A Solar Alternative

Environmentally concerned or just plain Wealth Redistribution?

2011-06-15T14:02:00.001-07:00

The Govt is not interested in whether Climate Change is man made or not, they have no intention beyond wealth redistribution through unjust taxing of middle and higher income earners.

Australia's population in 2009 was 21,874,900.

There were 12,500,000 registered personal Income Tax earners in 2008/2009

1,107,000 of the registered taxpayers who earned $80,000+ a year so would be liable for the full Carbon Tax with no compensation.

They paid $86,698,150,000 in taxation for this year.

There were 11,193,000 registered taxpayers who earned less than $80,000 and therefore will be given some compensation for the Carbon Tax.

They paid $90,236,850,000 in tax for this year.

Besides what business will be forced to pay, the 1,107,000 taxpayers that earn above $80,000 a year will pay the full Carbon Tax and will be having to contribute to compensating business and the 11,193,000 taxpayers who earn less than $80,000.

These figures were collated from data available through ATO for the 2009 year.

The diagram above shows Income Tax is already the single biggest revenue for the Government and still they continue to tax us more and more.

This has to be considered ridiculous in anyone's language, especially when the Government continually emphasise the tax is aimed at the biggest polluters in the country, well personally,

I don't even smoke, but I guess I am still guilty of breathing.

Environmentally concerned or just plain Wealth Redistribution?

2011-06-15T14:02:00.000-07:00

There were 12,500,000 registered personal Income Tax earners in 2008/2009

1,107,000 of the registered taxpayers who earned $80,000+ a year so would be liable for the full Carbon Tax with no compensation.

They paid $86,698,150,000 in taxation for this year.

There were 11,193,000 registered taxpayers who earned less than $80,000 and therefore will be given some compensation for the Carbon Tax.

They paid $90,236,850,000 in tax for this year.

These figures were collated from data available through ATO for the 2009 year.

The diagram above shows Income Tax is already the single biggest revenue for the Government and still they continue to tax us more and more.

This has to be considered ridiculous in anyone's language, especially when the Government continually emphasise the tax is aimed at the biggest polluters in the country, well personally,

I don't even smoke, but I guess I am still guilty of breathing.

Terms of Reference for Garnaut update

2011-06-05T20:02:00.000-07:00

I GREG COMBET, Minister for Climate Change and Energy Efficiency, hereby commission Professor Ross Garnaut to update significant elements of his 2008 Garnaut Climate Change Review ('the 2008 Review'), and to report by 31 May 2011.

The review update will update elements of the Climate Change Review where:

significant changes have occurred, or the sum of expert knowledge has increased, since the original analysis for the 2008 Review was undertaken; and
where such changes or improvements in expert knowledge could have significant implications for the key findings and recommendations of the 2008 Review, such that they should be updated.

The Review Update should consider:

international developments on climate change mitigation efforts;
developments in climate change science, and understanding of climate change impacts;
previous proposals to develop a carbon price in Australia, and the ensuing public debate;
domestic and international emissions trends;
changes in low emissions technology costs and availability;
the potential for abatement within the land sector; and
developments in the Australian electricity market.

Throughout the Review Update, consultation with key stakeholders will be required to understand views and inform analysis.

A series of publicly released papers is to be prepared between November 2010 and March 2011. A final report is to be presented to the Government by 31 May 2011.

The Report will embody the independent judgments of its author.

It appears the issues in the Terms of Reference aren't really important, like India 's Carbon Pricing, USA not resigning with the Kyoto agreement and one of their states actually dismantling a similar Carbon Tax policy as being too hard on the people.

The significant developments in Climate Change science debunking the man made alarmists theory is also not only not addressed, they went as far as deciding to ignore the science??? This goes on and on, and these Terms of Reference shows Combet and Garnaut ignore the process and makes it up as they go along

Middle and lower income earners are insignificant to the overpaid Greens and Labor Ministers

2011-05-30T12:46:00.000-07:00

Cornered on the fact that he wants to destroy the coal industry, Brown tried a denial. Then Uhlmann read out quotes from Brown: "Australia must urgently kick the coal habit" and the government must "commit to a plan to phase out coal exports". Brown smoothly changed tack.

Brown: "Sorry Chris, but Treasury has no intention of shutting the (coal) industry down."

Uhlmann: "No, but you do."

Brown: "No, I'm not ... "

Uhlmann: "Didn't you say, in 2007, that we have to 'kick the coal habit'?"

Brown: "No, I did not. You're looking at the Murdoch press where I said back in 2007 we should look at coal exports with a view to phasing them out down the line."

Uhlmann: "It wasn't the Murdoch press, it was a comment piece you wrote. So you want to phase out the coal industry?"

Brown: "The world is going to do that because it is causing massive economic damage through the impact of climate change."

Uhlmann: "But the simple question is, how would you replace the $50 million a year in export income that comes by way of coal, an industry that you'd shut down?"

Brown: "You go to renewables."

What Brown didn't say, but which his offsiders revealed this week, is the crippling cost of replacing coal.

These are the people with whom Julia Gillard has chosen to share power.

This is easy for The Greens to say, forgetting the issue that the MP and Senators are earning good money, at least 4 of these are professionals.

Bob Brown - TAS - Bachelor of Medicine and Surgery degree. One way or another he will not get hurt by a Carbon Tax.

Richard Di Natale - Vic - Masters in Public Health, a Masters in Health Sciences and is a Fellow of the Australian Faculty of Public Health Medicine. - Well he isn't going to be hurt with a Carbon Tax either.

Penny Wright - SA - She spent 20 years working as a lawyer. - No problem dealing with a Carbon Tax

Larissa Waters - Qld - Waters works as an Environmental Lawyer in a private firm - another Lawyer who will not be particularly affected by the Carbon Tax.

Adam Bandt - Vic - Prior to his election to parliament, Bandt was an industrial, labor relations and public interest lawyer living in Parkville. He was a partner at Slater and Gordon and is currently completing his PhD in law and politics from Monash University. His PhD thesis was "Work to Rule: Rethinking Marx, Pashukanis and Law". [3] At Murdoch University, Bandt was a student activist and member of the Left Alliance. At that time he has been quoted as calling the Greens a "bourgeois" party. - He wouldn't notice the Carbon Tax and recognises it will help to kill off the Middle Income class of people.

These Upper class Greens that insist on hitting us hard with a Carbon Tax can afford to say this, they are not the ones that will be hurt by it. This is the case for many of those that support this tax, most on good upper income wages. They do not care that the Middle income earners will be in a world of pain and IF the lower income earners really do receive compensation they will not be compensated for the increase in prices as the cost of living raises across the board.

The Watermelon republic

2011-05-28T00:47:00.000-07:00

Link

This story in The Australian of 28 May 2011http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/baby-boom-to-baby-... claims the modern demographic means the baby boomer years have meant we have too many people retiring and not enough 15 year olds entering job market. The trouble with this is they always want a quick fix to help fudge their numbers and so this goes around and around.

Under this Government, it does not make it worthwhile for people to strive to reach the next level of pay for they know they will be far worse off with this Governments attempts to kill off the middle class through taxation, known as equalization . They want 2 Classes the Party and the workers.....hmmmm sounds like Communism doesn't it? If people were able to afford to retire self funded we would have a far greater spread of retirees and it would not create as big an issue. The Government is now forcing 15 year olds to remain in school until later and this inflates this ratio even more. They are even going to force young mothers to abandon their 6 month old babies and return to education, this will not help us to teach youth to be more nurturing though, it will tell them they can leave their child and get on with whatever they like as, the Government has insisted the bond be broken

Skilled immigration levels were always increased or decreased depending on Australia's needs and this should still be maintained, however, the rate we are attracting an unwanted element of people willing to enter Australia regardless of the law, we will need to increase the police force to counter the unlawful element of society thanks to a closed minded Government, unless this Government want to import these as well to increase police numbers?

I know I am sick of this Government and their need to destroy Australian society so they can continue to mould us into a Communist state. This Parliament was formed on lies, bribery and threat, and will stop at nothing to achieve their purpose They assassinated their own PM and then sent his body around, so far, 384,000 kms of the world to avoid the embarrassment. They have refused to take action on asylum seeker arrivals, with the only concession being to enter an agreement that will mean we get rid of 800 and receive 4000, they are building workforce through immigration. They have opened their arms to China and invited their military to enter Australian waters any time.

