we should.
 

Forum statistics

Threads
111,103
Messages
1,947,076
Members
35,027
Latest member
Debbry64
Back
Top