According to the Australian Federal Government Treasury modelling the introduction of a carbon tax will reduce Australia’s National Income. How much will it be decreased by over the 38 years to 2050?
The Treasury modelling predicts that GDP (Gross Domestic Product) will be 2.8 per cent lower in 2050 than it would have been without a carbon tax. Doesn’t seem much, only 2.8%? Well try adding the reduction in GDP over the 38 years and you get $1.35 trillion dollars.
That is what it will cost Australians over the next 38 years more than one trillion dollars in lost income.
Imagine how many hospitals, roads and schools could be built over the next 38 years with that $1.38 trillion dollars?
The Indian State of Andhra Pradesh is in the process of installing 37 coal-powered power stations over the next few years. The capacity of these extra 37 coal-fired power stations is 56GW, which compares with Australia’s total installed electricity capacity of 57GW. As an example, just one coal-fired power station at Krishnapatnam is under construction which will have a capacity of 4000MW. This compares with Victoria’s Hazelwood coal-fired power station which supplies 25% of Victoria’sÂ power and has a capacity of just 1600MW.
So the Federal Labor/Green alliance government is going to use hundreds of millions of dollars of Australian taxpayers money to close down Hazelwood power station. At the same time in India, just one (of many) Indian states is building a new coal-fired power station with twice the installed capacity of Hazelwood, as well as dozens more coal-fired power stations.
So closing down Hazelwood is going to stop Climate Change?
Hazelwood Power Station soon to be replaced by an even bigger coal fired power station in India
You will not find the head of the Climate Commission Professor Tim Flannery mentioning this, because he prefers scaremongering high sea levels that are above the IPCC estimates. You will not hear Malcolm Turnbull mentioning this as he wants to respect the scienceÂ and ignore â€œless reliable”Â scientists that do not fit in with his carefully self-selected science. You will not hear Prime Minister Julia Gllard mentioning this, because for her the science is settled.
However a recent paper shows that Australian sea-level rise has been slowing between 1940-2000. The difference with this research is that it uses real tide-gauges rather than computer models predicting sea level increases. Another study had previously shown thatÂ “Extending the sea level record back over the entire century suggests that the high variability in the rates of sea level change observed over the past 20 years were not particularly unusual”.
Treasury modelling shows coal production drops by 30% by 2020
Prime Minister Julia Gillard and Treasurer Wayne Swan might keep saying that the coal industry has a bright future, but the Treasury economic modelling shows a different story.
Wayne Swan said only two days ago that “Australia was going to be exporting more coal”.Â That way the Chinese can burn it in their power stations instead of ours.
Perhaps Treasurer Swan should read some of his departments economic modelling. To quote from the Treasury modellingÂ “In 2020, coal mining output is around 30 per cent lower than it would otherwise be” .
Looking at the attached graph it shows even greater variability, with a possible drop of up to 45% in coal production:
The latest carbon ad, paid for again by the Australian taxpayer to further ‘educate’ us about renewable energy.
This advertisement features Geodynamics, a renewable energy company that has spend the last ten years trying to develop geothermal energy production near Innamincka in northern South Australia.
How many Megawatts has Geodynamics produced in electricity?
Geodynamics has spent ten years spruiking its grand plans. This Greens/Labor Government ad states that 10 percent of Australia’s power could come from geothermal, yet in ten years with ten of millions of dollars of government subsidy Geodynamics has produced not one watt of power.
Geodynamics got its first $5 million government subsidy in 2005. In April 2007 Geodynamics chief executive Adrian Williams said that by 2010 they would be provide some power into the grid, so far zero.Â In November 2009 Geodynamics was awarded $150 from theÂ Renewable Energy Demonstration Program (REDP), still no power.
In October 2008 Geodynamics announced it would provide a demonstration plant and provide power to the town of Innamincka, population 12, by early 2009.Â Now this is the company that this Labor Government advertisement is pushing as potentially providing ten percent of Australia’s base-load power. Have they managed to power the 12 people people in Innamincka in the following almost three years?
Australian Prime Minister Julia Gillard has mentioned several times in the last week that former Prime Minister John Howard took an Emissions Trading Scheme (ETS) to the 2007 election. Here John Howard is interviewed by ABC carbon tax supporter Barrie Cassidy , and refutes Julia Gillard. John Howard says Australia should not move ahead of the world with a carbon tax:
Followed by former Liberal Treasurer Peter Costello on the Bolt Report who argues that Australia should not throw away its natural advantages by legislating a carbon tax. Costello says “This is all about taking away a natural advantage of Australia” and “weâ€™re paying someone else for the right to use our own coal”
A new coal mine in China, in Xinjiang Uygur being developed by Peabody Energy will produce almost as much CO2 as the CO2 emissions saved by Australia’s Carbon Tax.