We can only speculate where this will end, but remember the PM is a self confessed Communist, at least 3 of the Greens, 1 in the Lower House and 2 in the Senate are self confessed Communists, and these people wield the most power in Australian politics, so call me paranoid, but be warned as our rights and way of life is being stripped away from under us, and they don't care what the public are saying.

A special Event

2011-05-16T00:51:00.000-07:00

On the weekend a very special gathering occurred, no it was not a family reunion, not was it the opening of a bridge, or hospital. This gathering was far more spectacular you see over 2000 people gathered at Port Macquarie to have their say and let their local member know, they are angry the man they elected has betrayed them all. You see they voted for an Independent, who was easily turned by the Gillard Government and supports a Carbon Tax. This Independent, has listened and learnt from this PM as he freely says everyone knew he was for a Carbon Tax, but thought a ETS was the best. Well after doing research he had NEVER mentioned a Carbon Tax, although he had shown a support for an ETS, these 2 items are not one in the same and the Carbon Tax will hurt every family member in Australia, and Gillard used the ETS as her way of disposing of KRudd,. He also believed in better internet speeds for regional areas, and even though the cost to Australia far out weighed it's usefulness he supported Gillard's NBN, the proof of what this is like is in in it's management.

This could have been accepted and he been forgiven had he said when the Government policies started to fall apart, and the NBN increase in cost by $20 odd billion with no realistic expectation it would fulfil it's promise, ENOUGH I am withdrawing my support for this Government and will see us go to the next election and let the people decide what they want. This is where people saw him for who he really is, a man who prefers 17 mins of fame than representing his constituents.

There was a real level at anger for this Independent, and hence people that had never attended a rally before came out to have their voices heard and to send a message not only to their local member, but also to the Gillard Government.

Mr Oakshott was invited to attend, however he obviously was busy this day. A shame as he seemed so eager to debate Ray Hadlee of 2GB on Climate Change, he would have had an opportunity to debate any one of 3 National Party members, as well as climate change scientist. That's just not cool man.

This event was handled expertly by CATA, and supported by several other groups together with good numbers of Port Macquarie locals. and people from Sydney, Canberra, and other centres around NSW. I would like to thank each and every person that attended this day for making it such a resounding success.

Kev's Site: Rothschild Australia and E3 International to take the lead in the global carbon trading market

2011-05-15T21:33:00.001-07:00

Rothschild Australia and E3 International to take the lead in the global carbon trading market

Sydney, Australia - Rothschild Australia and E3 International are set to become key players in the international carbon credit trading market, an emerging commodity market that analysts estimate could be worth up to US$150 billion by 2012.

In a move that will re-shape the fledgling emissions trading market, Rothschild Australia and E3 International today announced their intention to launch the Carbon Ring Consortium -- an investment vehicle that will provide companies in the Asia Pacific Region with an innovative way of learning about and understanding their risks in the new carbon market.

The Carbon Ring Consortium is the first of its kind in the Asia-Pacific Region, and is the first in a series of private investment vehicles that Carbon Ring Pty Ltd will launch in coming years.

Richard Martin, the chief executive officer of Rothschild Australia said, "With recent developments in international climate change policy, the question is no longer if, but when the global carbon trading market will emerge. Rothschild Australia, through Carbon Ring, intends to be at the forefront of this market, providing private investment vehicles to companies seeking to offset their greenhouse gas emissions liabilities."

The Carbon Ring Consortium allows companies with a future carbon liability to purchase a range of carbon credits and obtain a practical insight into the operation of this new market. Carbon credits will be bought from domestic and international projects that achieve a reduction in greenhouse gas emissions. These carbon credits will be distributed pro rata to Consortium investors.

"The Carbon Ring Consortium is an important first step for Rothschild and for our clients," said Mr. Martin.

"The Consortium should appeal to companies that are faced with a greenhouse liability and are significant users or producers of energy, such as electricity generators, heavy industrials, oil companies, major manufacturers or airlines, amongst many others.

"It provides investors with an opportunity to learn about the market through an investment in a low risk, low cost investment vehicle, created specifically to acquire a diverse range of carbon credits. Participants will also share in significant knowledge and intellectual property," Mr. Martin said.

During its life, the Carbon Ring Consortium intends to purchase a range of carbon credits, in a range of jurisdictions and from a range of sources. In the process, the Consortium will expose investors to many of the most pressing issues that corporations will have to address if they are to participate in the emerging carbon market. It will also give investors a practical insight into the buying and selling of carbon credits in the present market, without the need to invest in significant trading infrastructure or to assume undue risk.

Mr. Martin believes that there are many reasons why an organisation would invest in the Consortium: gaining practical experience in an emerging market; offsetting their greenhouse gas emissions; hedging their investments in new infrastructure; or in response to the expectations of the public, customers or shareholders.

Craig Windram, the director of E3 International and a partner in Carbon Ring, said, "A carbon liability brings with it considerable financial risk for organisations, and early planning to deal with this risk will add to an organisation's competitive advantage -- that's where Carbon Ring comes in.

"Few companies have developed a practical understanding of the emerging carbon market. For companies on either side of the equation, as either buyers or sellers, the Carbon Ring Consortium will provide the opportunity to 'learn by doing'. This experience will be vital in assisting businesses to formulate policy, to understand and identify their risks, and to demonstrate leadership in an area of growing public concern," Mr. Windram said.

The Carbon Ring Consortium is an unregistered, managed investment scheme. Designed to be a tailored, limited-life vehicle, it will document the legal and accounting process involved in the purchase, settlement and distribution of various carbon credit assets.

Requiring an investment of US$100,000, with a portion returned to investors in the form of carbon credits, the Consortium is intended to provide investors with a low cost, low risk and structured entry into this new market.

About Rothschild

N M Rothschild & Sons has been at the centre of the world's financial markets for more 200 years. Today, the firm is a global investment bank, which provides independent and quality advice to governments, corporations and individuals worldwide through a network of professionals in 40 offices across more than 30 countries. The firm employs 2,500 employees worldwide.

About E3

The E3 Group is a hybrid organisation dedicated to making the business case for sustainable development. It is part strategic management consultancy, part environmental think tank, part project developer and part investment manager.

The E3 Group comprises a number of companies that have developed around the business of sustainability. The Group includes a conventional consulting business, an environmental software company, a dedicated renewable energy project promoter and the Carbon Ring Consortium. The principal operating company in the group is E3 International Pty Limited, which is headquartered in Australia.

Distributed by PR Newswire on behalf of N M Rothschild and Sons

Kev's Site: Rothschild Australia and E3 International to take the lead in the global carbon trading market

2011-05-15T21:33:00.000-07:00

Rothschild Australia and E3 International to take the lead in the global carbon trading market

The Carbon Ring Consortium is the first of its kind in the Asia-Pacific Region, and is the first in a series of private investment vehicles that Carbon Ring Pty Ltd will launch in coming years.

"The Carbon Ring Consortium is an important first step for Rothschild and for our clients," said Mr. Martin.

About Rothschild

About E3

Distributed by PR Newswire on behalf of N M Rothschild and Sons

Back to the Future ?

2011-05-04T13:49:00.000-07:00

It is an agreed to point by the Government's favourite Climate Change scientist Tim Flannery, that if CO2 levels were reduced to an acceptable level now, we might see a difference in 1000 years.

Maybe we can make some insignificant difference to the environment in 1000 years if;

we make ourselves poor NOW and can't afford medicine or health checks,
or pay for food, or cover mortgage payments and new clothes,
or keep ourselves warm in winter, or even have children.

But that is fine because our great, great, great, great, great, great, great, great, great, great grandchildren will benefit from this maybe? However during this time earth that was hit by a meteor and our orbit has been changed, so we;

are living on a planet that is hotter than it has ever been,
our icecaps have melted and
large areas of the world reclaimed by the seas.

This was a catastrophic event, and people had to make a lot of changes to survive, however, the human race is an adaptive one, and so we adapted to our new environment.

What these people who live in this changed planet still just don't understand is:

why the people in the 20th Century who had a rare chance to enjoy some prosperity and enjoy their standard of living, in an unspoilt Australia,
ruined their lives while paying taxes on a free substance such as the air they breathed.

As far as the people living in the year 3000 are concerned, we were the most clueless generation history has discussed, and we allowed a Government that was based on lies and a mix match of Minorities to remain in power although they were unable to deliver policies and just were a tax making Government, and so we have been politely branded the 'Naive Era'.

