Federal Government proposes a price on carbon.

[fish]

I already pay $70 dollars for fuel a week + more when its needed i dont feel the need to pay another $20 ontop of what i do.

$20 extra per week on top of your current $70 represents a 28% increase in price, or around 36 cents per litre!

The extra cost I've seen quoted is 6.5 cents per litre, and that's from Tony Abbott.

I think you've been given some misinformation somewhere Bulldog.

[Darth Vader]

I already pay $70 dollars for fuel a week + more when its needed i dont feel the need to pay another $20 ontop of what i do.

$20 extra per week on top of your current $70 represents a 28% increase in price, or around 36 cents per litre!

The extra cost I've seen quoted is 6.5 cents per litre, and that's from Tony Abbott.

I think you've been given some misinformation somewhere Bulldog.

what would be the correct information fish?

[fish]

I already pay $70 dollars for fuel a week + more when its needed i dont feel the need to pay another $20 ontop of what i do.

$20 extra per week on top of your current $70 represents a 28% increase in price, or around 36 cents per litre!

The extra cost I've seen quoted is 6.5 cents per litre, and that's from Tony Abbott.

I think you've been given some misinformation somewhere Bulldog.

what would be the correct information fish?

We don't know the carbon price yet, or whether petrol will even be included. These and other details will be worked out over the coming months.

I believe the opposition has based their 6.5 cents per litre based on an a carbon price of $25 per tonne or so, which is not unreasonable.

Not sure where Bulldog got his figures from - I think he made them up.

[fish]

Santos has backed the carbon tax.

SANTOS has backed the introduction of a "well-designed" carbon tax, saying natural gas would become more competitive as a result.

As a major producer of natural gas, Santos said it stood to benefit from the move to a lower-emission economy.

"The introduction of a carbon price would enable lower-carbon technologies such as natural gas and renewables to be more competitive in the energy market," Santos' manager of climate change and sustainability, Susie Smith, said in today's Advertiser.

[fish]

Also, more distrubing news regarding the attacks on Tony Windsor. Article here.

AUSTRALIA'S bruising political landscape has taken a violent turn after the Wikipedia site of independent MP Tony Windsor was edited to report he had been assassinated.

Federal police will be called in to investigate the latest threat against the rural MP. Earlier this week, Mr Windsor revealed he had received death threats in the wake of his support for Labor's climate change policies.

[redandblack]

The Conservative governemnt of the UK is to introduce a carbon price policy.

That's right, the CONSERVATIVE government of the UK is to introduce a carbon price.

I presume that makes them a dangerous mob of socialist loonies who will wreck the UK?

[Bully]

strange how this carbon tax is so good to everyone yet the polls state otherwise towards Julia. Putting her below Rudd before he was out on his backside.

ANyway seen as i bought a new Series 2 commodore and that engine is capable of taking the BioFlex fuel (75%-85% ethanol in it) i filled up yesterday at caltex for $1.21 a litre So i knew there was a good reason to buy the new commodore. I was probably the first person to use that bowser as when i went to fill up my tank the nosel was full of spider webs. everyone was looking at me thinking i was putting the wrong fuel in. They all paid $1.47 a litre.

[Psyber]

The Conservative governemnt of the UK is to introduce a carbon price policy.
That's right, the CONSERVATIVE government of the UK is to introduce a carbon price.
I presume that makes them a dangerous mob of socialist loonies who will wreck the UK?

Hopefully it is one that offers real change in technology not just a flow of money.

[Psyber]

strange how this carbon tax is so good to everyone yet the polls state otherwise towards Julia. Putting her below Rudd before he was out on his backside.
ANyway seen as i bought a new Series 2 commodore and that engine is capable of taking the BioFlex fuel (75%-85% ethanol in it) i filled up yesterday at caltex for $1.21 a litre So i knew there was a good reason to buy the new commodore. I was probably the first person to use that bowser as when i went to fill up my tank the nosel was full of spider webs. everyone was looking at me thinking i was putting the wrong fuel in. They all paid $1.47 a litre.

The carbon taxes posed in the past by the ALP didn't actually reduce emissions, just trade them, so they were not much good for anybody.
This one so far doesn't offer more - the Greens have better policy in that area.

Burning ethanol is better than petrol to some extent because ethanol is a smaller molecule with less carbon atoms in it.
However, I think you need more ethanol to generate the same power and cover the same distance so it may work out much the same.

I'm not sure how LPG compares with an ethanol/petrol mix for carbon content, but I'd expect LPG to be better.
However, we may run out of LPG, but we can divert food crop lands to growing vegetation to make ethanol from.
Hydrogen is the only carbon free fuel, and petrol cars can be converted to run on it - and Germany is already moving in that direction.