Peabody Energy Corporation are to develop an open cut coal mine that will produce 50 million tonnes per year of coal. This coal burnt in power stations (or anywhere else) could produce up to 142 million tonnes of CO2 annually. (the exact amount depends on the type of coal). Thats 142 million tonnes per year of extra CO2 from just one coal mine, versus the 160 million tonnes saved with an Australian Carbon Tax.
Of course the Greens want to close down Australian coal mines.
Just one coal mine in China wipes out the efforts in Australia costing billions of dollars and hurting millions of Australians.
142 million tonnes of CO2 per annum from just one coal mine in China
Treasury projection 2050 Carbon Price of $131 to $275 per tonne
Prime Minister Julia Gillard likes to tell the Australia people that the carbon tax will have only a small impact on them. However its only the beginning.
The treasury projections for 2050 are in real terms (discounted for inflation) from a minimum of $131 per tonne to a maximum of $275 per tonne. Of course the carbon tax will be hidden as an Emissions Trading Scheme (ETS) by then, but it will still be a tax on Australian industry and people.
Imagine if a $23 per tonne carbon tax causes a 10% increase in power prices (although the NSW government says it will be 20%), what will a $275 carbon tax, ten times larger do to electricity prices?
Imagine what a carbon price on petrol and diesel, which the greens want to introduce, will do to fuel prices at a carbon tax of $275 per tonne?
Australian Prime Minister Julia Gillard is confronted by a real voter who questions her on her lie before the election where she claimed ” There will be no carbon tax under the government I lead”. This lie gave the Labor Party the chance to slip into government. Julia Gillard still denies she lied in this exchange, she does not understand the anger:
â€œWhy did you lie to us?â€
â€œAnd why are you continuing to lie and say, â€˜Well, I didnâ€™t really mean to lieâ€™?…â€
â€œIâ€™ve listened to you for months, Iâ€™ve watched Parliament – and you are still lying”â€¦
â€œI heard you on Q and A. I heard you for over a year. The thing that sticks in my craw is that you stood up and said there will be no carbon tax. And a few months later.,. youâ€™ve changed your mind.â€
Prime Minister Julia Gillard and Greens leader Bob Brown don’t want to point this out, but under the Carbon Tax – according to the governments own treasury modelling -the amount of Carbon Dioxide “Pollution” emitted by Australia as a whole will increase by 2020.
Current Greenhouse gas emissions are at 578 million tonnes of CO2.
In 2020 even with a carbon tax they will be 621 million tonnes of CO2.
But then it gets better. In 2050 after 38 years of a carbon tax followed by an emissions trading scheme Australia’s CO2 emissions will be 545 million tonnes, just 5% less then what they are today.
If the Great Barrier Reef and Kakadu are under risk today because of dangerous climate change, how are they going to be better off in 38 years time with almost the same level of CO2 output?
Only 5% less carbon output after 38 years of carbon tax and ETS
Australia will be the first country in the world to have an economy wide carbon tax. Even though Australia produces 1.32% of the worlds carbon dioxide output, we will be punishing our industry and people with a carbon tax.
And to meet the target of 160 Million tonnes of carbon dioxide, we will not be reducing our own emissions, we will achieve two thirds of it by sending $3.7 billion dollars per year overseas to buy permits.
So how does our 160 million tonnes reduction compare to China’s annual production of CO2? China produces 7,031 million tonnes of CO2 per annum. Thats 2.2 per cent of Chinas output. So if China increases it output by the same amount it did in 2010, by ten percent, the 160 million tonnes of Carbon Dioxide saved by Australia will be replaced by China in 3 months.
Billions of dollars in extra burdens on Australian workers, industry and consumers to be replaced by China in three months.
Chines coal fired power station, replacing Australian carbon abatement
Norway introduced a carbon tax in 1991. It was set at $US65 per tonne. The carbon tax was placed on fossil fuels, and applied to petrol and diesel. As a result of the carbon tax, Norway has the most expensive fuel in Europe. While the current price for unleaded petrol in Australia is $1.35 per litre, in Norway fuel is $2.45 per litre. Diesel is only slightly cheaper.
So what has a carbon tax done for Norway’s CO2 emissions over the twenty years it has had a carbon tax? CO2 emissions have gone up in Norway by !5% per capita.
All the economists in Australia who have lined up behind the Labor Federal governments carbon tax say it will cause real world changes in behaviour and reduce CO2 production. However as we know economists get it wrong most of the time, and Norway is an example of where, despite the introduction of a carbon tax, it has not changed behaviour, and not dropped the production of CO2.