Minority Government

2011-05-03T01:52:00.000-07:00

Hey guys we need to think about this, I know there has been a number of rallies lately, but if something does no happen before July, then each and every one of us will be stuck with a tax on the air we breath.
We all know the science on Climate Change tells us the Government is lying to us, we know our PM has done nothing but lie to us since seizing power. And we know that the Government is rallying her forces to stop people and businesses opposing the Carbon Tax. What we don't know is the level of the secret deals she has made so far, to stop people opposing her. She gave her zoologist Climate Change expert a Australia Day award, and a $180,000 job, to have him babble on and quote either manipulated data or data that is not encompassing the full variables.

We deserve for it to come back to the people to vote on, in fact we deserve for a chance to vote on whether we should have a Government made up of 2 minority Government parties and who managed to grab power through LIES made to the Australian people.

So I implore you to remember All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good "people do nothing" Keep the pressure on and continue supporting the rallies with your presence, we are having an effect, and you will know you have been part of a historic time where the people are saying to the Government of the day 'HELL NO, YOU MUST GO'

Blogger: What a Mess - Publish Status

2011-04-07T17:11:00.000-07:00

Link

I left the RAAF in the 1980's and I admit that when I was in their was a attitude against women in particular Female Defence force personnel. As ashamed as I am now for this attitude I was not someone that regarded women as second class citizens, but I knew of a number who did, and they were regarded as good blokes and real characters.
For anyone who never went through the services you may struggle to understand how this is able to fester, and that answer is simple, Senior Officers! They are so intent on not having the image of the forces dragged through the mud, they try to squash any incidents rather than see it hit the media, this includes assault, rape, and drunken behaviour.

I recall a medical orderly who was homosexual, at a time when this was not allowed in the service. This orderly was well known on the base as being gay, but no one worried about it. Unfortunately one day a picture of his kissing his partner appeared in a Adelaide paper, and due to this the RAAF immediately took action and drummed him out of the service before it could become a media spectacle.

This had occurred for many years for anyone that may cause a media storm, they always took the smoke and mirrors approach with personnel. I had heard of a number of sexual assault cases while I was in the service, but I only recall 1 of these that became public knowledge.

The 1 I recall was in fact a civilian female that attended the base disco, ended up going to her boyfriends room and was discovered in the early hours of the morning in bushes, she had been raped and murdered, this could not be made to go away and the mood from Senior Officers were angry this had occurred, but instead of taking a number of steps to assist and to admonish people that failed in their duties, they were angry because this reflected badly on the base, and on them.

This was the culture, of course because of this investigation the place was cleaned up and they made an effort to change the way reports were handled. Well we have heard enough over the years to know nothing has changed, and now these last few stories shows the culture has not altered in all these years, 37 years that I am aware of, and much longer when listening to others stories.

Now The Minister for Defence is rightly angry with the ADF for these last outbursts and abuse of a female, and the Defence Chiefs are attacking the Minister, when they should be agreeing with him.

The latest allegations of breach of privacy, I would have thought sexual abuse, and hopefully the AFP will find other charges. What was worrying is that the AFP, were considering if there were charges they could place against the guy involved. The Defence Force should have made a strong statement and kicked this guy out and then looked at the involvement of the others in this.

It is time to make a stand and see the Defence Forces culture brought into line with this decade, and if the fossils. Even when I made a short post on this I was surprised at the women blaming this girl? The only thing she did wrong was be strongly attracted to a guy who was a woman abuser. This isn't even a case of pics taken and promised to keep private, this was purposely webcast to his mates in another room without her knowledge. He must be dealt with and she should be protected, however, in this Defence Force you are more likely to see this the other way round.

Forget the Carbon Tax - try this? - Just Grounds Community

2011-04-03T20:06:00.000-07:00

Link

Forget about a Carbon Tax if you want to help the environment, my way allows for a reduction in fossil fuelled electricity, a process that allows all to participate if they feel they need to do something, will harm no one when the Climate Change science finally wakes the Government up to they can no longer fool their electorates. and is a low cost alternative.

I suggested the Govt have green loans available for people to convert to Green housing as much as possible. Now my rationale for this is simple it would help people reduce household costs, nothing to do with a Air tax. The idea is simple people convert the loan is to be repaid via a loan levy on the individual or family, and if they want to sell the home, then the loan must be paid off out of the sale price. The sale price will automatically be higher as it has these conversions in it.

This way those that want to green themselves pay for the privilege, and those that don't aren't slugged unfairly. It sounds too simplistic, and it is, there is a lot more to it, but it is the way a Government can do something proactive for the greens and they can have a no interest term on the loan and then a interest rate on the remainder after say 3 years of the loan.

This encourages people to repay quicker, does not cost the Government a huge amount as the monies themselves are being repaid rather than just handouts and the Government has no reason to impose great big new taxes on us.

But I emphasize, this is not about Climate Change, this is about a more cost efficient alternative for the consumer, even if it is only for a period of 6 months in the year, it is savings. If they did this to schools during school holidays etc the schools could earn money by selling back to the Grid.

As technologies change, it will not be effected by doing this, it is a win win alternative.

So what did happen to our Democracy? - Just Grounds Community

2011-03-18T19:32:00.000-07:00

Link

Australia has had a lot to contend with over the years and we have embraced changes stoically, but always, with hope. For the first time in my life I am seeing that hope disappearing in the eyes of many of my fellow Aussies.

In a time when hysteria over Global warming reached a peak and their is a dramatic change in peoples perception over the true reason behind Climate Change. People have realised not only has there been NO scientific evidence of man' involvement altering the levels Australia's levels are infinitesimal in the overall Global Emissions around the world, and will make no difference unless the large countries made the same changes which is not happening.

So the Australian Government decided to introduce a Carbon Tax, When it was brought up before the election the government made several denial including the most succinct on by the PM. She stated "There will be NO Carbon Tax under a Government I lead" Well this was put to rest and people that believed it must be true voted for her instead of for the Coalition and these votes managed to win her a hung parliament after a dramatic swing against the ALP, and by virtue of a deal with the Greens on first preferences. She used this and promises which of course are not made public to retain the Greens support and bought the support of a few independents to secure enough seats to retain Government. We can say that is the nature of the system and accept this, knowing they have no mandate to introduce any policies outside of their election promises.

However to secure Government The PM felt she no longer needed to keep promises she made before the election and introduced a Carbon Tax. But this wasn't all she Climate change Assembly she promised the people before the election was replaced with a "Multi-party panel for Climate change" but to go on this committee you not only had to agree with their stand on Climate Change, you needed to understand you were there to agree on a price for Carbon., and would be guided by Ross Garnaut on the price to be set

The Government is compensating most of the big polluters, after they have passed the rise in costs on to us of course, so to all households, start adding your wages up, if it is above $120000 it is YOU that receives NO compensation, while Electricity suppliers, BHP and who knows who else will receive compensation. Like every other tax this Government brings out, the mid to higher income earners get to bend over and take it again. Gillard had the cheek to say well people like me shouldn't get it we can afford to absorb this, and fair enough she earns over $355,000 plus allowances, I think at 3x the $120,000 limit, what right does a person in her position have to say we earn enough??? She is earning about five times that of the average full-time adult salary of $67,116, as of February 2010. So enough of your pious opinion Juliar.

And if the Carbon Tax comes to pass in July, this is where our democracy fails, we will have a Government we never elected and therefore have no mandate for such an enormous change, we are suffering more financially than at any time in my lifetime, we have a Government that refuses to listen to the people, and claim we will come round to their thinking on what is really best for us?, we have a minor party who have complete control over our government, say what they like, Labor can not even hold Government unless The Greens continue to support them and vote with them, we have independents that are ignoring the majority of their own electorates, and we have a minimum of 3 years of pain before we can get rid of the Government.

Why should this occur when they never had the mandate to implement these policies, and in the Carbon Tax case lied about it even being introduced to win extra votes, which may well have been the difference in Government, and a reprieve for the pain many Australians are experiencing under this Governments policies.