[Bully]

get the same if not more kms per tank.

Unleaded 98% i got 600kms out of tank. This was highway/motorway driving
Bio Fuel i got 550kms out of tank. And that was city driving.

[Psyber]

get the same if not more kms per tank.
Unleaded 98% i got 600kms out of tank. This was highway/motorway driving
Bio Fuel i got 550kms out of tank. And that was city driving.

A technical review I read some time ago suggested otherwise, and we need a bigger sample than one tank of each to be conclusive.
However, you prompted me to look it up and here is some data for those interested.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethanol_%28fuel%29

Fuel economy

In theory, all fuel-driven vehicles have a fuel economy (measured as miles per US gallon, or liters per 100 km) that is directly proportional to the fuel's energy content.[44] In reality, there are many other variables that come into play that affect the performance of a particular fuel in a particular engine. Ethanol contains approx. 34% less energy per unit volume than gasoline, and therefore in theory, burning pure ethanol in a vehicle will result in a 34% reduction in miles per US gallon , given the same fuel economy, compared to burning pure gasoline. Since ethanol has a higher octane rating, the engine can be made more efficient by raising its compression ratio. In fact using a variable turbocharger, the compression ratio can be optimized for the fuel being used, making fuel economy almost constant for any blend. .[22][23] For E10 (10% ethanol and 90% gasoline), the effect is small (~3%) when compared to conventional gasoline,[45] and even smaller (1-2%) when compared to oxygenated and reformulated blends.[46] However, for E85 (85% ethanol), the effect becomes significant. E85 will produce lower mileage than gasoline, and will require more frequent refueling. Actual performance may vary depending on the vehicle. Based on EPA tests for all 2006 E85 models, the average fuel economy for E85 vehicles resulted 25.56% lower than unleaded gasoline.[47] The EPA-rated mileage of current USA flex-fuel vehicles[48] should be considered when making price comparisons, but it must be noted that E85 is a high performance fuel, with an octane rating of about 104, and should be compared to premium. In one estimate[49] the US retail price for E85 ethanol is 2.62 US dollar per gallon or 3.71 dollar corrected for energy equivalency compared to a gallon of gasoline priced at 3.03 dollar. Brazilian cane ethanol (100%) is priced at 3.88 dollar against 4.91 dollar for E25 (as July 2007).

http://auto.howstuffworks.com/fuel-effi ... facts1.htm

It may depend on the motor too: http://www.ethanol.org/pdf/contentmgmt/ ... dy_001.pdf

The three vehicles averaged 1.5% lower mileage with E10, 2.2% lower mileage with E20, 5.1%
lower mileage with E30, and miles per gallon actually increased by an average of 1.7% when using
E10AK made with the specially denatured ethanol. E10AK was the highest mileage fuel in two of
three cars.
One vehicle – the Toyota Camry – showed virtually no variance between unleaded and either of
the E10 blends, and both E10 blends actually performed better than straight unleaded. That car
also took the largest drops on fuel efficiency when using E20 and E30. Kasperson suggested that
the vehicle’s “tight” tolerances for optimizing efficiency of standard fuels like unleaded and E10
would possibly also result in larger variances in non-standard fuels.

[redandblack]

Psyber, if the Labor Carbon Tax plan isn't much good for anybody because it ;doesn't reduce emissions', how do you rate Mr Abbott's policy on the same problem?

[Psyber]

Psyber, if the Labor Carbon Tax plan isn't much good for anybody because it ;doesn't reduce emissions', how do you rate Mr Abbott's policy on the same problem?

I haven't actually seen very much about it - certainly not enough to form a considered opinion.
The party hasn't circulated it to members, it isn't on the news web sites I frequent, and as I said he just hasn't been on TV when I've tuned in.
I gather from the little I've heard taht it leans a bit on carbon sequestration which is not one of my preferred options.
But I have to admit I haven't read the details of the process and assessed it for myself.
I'll email him and ask for the details - in fact I'll do it as soon as I get of this forum..

As I've said, I like the Greens more comprehensive plan better than the ALPs token efforts.
I could support them if they were prepared to look at cleaner fission technologies for base load, rather than rely entirely on renewable energy systems.

[redandblack]

No worries.

Does that suggest you don't subscribe to the views of some that the Greens are running the show on this policy, or at best, they didn't get their own way much?

[Psyber]

No worries.
Does that suggest you don't subscribe to the views of some that the Greens are running the show on this policy, or at best, they didn't get their own way much?