Norway does not have to worry about a carbon tax on its electricity production, as 98% of its power comes from Hydro.
The Gillard Labor government has dropped fuel out of the carbon tax, so the burden of reducing emissions goes onto an even smaller number of industries, making the pain for those industries even more severe.
20 years of punishing themselves with a carbon tax and Norway produces even more CO2
The Greens have already said they want to close down the coal industry and stop the export of coal. They also want to close down the brown coal power stations in the Latrobe Valley effectively closing down the brown coal industry in Victoria.
The latest is that the Greens are happy for the Carbon Tax to result in One Steel in WhyallaÂ closing down,Â a town where 4000 of its 22,000 people are employed by One Steel.Â Greens Senator Sarah Hanson-Young wants Whyalla to magically become a high capacity wind generator manufacturer, which no one else does in Australia. In fact more and more of the manufacture of wind turbines happens in China.Â Senator Hansen-Young wants Eyre Peninsular covered in wind farms even through there is growing opposition to wind farms in South Australia.
The Greens solution to losing 4000 jobs in Whyalla because of the Carbon Tax
While the Gillard Government and the multiparty committee on Climate Change plot to tax Australians with a Carbon Tax, the Sun is doing something completely different. The Federal Government and its trained Climate Change Commission like to deny any link between the suns activity and global temperatures. However the Maunder Minimum of low sunspot numbers between 1645 and 1715 coincided with the coldest part of the Little Ice Age.Â This included the very cold winter of 1708-09 when hundreds of thousands of people died from famine and cold.
Three papers were released this week at the American Astronomical Society meeting in New Mexico USA. “The solar cycle may be going into a hiatus,” Frank Hill, associate director of the National Solar Observatory’s Solar Synoptic Network, he also said “If we are right, this could be the last solar maximum we’ll see for a few decades, that would affect everything from space exploration to Earth’s climate.”
The Australian Federal Governments Climate Change Commission says all the science is settled. Really? When the solar physicists have no idea what these changes mean for the sun?
The Earth would be a frozen ball of ice without the sun.
Will we end up getting Climate Change refugees from a frozen Tasmania heading north to warmer climes?
The Climate Commission headed by Professor Tim Flannery is not making much headway with its support of its employers carbon tax, the Federal Government Labor/Green alliance.Â So today Tim Flannery is spruiking the Department of Climate Change report Climate Change Risks to Australia’s Coasts. It made the South Australian news as Tim Flannery and his Climate Commission are visiting the incredibility unpopular Premier Mike Rann, who is working hard to make sure South Australians pay even more for electricity.
The report is claiming 43,000 houses in South Australia will be under water before the end of the century.
The problem is the Australian public is not listening. So what to do? Lets fall back on what we have been doing for the last 20 years, lets scare-monger. Lets make the future even more horrible. Lets find the worst possible scenario and build on that. Its got to scare people into seeing sense, doesn’t it?.
Here is are example from the report on South Australia.Â The upper end of the IPCC projection for sea level change for 2100 is 79 cms. However it could be as low as 20cms. However that’s not very scary is it? How can we improve on that?
Well you make it even higher and project it up to 1.1 metres, and then do your damage assessment on that projection way past the highest sea level IPCC projection.
Now that’s sounds much scarier doesn’t it?
Its just the continuation of the last 20years. If people don’t think the way we want them to, lets just keep inventing even scarier scenarios….
Will the Adelaide CBD look like this projection of New York in 100 years?
The Australian Broadcasting Commission (ABC) gets a chance, on a slow news day on Sunday, to push its pro-carbon tax line. The article (with no byline other than ABC/AAP) reports in excited terms about the pro-carbon tax rallys in Australia Capital cities. The ABC had no problems quoting Don Henry head of the Australian Conservation Foundation (ACF) saying that because 10,000 rent-a-crowd protesters turned out in Melbourne (only 2000 in Brisbane) then that showed that the majority of people supported action on climate change. Really?
Its so disappointing for the ABC’s pro-carbon tax agenda when the next day the Daily Telegraph posts a story showing that 75% of people surveyedÂ thought the carbon tax would do nothing to help the environment, and 64 percent of those surveyed wanted a new election, because they believed Prime Minister Julia Gillard had no mandate for a carbon tax.Â Especially when she promised before the election not to have a carbon tax.
A chance for the excited ABC to push its pro carbon tax agenda
Update: Fran Kelly on ABC Insiders 19th June says “I am firmly of the view that there should be a price on carbon”. Is there no surprise that the ABC pushes a pro-carbon tax line?