Letter to PM Julia Gillard regarding Carbon Tax Petition

2011-03-13T03:41:00.000-07:00

Link

Climate-row professor Phil Jones should return to work, say MPs - Times Online

2011-03-04T23:02:00.000-08:00

Link

Although this was overseas it shows they are hiding evidence that Man Made global warming is a fallacy

Climate Change is Natural - Just Grounds Community

2011-03-01T23:45:00.000-08:00

Link

My opinion on the Climate Change debate - Just Grounds Community

2011-02-27T23:42:00.000-08:00

Link

Australia's Totalitarian Govt. - Just Grounds Community

2011-02-22T22:29:00.000-08:00

Link

Multiculturalism a word that is antiquated in Australia - Just Grounds Community

2011-02-22T19:23:00.000-08:00

Link

Australians Soldiers killed in Afghanistan - Just Grounds Community

2011-02-21T19:44:00.000-08:00

Link

What a Mess

2011-01-06T15:30:00.000-08:00

Link

What a Mess

2011-01-06T15:28:00.000-08:00

Link

Our Healthcare Crisis

2011-01-06T11:50:00.000-08:00

Link

Our Healthcare Crisis

2011-01-06T10:28:00.000-08:00

Link

Climate Change - is this the inconvenient Truth

2010-12-02T12:02:00.000-08:00

Why do we keep hearing all the indignation about climate change?

Is it real or is it just a beat up to justify the position a number of scientists took with regard to Global warming, well the answer is very simple.......YES.

When they discovered the fear tactics they had been trying to force feed us on Global Warming were being scuttled by Global Cooling, they decided they best call it Climate Change.....this was a typical beat up by scientists who needed to save face due to their stand in agreeing with Global warming.

So this leaves a question does Climate Change exist?, well in 1984 they claimed it existed and...100 years prior it was said to exist.... and they were in fact right on both ocassions.

You see Climate Change has existed from the formation of our planet, and will continue through to when our planet finally implodes on the back of the noxious gases that are let off by The Greens and the Union/Labor party, for it is far more resilient than we are. It adjusts to changes in rotation of the earth and shifts in gravitational pull, it also adjusts after significant Solar flares meteor collisions with earth and our own attempts to destabilise the earths composition. And Nature adjusts along with climate change to

ensure a balance is kept, throughout the earth.

NBN - Not blasted Needed

2010-11-24T14:54:00.000-08:00

A 36 page summary meant 2 supposed independent Senators agree to support the NBN.
A $8 billion dollar reduction in the roll out cost is explained as a result of Telstra agreeing to NBN using their existing infrastructure, how generous of them?? Telstra is a business and aren't about to throw away an opportunity to make money, so what has this cost us, no-one has bothered to ask?

A 36 page summary was released out of a 50 page summary, 14 pages were deemed to be Commerce in confidence, well as it is our money this should not exist. We need to know what the Government is hiding in those 14 pages?

Now they are saying we will have savings through bundling on the NBN? We have had this for years and it does not cost us 37 billion + dollars. They have also talked about other services that will use the NBN, but these use our existing services already?

We still will be required to have the Network attached to our homes and the cost of this may still be too high for many, especially when we have Broadband with speeds that are fast.

In what alternate reality do they see this as justifiable? They are rushing the roll out so we will be stuck with it and are certainly stuck with the bill that NBN Co, are relishing as they will have a Network rolled out at taxpayers expense and then they will be making money from us again through ongoing usage.

Act Now

2008-11-04T10:04:00.000-08:00

I will start this off with a positive and congratulate the Sydney City Council on the trialing the following measure

“Motorcycle and scooter riders will be able to park for free in Sydney's CBD and the inner suburbs under a Sydney City Council trial program.
Motorcyclists will still be expected to park in designated areas and comply with any time restrictions.
The 12-month trial also includes new anchor points and locking rails for motorcycles in untimed parking areas.
The council is also trialing on-street charging points for electric scooters.”

A true step forward in dealing with carbon emissions in a proactive manner.

However, this alone is not enough, we need to go ahead with a congestion tax, or the best solution is to close the city for all traffic bar public transportation between the hours of 7.00am and 7.00pm.

Politicians are all presenting ideas piecemeal which will not work, what they need is to present a package that works. Of course this requires an upgrade of out public transportation in Sydney instead of throwing money into systems that are failures, but as long as we don’t have a productivity link to these politicians they get as much as failures as they would if they succeeded.

That will also allow for more bicycle couriers in the city, electric vehicle transportation(taxis or PublicRapidTransport) in the city, the use of pushbikes, electric scooters, even roller blades for getting around the city by those who are employed there or there for shopping.

This will cause a huge reduction in emissions in the city, and have the additional benefit of improving the fitness of many working there.

If city buildings were encouraged to introduce alternate measures such as solar panels etc, they could produce a large percentage of their electricity requirements this way and by intelligent use of area around surface railway lines solar farming could be instigated in conjunction with converting trains to generate their power through installing solar panels.

This is a simple solution, although one with initial significant upfront costs, before savings would be seen. If this measure was aimed at saving money alone, then change may never occur. Of course though, this is only one part of the equation, the saving in the production of fossil fueled electricity will be significant, and still we have not needed a Emissions Trading Scheme which is based on a European model.

In order to encourage these measures the Federal Government will need to come to the party and develop a scheme to assist with the conversion to solar power and provide a loan which can be recovered in a way that will make it an attractive prospect to actually make the conversion with these terms. This is not looking after the rich, this is being proactive in developing ways to lower emissions.

Now since I started this campaign, I have seen a number of politicians that have been mooting parts of my proposal, which although encouraging, is frustrating that they do not see the big picture.

Now is not the time to approach this little by little though, it will achieve very little and lose all momentum, we need an all encompassing plan to reduce emissions and provide cost savings to Australians.

To assist people getting into massive debt the Government implemented the First Home Owners Scheme. What we need now is a similar measure aimed at helping households convert to Alternative Energy, the difference here is the Government can either recover the monies through an agreed to figure through personal tax over ‘x’ years or recover the debt from the sale of the home, whichever occurs first.

Another area I was pleased to hear being looked at was the conversion of schools to solar, this seemed to need at least one school converting through their own funding, then the Government seemed to be attracted to the idea. The best part of this idea is during school holidays the schools can actually produce income through on selling of the energy produced by them back to the grid.

Then we have street lighting, telephone boxes, sports oval lighting Government buildings all of which can be converted to alternative energy, and as icing on the cake, many farmers that cannot make a go of their farms due to drought etc, could become Solar or wind farms selling on to the grids or just leasing the land to grid providers to install their own wind or solar farms, a win - win for these farmers, who will not need to sell their farms or require government help.

So what are the drawbacks, the initial cost of course is a drawback, this is where the Government needs to show the way and provide a scheme to help all. The one thing they must not do is limit it to socio-economic groups, instead make the repayment terms match the financial circumstances of people. This will ensure we all convert and this is a must to ensure a national action plan that will show the world Australia is able to address the hard issues as well as the easy.

So why isn’t it being considered well firstly ‘a politician is a fellow who lends you his umbrella when the sun is shining, but wants it back the minute it begins to rain.’ Therefore they get scared when the clouds start building, they may need to tighten their belts in order to fund these conversions.

Secondly, they are so tunnel visioned and focused at introducing an Emission Trading Scheme, that they cannot see that there is a not only a better way, but a way that contributes to all levels of Australia society.

What we must do is get the message out that there is a solution to a number of current issues, ie. Climate change, emission levels, hard financial times, high taxation.
And we expect politicians to do what is right for Australians, rather than their own aspirations or what other world leaders are doing.

The Failure to Act

2008-10-26T23:45:00.000-07:00

We had a coalition Government that although were proficient at handling the economy, failed to act on improving emission levels in our country. We now have a Labor Government who are good at rhetoric, but unwilling to do anything constructive to improve these emissions.

In these uncertain financial times it is even more important for a Government to act on behalf of the Nation, and help householders to reduce there expenses. And yet a man with an almost unpronounceable surname and a thick Austrian accent, a man who was a brash, quick talking bodybuilder from a small European village and would become one of Hollywood's biggest stars, go on to marry into the prestigious Kennedy family, amass a fortune via shrewd investments and one day be the Governor of California, had the vision to take appropriate steps to address this issue rather than spend eons talking about it.

http://kevshot.multiply.com/journal/item/63/THE_KIMBERLINA_SOLAR_THERMAL_ENERGY_PLANT_

This is the bold politics we should expect from Australian politicians, instead they want to follow the European solutions, which are not needed or appropriate for conditions in Australia and the ETS is a joke. It is based on building Government coffers while forcing electricity prices to increase so that alternatives are a attractive solution. The trouble is it is increasing costs to households, which Australian households will pay more money to make the cost of transferring to alternatives more attractive. This is a strange strategy and delaying conversion possibilities for at lease 10-15yrs.