Obviously the Greens are getting some concessions, as are the other independents, who are probably more powerful as they could decide to swap sides.
I don't think the Greens are "running the show", but they have some influence and are providing forces within the ALP with a thin excuse to reverse Julia's pre-election promise.
What we are getting is not the Greens policy but a variation of the Rudd policy that Julia said was dead, with as yet undeclared variations to keep the Greens and independents just enough on side.
Overall, I think the Greens policy would be better.

[redandblack]

I see the No-Carbon Tax rally (being organised by a Sydney Radio Station, 2GB, amongst others) has strong links to Climate Sceptics and Anti-Islam websites.

Surprise

[Psyber]

Psyber, if the Labor Carbon Tax plan isn't much good for anybody because it ;doesn't reduce emissions', how do you rate Mr Abbott's policy on the same problem?

I didn't have to email Tony Abbot about the policy - I found it on the website, which I rarely go to.
http://www.liberal.org.au/Issues/Environment.aspx

Policy and Media Downloads

* Environment Policy download
* Direct Action Plan on the Environment and Climate Change download
* Marine Protected Areas Policy download
* Water Conservation Policy download
* Murray-Darling Basin Policy download

There is a lot to wade through and the details of implementation and the science behind it is a bit thin, but so is the ALP's at present.

These bits appeal to some extent on the surface, but I haven't had time to read it all:

Direct Action in Australia, not Overseas
Labor’s emissions trading scheme relies on extensive purchase of overseas CO2 emissions abatement to meet the 5 per cent emissions reduction target. This delivers no local environmental benefit in Australia.
In contrast, the Coalition’s approach ensures that all abatement activity supported by the Emissions Reduction Fund to achieve the 5 per cent emissions reduction target will occur in Australia – delivering environmental benefits here rather than overseas.

Soil Carbons – Once in a Century Replenishment of our Soils
The single largest opportunity for CO2 emissions reduction in Australia is through bio-sequestration in general, and in particular, the replenishment of our soil carbons. It is also the lowest cost CO2 emissions reduction available in Australia on a large scale. Significantly improving soil carbons also helps soil quality, farm productivity and water efficiency, and should be a national goal regardless of the CO2 abatement benefits.

International Recognition of Soil Carbons
While soil carbons are not recognised under existing Kyoto Treaty arrangements, any new global CO2 emissions reduction agreement is expected to include soil carbons.
Current draft US emissions reduction legislation specifically includes soil carbons, and without their inclusion it is unlikely that a global agreement will be reached.

Reducing CO2 Emissions in the Electricity Sector
The dominance of coal as Australia’s primary energy source is the principal reason that Australia’s CO2 emissions are higher per capita than in many other countries.40
Electricity generation represented approximately 200 million tonnes of CO2 emissions or nearly 36 per cent of Australia’s total CO2 emissions in 2007. The largest proportion of this is base-load electricity generated primarily from black and brown coal.

Electricity Generators
Through the Emissions Reduction Fund, a Coalition Government will make incentives available for the oldest and most inefficient power stations to reduce their emissions in an orderly manner which protects jobs, electricity prices and Australia’s energy security. The Coalition will work with the electricity sector on the design of potential assistance that could be provided through the Fund to ensure both fairness and cost parity for consumers. Support from the Fund will only be considered if appropriate guarantees are received in relation to jobs, energy security, and electricity prices.

Creating New Clean Energy Jobs
The Coalition recognises the potential for clean energy to underpin future employment growth in key regional areas.
In addition to potential support to be provided from the Emissions Reduction Fund, we will provide $60 million to develop the La Trobe Valley, Hunter and Central Queensland regions as Clean Energy Employment Hubs to drive additional clean energy research and development. These ‘Clean Energy Hubs’ will support the identification and attraction of new employment opportunities to assist the transformation of local coal industry jobs transformation to clean energy jobs.
Details on the establishment of these Clean Energy Hubs will be determined in close cooperation with local business and community leaders from each region.

[redandblack]

The anti-carbon tax rally in Melbourne yesterday drew 400 people.

The pro-carbon tax rally drew 8,000.

The people's revolt isn't off to a great start.

[fish]

Surprised nobody has mentioned Tony Abbott recent change of view on climate change.

Apparantly he now believes what the scientists have been telling us for years - that climate change is forced by human activity!

See this article.

TONY Abbott has been forced to reaffirm that the Coalition accepts climate change with human causes, after a senior senator rejected the concept.

"Climate change does happen. Mankind does make a contribution," the Opposition Leader said today.

Looks like the coalition is still divided on the issue though...

[redandblack]

Don't be surprised it's hardly been mentioned.

Abbott gets very little examination of his policies.

He now says climate change is real, Minchin says it's crap.

If it was the ALP, the headlines would be screaming:

SPLIT IN THE ALP!!