If a Government looked at this rationally, by seriously assisting households to convert to alternatives now, by embracing new technology now, and by pushing the closure of city centre’s to general traffic between 0700 & 1900, and improving public transport measures we would have the structures in place by 2030 to have significant lowering of emissions, possibly already achieving our targets, while assisting households in their daily household budgets, saving overheads for business and making schools capable of generating funding through the on selling to the grids of excess energy generated during school holiday periods.

I would envisage a sizeable commitment by the Government initially, to assist in conversion for households, however, this could be recovered through person tax over a period of time, or recovered on sale of the house, which ever comes first.

This would be a case of a Government acting proactively to improve both the climate and saving households in ongoing expenditure. The technology is available now, we need not wait until 2030, nor do we need a ETS to tackle the problems.

I am not a greenie, nor do I believe we have caused the current cycle of weather we are in, but I do believe we need to clean up our planet, and embrace technology that has the ability to create electricity using the sunlight we are blessed with for free. So regardless of what you believe the solutions are the same and of benefit to all Australians. I have no financial interest in this matter and my only concern is for Australian households.

I have been pushing my views since July and no political party appears to be interested in what I have to say. I have had the pleasure of hearing some individuals using parts of my ideas as their own, but no-one is willing to take the horse by the reins, and present the full package. It is workable as is, but I can accept others ideas as valid also. I will present this to you without the belief anyone will actually read it let alone acknowledge it. But I will keep knocking on doors until someone listens and acts on behalf of the Australian public

http://kevshot.multiply.com/

THE KIMBERLINA SOLAR THERMAL ENERGY PLANT

2008-10-23T14:48:00.000-07:00

Located in Bakersfield, CA, Ausra’s state‐of‐the‐art Kimberlina Solar Thermal Energy Plant is the first of its kind in North America,and proof that Ausra’s “next generation” solar thermal technology is real and that it works now. We’re ready to power our customers and provide industrial steam for businesses working to cut energy costs with pollution‐free technology.

The Kimberlina plant also represents the first solar thermal project to enter operation in California in nearly 20 years. It showcases Ausra’s technology that is already operating at the company’s Liddell solar thermal facility in New South Wales,Australia.

The rows of mirrors at Kimberlina were manufactured at Ausra’s solar thermal power factory in Las Vegas,Nevada. These solar thermal collector lines will generate up to 25 megawatts (MW) of thermal energy to drive a steam turbine at the adjacent Clean Energy Systems power plant. At full output, the Kimberlina facility will produce enough solar steam to generate 5 MW of clean, reliable electricity—enough electricity to light up 3,500 central Californian households.

In addition to Kimberlina, Ausra is developing a 177‐MW solar thermal power plant for Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PG&E) in Carrizo Plains,west of Bakersfield. Ausra will sell the full output of the plant to PG&E under a long‐term contract.

CLEAN, RELIABLE, COST‐COMPETITIVE ENERGY

Ausra’s Compact Linear Fresnel Reflector solar collectors boil water with concentrated sunshine. Mirrors track the sun, reflecting solar heat onto boiler tubes to produce steam without the costs and pollution of fossil‐fired boilers. Direct steam generation makes integration into existing systems simple, either as retrofits or new designs. The result is a system that produces steam and electricity directly from the sun, at prices that compete with peak natural gas energy resources.

AUSRA – YOUR LOW‐COST ENERGY SOLUTION

Ausra delivers energy from the sun. The company provides solar energy and energy systems for industrial processes and utility‐scale electricity generation. The company is a leader in solar thermal energy design, development and manufacturing. Ausra is committed to serving the global energy needs of customers in a dependable, market‐competitive and environmentally responsible manner. Headquartered in Palo Alto, Calif., Ausra is a privately held company with operations in the United States and Australia. To learn more about Ausra and solar thermal power, visit www.ausra.com.

THE AUSRA ADVANTAGE COST‐EFFECTIVE STEAM

Most land‐efficient solar technology Eliminates fuel and pollution cost risks; On‐peak energy delivery

RELIABLE AND ROBUST

Commercially proven technology; Low wind profile; Steel‐backed mirrors for long life;
Suitable for demineralized or produced water operation.

RAPID DEPLOYMENT AND INSTALLATION

High‐volume, automated production and standard materials eliminate supply chain constraints; Rapid field installation (12‐24 months)

When will we catch up ? Will it be too late?

2008-09-15T16:13:00.000-07:00

High on the Alantejo Plain, in Eastern Portugal, the world’s biggest solar photovoltaic farm is nearing completion. When the £250 million farm is fully operational later this year, it will be twice as large as any project of its kind in the world. It is expected to supply 45MW of electricity every year, enough to power 30,000 homes.

The farm, located in an area with the highest annual sunshine per square meter in Europe, is made up of 2520 giant solar panels, positioned at a 45 degrees angle, to track the sun through 240 degrees every day. Portugal, with no oil, coal or gas reserves and no expertise in nuclear power, has some of the most ambitious targets for renewables in Europe, and aims to become a leader in the European clean-tech revolution. According to economics minister Manuel Pinho, “We have to reduce our dependence on oil and gas. What seemed extravagant in 2004 when we decided to go for renewables now seems to have been a very good decision.” By 2020, he expects Portugal to generate 31% of its energy from renewables.

The rate of progress is certainly impressive. In less than three years the country has trebled hydropower capacity, quadrupled wind power and invested in flagship solar projects like the one at Mouro. Crucially, this progress has been achieved on the back of a favorable economic and political climate. The government has guaranteed price-levels for the long-term and projects are not delayed by state indecision or hold-ups in the planning system. By 2012, companies are expected to invest £10 billion ($20 billion) in renewables, rising to up to £100 billion ($200 billion) by 2020.

While this project is to be of record-holding size, it will be overshadowed eventually by a plant in the US currently in the planning stage, which is expected to produce 500MW - far more than this plant. The current largest solar farm in the US is well below Portugal's upcoming farm, sitting at 14MW. Of course, it seems as if lots of "world's largest" solar farms are in the works, so it's nice to see at least this one will be a reality.

Via The Guardian; photo credit Teri Pengilley

It seems that some countries are getting it right, and yet Australia is well behind the eight ball on renewables, while the Government thinks its priority is to tax us even more in order to make current electricity prices rise to a point where it is just as economincal to use Renewables????

Lets get this right, because we may not get a second chance. Start renewable plans, convert to solar, at least Hotwater services ( these account for up to 50% of our domestic electricity usage), and produce plans to reduce our reliance on driving our cars especially CBD's and sububan commuting.

Kev

http://www.gopetition.com.au/petitions/renewable-energy-solutions-for-australians.html

Is the Government only paying Lip Service to Climate Change?

2008-08-30T06:28:00.000-07:00

Our current Govt states:

‘There is no greater challenge now facing our world and our nation than dangerous climate change. Australia is on the front line to suffer the impacts of climate change as a result of our increasing water scarcity, finely balanced natural environment and our large resources and energy sector. Yet Australia also has the potential to become a world leader in the fast-growing technologies and industries that will enable economies to reduce their carbon emissions.

The cost of inaction on climate change will be much greater than the cost of taking action now. The Australian Government is committed to decisive action on climate change, to prepare Australia for the transformation of the global economy to low carbon energy sources.

The Government’s action plan on climate change includes:

. Establishing a national emissions trading market by 2010 – to enable the market to
set a price for carbon, unleash innovation and create strong market incentives to
reduce carbon emission levels.
. Implementing the Kyoto Protocol and strong support for a new global climate change
agreement to take us beyond 2012.
. Establishing a national emissions trading scheme by 2010.
. Investing in low carbon technologies such as clean coal and renewables.
. Setting a 20 per cent target for renewable energy by 2020 to dramatically expand
the use of renewable energy sources such as solar and wind.
. Implementing a $200 million Great Barrier Reef Rescue Plan to help secure the Reef
from the serious threat posed by climate change and declining water quality.

20% renewable energy target

Reducing greenhouse gas emissions is one of the major challenges in tackling climate change. The Government is implementing a 20 per cent Renewable Energy Target for Australia to reach by 2020 – so that by 2020 renewable energy sources will produce enough energy to meet the energy needs of all Australian households. This will help fast-track the development of new renewable technologies, such as solar, wind and geothermal energy, also known as hot dry rock technology, and help to achieve overall emission reductions at lower cost. ‘

http://www.pm.gov.au/topics/climate.cfm

If The House of Representatives is one of the two houses of the Australian Federal Parliament, the other being the Senate. It is sometimes called the 'people's house' or the 'house of government'. And one of its functions is it ‘Represents the people—Members may present petitions from citizens and raise citizens' concerns and grievances in debate. Members also raise issues of concern with Ministers and government departments.’

Then what are they doing? It is evident they recognize the benefits of Renewable Energy technologies and the fact they will achieve overall emission reductions at a lower cost, and yet they aim for implementing a 20% Renewable Energy Target by 2020. This is a classic case of ‘too little, too late’.

They should be aiming at an 80% Renewable Energy Target by 2020, and start implementing NOW. This, as the Government so rightly states will reduce emissions at a lower cost. It has number of ongoing effects i.e. these sensible approaches will assist schools to produce part of their own funding through electricity generation and on-selling, during school holidays.

When are they going to see the light, this idea is unworkable, and unpopular. They need to work on plans to actively address the issue, rather than boost their tax revenues.

The Means Test was such a backward step for the Solar Energy debate, it is unbelievable that anyone could even have thought of it, let alone suggested and implemented it. You need incentives for people that have the money to install these Solar systems, because if these people take up the incentives then the price of these Solar systems come down, which in turn become more affordable to people in the lower income bracket to be able to purchase them, (it's a no-brainer isn't it). Therefore the Senate Committee should recommend abolish the Means Test.

Fighting against and reducing Carbon Emissions is in fact the easy part, the real challenge is in finding enough politicians that care enough about the issue and their constituents to tackle this issue head-on. We need politicians, that are willing to take the radical solutions onboard and realise it is worth the expense to have people convert their lifestyles and homes and embrace alternate renewable energy resources, and vehicles with 'Greener' emissions.

A concerted Government effort to assist business to convert their energy resources to Solar would be further improving the situation and end up saving business costs in the long term. Schools could be big winners through solar conversion, as besides a saving in general terms, during holiday periods they would have the opportunity to make money by allowing the electric suppliers to buy back electricity the generate and are not using during this period.

And of course the conversion of all residential properties to solar energy as mentioned in my previous Blog has enormous effect on Carbon Emission reduction and offset.

The Carbon Emissions Trading Scheme, which the Rudd Government are presently opting for, due to debatable success in Europe, is a poor choice for Australia, and our unique conditions, and will not really address our problems. The Government is floundering yet again their ‘Grand Design’, as it is not a viable solution in Australia.

See http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,,24264595-2702,00.html

The Government should also encourage people to purchase electric bikes and scooters, without a need for license and registration for vehicles up to 500w or 750w motors. (The key consideration will be safety measures such as helmet, or even knee and elbow pads as currently exist) Once again it will reduce emissions, and will force the petrol companies to reduce petrol prices due to the reduction in demand. This will then have an ongoing effect with other supplies such as food etc due to reduced petrol costs.Further emission savings could be achieved with discount in registration costs for vehicles using cleaner solutions such as Electric, LPG or Diesel. Although the Government will need to ensure some form of regulation to keep the sale price of these fuels steady, at least initially. This will result in an increase in greener vehicles being sold as they will be far more attractive in terms of their ongoing costs.

A matter for serious consideration should be closing our city centers to general traffic, by closing the city between 8.00 - 7.00 to private vehicles and introducing a congestion charge with a time restriction on heavy vehicle traffic and deliveries, this will reduce the congestion in the city, and alleviate the carbon emissions produced by vehicles that can only travel at a snails pace there anyway. This would allow city workers to use the current public transport arrangements, bicycles, e-bikes, scooters, and even roller blades safely, leading to not only reduced carbon emissions, but would show an improvement in the health and fitness of many of these workers.They will need to spend to upgrade our public transport also, and teach drivers of buses to drive more economically also., they could actually allow people in the city to use electric bikes and scooters safely, bicycles, scooters and even roller blades safely, and make walking around the city easier to accomplish and less hazardous, which can increase the health and fitness of these workers while reducing Carbon emissions at the same time. Delivery vehicles could be limited to times outside of 8.00 to 7.00.

A Personal rapid transit (PRT) system, also called personal automated transport (PAT) or podcar, is a public transportation concept that offers on-demand non-stop transportation, using small, independent vehicles on a network of specially-built guide-ways. Several different designs have been proposed, and as of 2008, at least one is under construction. This ideally could be utilized to travel around the city initially, and then expanding the network to other areas. Another option would be to expand the current Sydney Monorail and Metro Light Rail to encompass the CBD.
As we have a train link to the airport, the issue of people needing taxis to the airport is already addressed and by upgrading public transport facilities, will be better accepted and utilized.

These ideas would be an easy sell on the electorate, they are a sign of Australia’s ‘coming of age’ to the International Community on the proactive approach to Climate Change, and a radical change in the political scene by showing Government’s don’t just feel our pain, but are willing to address the cause of our problems, and take action to implement the necessary changes, with the aim to improve the quality of life of all Australians and this wonderful country.

A Government with a strong leader in place, who is willing to show they are focused on Australia, and the electorate, rather than their own political future, could bring forward these changes and ensure policies, that are against the electorates’ needs or desires and are fundamentally flawed are not introduced.

It only requires politicians willing to accept they may upset a few big businesses, (although the abolishment of the Emissions Trading Scheme, will appease a lot of these) for the benefit of all Australians, and show a willingness to make and change some existing legislation, policies and plans, to address these important needs, and we as Australians will be showing the world not just ‘the way of the future’, but also 'the way forward'

Kevin

Time to raise the ante

2008-08-25T05:00:00.000-07:00

So here I am 6 weeks after starting a campaign to get politicians onboard in an attempt to help all Aussies, and what has been achieved.

I have had two politicians respond showing they are of the same thinking, and that is all. None of the Major players have bothered to respond regarding these issues, of course I expected this as at present neither party is willing to look after Australia and Australians, and forget about the reduction in taxes in the short term.

However, although no response, it is noted since distributing these ideas a number of politicians have been coming out with very similar views of their own, although selectively chosen.

So this would appear to show the message is getting out after all, if only more people would get behind these views we could put a much greater pressure on to convince them, there is another way, and in showing they truly care about improving Australia and Australian households they are ensuring their place in an Australian Government for a long time to come.

The fight is on people are not prepared to sit back and wait until politicians start getting it right, we are insisting they start listening, and stop dallying with our future. While they are looking overseas for answers, they are not addressing OUR needs. We had the 2020 summit, where the Government ignored many good ideas and only adopted ones they could twist to their advantage. This is the reason we need to apply strong pressure otherwise we will be at 2020 with less money in our pocket, and still deciding what to do about renewable energy solutions.

A number of submissions were made with similar views to mine, and yet these were discarded as the emphasis of these ideas was on giving back to Australians in order to resolve environmental issues, rather than finding ideas to raise taxes. Having read the 2020 Summit report, it was as most of us knew an exercise in public perception rather than a gathering of realistic ideas, the Government would consider.

In the next week I will develop a petition which I hope to gather enough signatures online to continue in changing politician’s ideas and forcing them to act for the Australian public rather than their political party futures

Any feedback greatly appreciated and ideas for the petition gratefully received.

Kevin

There is a Solution - Is there a Hero?

2008-08-01T05:41:00.000-07:00

No 'magic wand' on grocery prices

This headline in the news today, show a need for a leader with the courage to put an effective alternative policy forward that will lead Australia forward, provide relief to households, and address the emission levels at the same time. I feel this leader will gather unprecedented support, and if this leader has the economic nous to put this plan into action and ensure it is adopted on a unequivocal basis then this person would no doubt hold the support of the electorate for a long time to come.

The Carbon Emissions Trading Scheme, which the Rudd Government are presently opting for, is a poor choice for Australia and will not address our problems.

This headline is not necessarily true as some of the reasons for climbing grocery prices can be addressed via my plan for a solar solution and the options for alternate fuels that will drive down prices, solar power on businesses reducing overheads and possibly the Government putting in place a watchdog, with appropriate teeth in place to ensure these savings are passed on to consumers.

It would be an easy sell on the electorate, a sign of Australia's 'coming of age' to the International Community on the Climate Change debate, and a change in the political scene to showing Government's don't just feel our pain, but are willing to address the cause of our problems, and take action to implement the necessary changes.

I urge politicians to seriously look at this alternative below, they could easily poll the electorate to view their reaction to it, but this is the only 'real' alternative policy. It will allow a Government with a strong leader in place, to show they are focused on Australia, and the electorate, rather than their own political future.

Kevin

Emission Trading Scheme is not a Solution

2008-07-27T18:06:00.000-07:00

"The Earth’s temperature is determined by balance of incoming solar radiation (“insolation”) energy and outgoing terrestrial infrared radiant energy emitted by the planetary surface and atmosphere.

As far as policy is concerned, what matters is not so much the costs to Australia of higher average global surface temperatures, but the costs and benefits of various policy actions which are aimed at addressing the possible undesirable effects on Australia of higher average global surface temperatures.1 This is a subtle but important distinction. Any policy contemplated by the Australian government should be focused on the net benefits to Australia of that particular policy.

Only a full economic cost-benefit analysis of emissions reductions versus alternative policies can shed light on these issues for Australia. No credible economist (or anyone else, for that matter) has demonstrated that there are significantly positive total benefits (let alone significantly positive marginal benefits) to Australia from the policy of reducing our CO2 emissions. There is a very good reason for this: since Australia’s emissions are so small, any benefits (both in total and at the margin) of emissions reductions are likely to be extremely small – almost certainly zero. The report therefore constitutes a solution in search of a problem. - The Shergold Report on Emissions Trading

Of course this report is being ignored by this Government who seem to have ‘a dream’ of what they will introduce. The trouble is this report has got it mostly right and in particular “Only a full economic cost-benefit analysis of emissions reductions versus alternative policies can shed light on these issues for Australia.”

This is one of my points in particular, the policy the Government is pushing in regard to Emissions Trading Scheme is not the best policy for Australia. Although a number of sources are visiting Alternatives, they are not pushing for these, why?

The answer is obvious ‘greed’ ETS will deliver the Government with a windfall, where to deliver a ‘real’ solution in assisting households to become solar efficient would not. Governments need to stop looking at the coffers and start caring about their constituents and the environment.

Although ETS is a proven scheme in Europe, we are Australia, and have better solutions available to us. What we deserve is a Government who recognizes this. All papers on Alternate sources of energy show the significance of making changes now.

Solar energy – photovoltaic (PV) panels – offer Australia’s best, most immediate, and most efficient means to provide zero emissions energy during periods of peak power use
reducing emissions, and reducing the need for new, high emissions power stations to cope with increasing demand.
In this context we want to set a clear policy direction of substantially increasing the take up of Solar PV throughout Australia.
In short, we want to set Australia on a path to being a country where everyone willing to invest is within reach of running a solar home" The Hon Greg Hunt MP stated on 28 April 2008

“The Government recognises that there will be adjustment costs for Australian
households arising from the Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme.

The Government will cut fuel taxes on a cent for cent basis to offset the initial price impact on fuel associated with the introduction of the Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme. The Government will periodically assess the adequacy of this measure for three years and adjust this offset accordingly. At the end of ”the three year period the Government will review this adjustment mechanism.”

“Fundamental to the Government’s climate change strategy is a Carbon Pollution
Reduction Scheme. It is the best way to reduce carbon pollution while minimising the impact on business and households.”

“There is considerable international cooperation on clean energy technology and the Government, its key research institutions and business participate in all significant initiatives. Carbon capture and storage, solar and geothermal technologies have been identified as strategic priorities for Australia. With regard to adaptation responses, Australia will be able, and expected, to assist vulnerable countries in the region adapt to unavoidable climate change. Consequences across the region will vary, with some countries being particularly exposed in relation to climate risks, such as sea level rise, while others are potentially significantly impacted by climate change responses.
Assisting the region in this way will help ameliorate potentially regional impacts and support sustainable development.”

“Several Commonwealth residential energy efficiency programs targeted to address market failures and assist households, including those on low incomes, are under development and will be implemented in 2008–09. Those programs include:
• low-interest Green Loans, to assist families install solar, water, and energy
efficient products
• the Low Emission Plan for Renters program, which subsidises the installation of
insulation in rental properties
• the expansion of the Energy Efficiency of Electrical Appliances measure, to help
families identify the most energy efficient and cost effective appliances for their homes
• the Solar Hot Water Rebate program, to encourage the domestic use of solar and heat pump hot water systems, and the Hot Water System Phase-Out to phase out inefficient hot water systems used in Australian homes
• the One Stop Green Shop, which is a single, user friendly government web portal designed to link schools, businesses and families to household efficiency programs provided by all levels of government.” The Green Paper July 2008

So the Government in a 532 page document they call the ‘Green Paper’ committed 2 paragraphs to solar energy. This is a afterthought, and pure rhetoric, not something the government intends to seriously consider. Why? I said it before and the only obvious answer is ‘greed’

They begin with acknowledging the ETS will hurt households, and suddenly will cut fuel tax on a cent per cent basis to adjust? Is this the same Government that stood up and said “ there is nothing we can do to reduce the cost of petrol” when prices went up and we were in pain, now they have discovered they can reduce fuel costs, when it suits ‘them’. Remember in my article ‘A solar Solution’ I proved they could address reducing, Carbon Emissions, Offsetting Carbon Emissions, lowering prices of petrol and other services, and easing the pressure off Australian householders in very achievable and simple solutions where we won’t be ‘hurt’.

How have G8 members done under the protocol so far?

The EU’s environment agency projects Britain and France will meet their Kyoto obligations but other G8 members are struggling:

Canada. Emissions have gone up as much as 35 percent since 1990 because of continued increases in the exploitation of the country’s oil resources, calling into question whether Canada can make its 5 percent reduction target.
Japan. The second-largest economy in the world is also in jeopardy of not making its assigned goal. Japan’s emissions have risen over 8 percent, which means the country will now have to reduce emissions more than 14 percent by 2012 to meet its Kyoto target of 6 percent.
Italy. Greenhouse gases have increased more than 12 percent above 1990 levels. Italy’s target is a 6 percent decrease by 2012.
Germany. The world’s sixth-biggest carbon dioxide emitter faces criticism from environmental advocates and the European Union for plans to build twenty-six new coal-fired power plants (Spiegel), considered one of the main sources of greenhouse-gas pollution. A German plan to exempt coal plants from Kyoto requirements adds to concerns. Although Germany has managed a 17 percent reduction in emissions (very close to its overall goal of 21 percent under the protocol), much of those reductions came from shutting down power plants in former East Germany.
Russia. Russia did not face mandatory cuts since its greenhouse-gas emissions fell well below the 1990 baseline due to a drop in economic output after the breakup of the Soviet Union. Yet Russia has approved joining the emissions-trading market. As the largest corporate emitter of greenhouse gases in the world, Russia’s electricity company stands to realize large profits from selling carbon credits to other industrialized countries. Russia’s official RIA Novosti news agency said in January 2008 the country was unlikely to exceed the 1990 levels in even the expected post-Kyoto commitment period.

Without the United States and developing countries entering into binding commitments, other Kyoto signatories may be unwilling to agree to additional international commitments, says Elliot Diringer, director of international strategies for the Pew Center on Global Climate Change. The European Union is likely forge ahead on its own to reduce its greenhouse gas emissions 20 percent by 2020. But after Bali, UN environment agency chief Achim Steiner said: “The bottom line is: there is no alternative to trying to find an agreement in which the [United States]… takes significant action” (Reuters).

As we can see, this is not a easy to fix thing globally, but what we can do is show the way by moving straight to Solar and Geo-Thermal energy and showing the rest of the world just how effective these solutions are, not going with a European solution that has worked for only two countries in the EU. We must change to the Solar Solution and become Australia - ‘The Solar Country’ now.

Kevin

The True Challenge

2008-07-22T16:36:00.000-07:00

Fighting against and reducing Carbon Emissions is in fact the easy part, the real challenge is in finding politicians that care enough about the issue and their constituents to tackle this issue head-on.

We need politicians, that are willing to take the radical solutions onboard and realise it is worth the expense to help people convert their lifestyles and homes and embrace alternate renewable energy resources, and vehicles with 'Greener' emissions.

They will need to spend to upgrade our public transport also, and teach drivers of buses to drive more economically also. By Closing the city to general traffic during 9.00-5.00 and introducing a congestion charge, they could actually allow people in the city to use electric bikes and scooters safely, bicycles, scooters and even roller blades safely, and make walking around the city easier to accomplish and less hazardous, which can increase the health and fitness of these workers while reducing Carbon emissions at the same time.

Delivery vehicles could be limited to times outside of 9.00 to 5.00. As we have a train link to the airport, the issue of people needing taxis to the airport is already addressed and by upgrading transport facilities, will be better accepted.

A concerted Government effort to assist business to convert their energy resources to Solar would be further improving the situation and end up saving business costs in the long term. Schools could be big winners through solar conversion, as besides a saving in general terms, during holiday periods they would have the opportunity to make money by allowing the electric suppliers to buy back electricity the generate and are not using during this period.

Parents, local business and children would be able to travel around their local area using e-bikes, and e-scooters together with bicycles and scooters if Governments legalize e-vehicles up to 500w or 50cc without registration or licensing requirements, this is currently 200w and inefficient if taking a passenger or carrying shopping etc. The resultant lessening in demand for fuel, will force petrol suppliers to drop prices, providing savings in prices across the board.

And of course the conversion of all residential properties to solar energy as mentioned in my previous Blog has enormous effect on Carbon Emission reduction and offset.

It is all covered here, and only requires politicians willing to upset a few big businesses for the benefit of all Australians, and a willingness to make and change some existing legislation, policies and plans, to address these important needs, and we as Australians will be showing the world, 'not the way of the future' , but 'the way forward'

Kevin

Reducing Emissions and Saving Houshold Costs

2008-07-20T15:42:00.000-07:00

I am not totally sure I believe in Global Warming, but what I do believe, is we need to stop polluting our planet. We also need to come to grips with harnessing the woelds resources rather than harvesting them.

In that regard I am a believer in alternate power sources, and energy. Solar, Wind, Water, and Thermal are all great resources we could harness, and we need to learn to recylce our water, rather than desalinating our oceans, and capturing and recycling our storm and rain water.

Our Government in it's wisdom decided to means test rebates on Solar, which meant most that could have afforded to purchase it with the rebate no longer can, and those that could not before, still can't. Our State Government decided to plough ahead with a desalination plant, where it is not necessarily the best solution to possible drought in Sydney region, and of course it was a overreaction at the time. Why plunder water from one resource when we are still wasting our other used water rather than recycling it?

The Government also feel they can do nothing to affect petrol prices, which is at best blinkered. They should be encouraging Australians to move away from petrol, and towards electric, hybrid, LPG and diesel vehicles all of which are much cleaner and greener vehicles and would through lack of demand force petrol suppliers to lower their prices, this in turn will affect prices of food, clothing etc, due to a decrease in transport costs.

The Government can encourage us by discounting registration costs for these vehicles, and allowing electric scooters, e-bikes, etc up to 500w or 50cc to be free of registration and licencing requirements, and subject to the same rules as bicycles.

Again this will mean a reduction in the amount of more local trips by petrol vehicles and save in Carbon Emissions, and lessen demand for petrol, a twofold effect.

We need to close the City to traffic during business hours, and have a time limited delivery and heavy transport access outside of business hours. This will mean a reduction in the heavy carbon emissions in the city, and will allow city workers safew walking, uses of bicycles, e-bikes, scooters, and roller blades to get around, and of course there is the existing public transport still in existence. This would have the additional effect of increasing the health and fitness of workers in the city, which is known to translate into more productive workers.

I cover the Solar energy debate in my Blog:- 'Solar Energy - The Solution to Carbon Emissions'

This is a effective way of 'doing something' which will provide extensive Australian Carbon Emission reduction in a short period of time, will work towards offsetting the effects of existing Emissions, and will help household budgets through reductions in the essential living costs.

The technology for all I mention presently exists, although Solar Conversion is expensive. The Government can assist all households to convert by providing no interest loans for conversion, which can be repayed through the familiy or individuals income tax, or upon sale of their home whichever is the sooner. However, the Government needs to make these loans available to all in order to encourage all households to convert, and of course those on higher incomes will be repaying far sooner under this idea.

Solar energy conversion for all schools is particularly beneficial in saving costs, and allowing schools to make money during the holiday by the electric suppliers buying back the electricity produced during this period.

Solar Energy – The Solution to Carbon Emissions

2008-07-17T20:01:00.000-07:00

I am of the opinion Carbon Emission reduction through the promotion of solar energy, will be far greater than anything the Government is currently planning, and will assist Australian households in not only becoming greener, but in easing the financial pressures on these families. With Government schools, Public Service buildings, factories etc similarly converted the cost saving can be astounding to both the environment and to the schools and organizations themselves. And all this without the need for an Emission Trading Scheme which is due to increase the cost across the board of food, petrol and other items we have come to regard as essential.

I believe the use of solar energy is a far simpler solution to reducing Carbon Emissions, which will reduce emissions far sooner than any Emission Trading Scheme could, as it is aimed at reducing the emissions emitted, and will show a repayment in financial terms to Australians for their efforts in ‘Greening Australia’. It seems the Government is intent on following the European Union lead rather than approach this problem in a way that suits Australian conditions

To start, the Government will need to provide rebates and subsidies which are aimed at assisting all homeowners to convert their homes to solar energy. Through Government assistance at this early stage, we can generate up to 70% of the power required to run our homes without using the present carbon intensive measures. The current cost of converting your homes energy to solar is not affordable for most and can cost between $20,000 to $30,000 and possibly more dependent on the size of the home and your energy needs. People do not own their home long enough to see the return on this type of outlay as the likely energy payback of a typical domestic sized rooftop grid connected solar conversion is approximately four years, so government assistance will be required.

Part of our surplus budget funds can be used for this purpose through non-interest loans available to all and could be repaid through individual tax increases over an agreed period of time, or recouped on the sale of the home, whichever is the sooner

As a bonus to the above we would be implementing measures that will reduce costs in households for essential supplies. The Solar energy system is reported to result in a offset of approximately 105,203kgs of CO2 over a 30 year period from one residential house. If these figures are even close the reduction in CO2 is staggering and with up to a 70% reduction in your electrical bill, this is great for the environment and friendly to the family budget. As coal-fired electricity generating stations are said to be producing up to 50% of Australia’s Carbon Emissions at present a reduction in demand of up to 70% per household will reduce the amount of emissions at this source. (http://www.solarcity.com/tabid/281/Default.aspx ) (http://www.urbanecology.org.au/topics/solarpanels.html)

Secondly the Government should encourage people to purchase electric bikes and scooters, without a need for license and registration for vehicles up to 500w or 50cc motors. This will assist in reducing emissions, and will force the petrol companies to reduce petrol prices due to the reduction in demand. This will then have a ongoing effect with other supplies such as food etc due to reduced petrol costs etc.

Further emission savings could be achieved with discount in registration costs for vehicles using cleaner solutions such as Electric, LPG or Diesel. Although the Government will need to ensure some form of regulation to keep the sale price of these fuels steady, at least initially. This will result in an increase in greener vehicles being sold. Tesla now have released a vehicle that runs solely using Electric power, it will go from 0 – 100kmh in 4 seconds and can travel at 200kmh. It will do 350kms in a charge that is equivalent to 250 mpg (US) = 0.9408583 liters/100 km. So the technology has arrived and is only a matter of time before it will be available at a price for we all can afford.

A matter for serious consideration should be closing our city centers to general traffic, and the introduction of a congestion tax, with a time of day restriction on heavy vehicle traffic and deliveries, this will reduce the congestion in the city, and alleviate the carbon emissions produced by vehicles that can only travel at a snails pace there anyway. This would mean city workers would use the current public transport arrangements, or be able to use bicycles, e-bikes, scooters, and even roller blades safely, leading to not only reduced carbon emissions, but would show an improvement in the health and fitness of many of these workers. The increase in demand on public transport would mean the Infrastructure fund would need to upgrade these facilities.

Of course I have not even broached other approaches that could well be used in conjunction with these measure such as wind power, but that was as a result of our ability to use global warming, with increased sunlight to our advantage rather then be the victims of it, where wind would be better used as a back up to solar power.

These ideas are based on the use of existing technology, the ability to implement these measures fairly immediately and with an eye on the larger picture for Australians in general. This system is workable and good for the environment, for families, and our future. If enough people become as convinced as me, we may just be able to pitch this at the politicians and set them thinking about solutions that can benefit us all.

Kevin