Skip to toolbar

Aussies Living Simply

New Climate Council – community funded

Home Forums SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITIES Community Activism and Self Nurturing Communities New Climate Council – community funded

  • This topic has 38 replies, 10 voices, and was last updated 7 years ago by SnagsSnags.
Viewing 9 posts - 31 through 39 (of 39 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #533834
    Hummer HumbugHummer
    Keymaster

    Keep it nice in here folks 🙂

    #533835
    pavbenthpavbenth
    Member

    Tipper post=358981 wrote: 97% of scientists may believe in GW but I could say without doubt that the consensus as to how to deal with the problem wouldn’t be a carbon tax…

    Writes Wade and Hutchens in the Sydney Morning Herald, “A Fairfax Media survey of 35 prominent university and business economists found only two believed direct action was the better way to limit Australia’s greenhouse gas emissions. Thirty – or 86 per cent – favoured the existing carbon price scheme [the carbon tax]. Three rejected both schemes” (Wade and Hutchens, 2013). You’re entitled to your personal lack of doubt but – perhaps fortunately – that doesn’t affect the real world. Fact is, based on the above study, the majority of economics experts believe in favour of the carbon tax.

    You’re right, the scientists that bring us the facts about climate change may not be the best people to tell us how to deal with it. But there are certainly people that are. And, in a capitalist society, economists are certainly a stakeholder.

    Wade, M. and Hutchens, G. (2013). “Tony Abbott’s new direct action sceptics”. Viewed: http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/tony-abbotts-new-direct-action-sceptics-20131027-2w9va.html

    #533836
    pavbenthpavbenth
    Member

    ballamara post=358388 wrote: Tim Flannery is not a major expert or even a minor one when it comes to climate change he is a geologist nothing more, and it is debatable whether he is in the majority of scientific thinking on the subject

    I think Professor Tim Flannery is poorly branded. He is a talented palaeontologist and prize-winning author. Foremost, he is a science communicator. He brings science to the masses. He brings us the juicy facts. He doesn’t claim to be a climate scientist – though he has a lot of knowledge in areas that count. But he knows how to communicate the findings of climate scientists, as a scientist.

    #533837
    caddiecaddie
    Participant

    I too was wondering about solar panels/wind turbines with battery backup for all new buildings.

    I would think the power company could supply them and maintain them, then charge a rental based on capacity, for it all because it isn’t cheap.

    the company would need to make a profit but the householder wouldn’t have to find the cash to install them.

    When we connected to the grid in the 70’s there was a cash deposit and a supply charge levied over 30 years.

    At the end of that your deposit was returned but the supply charge continues on

    You would need to know aprox how much power you need to install the correct sizes.

    this would certainly make people more aware of just how much they use, not nice to run out of supply because you were just too tired to turn things off!!!

    Having said that I wonder how it would work out cost wise in the country because the cost of installing power lines is huge!

    Maintance costs for the ageing lines are also a huge burden so perhaps this could be a way to slowly turn over to renewables

    Cost comparisons would be good to know.

    #533838
    SnagsSnags
    Member

    Tipper post=358997 wrote:

    I wonder how giving everybody in Australia solar panels and battery banks to attain autonomy instead of feeding back to the grid would go??I guess if it can’t be controlled by the big energy companies(At a profit of course) that have us by the proverbial balls in regards to supply and demand it just wouldn’t work on any level would it.Domestically it would be a better option than a “Here it is,There it goes” tax on the biggest polluters which we pay for not them themselves.I wonder how the energy companies would feel if we owned the carbon credits and could buy/swap and sell to the highest bidder as we pleased to negate our part in the problem.If lowering our power usage is the aim domestic solar would seem fairer.

    I fear I’m living in a utopian bubble that we could domestically break the chains that bind us to these enslavers.Now there is an economic FIX that I would agree with in principle. 👿 :whistle:

    batteries are a very expensive and inefficient way of storing electricity.

    Technically the government did give us power

    They built power stations coal mines and put in power lines.

    I cant see how this is any different to governments giving panels turbines and batteries other than its less expensive electricity but way more polluting.

    Small scaled community owned geo thermal,solar thermal,wind farms or solar farms were you competed with coal power.

    A carbon tax or a price on polluting slowly evening up the playing field, should speed that along.

    Using the money to invest in infrastructure is another way of getting it speeding along.

    And the long term mathematical/economic reality that once the infrastructure was in place their was no need to keep feeding it, like there is with a coal fired power station, would eventually kick in.

    The major thing standing in the way is the that the state governments NSW Qld and Vic rely heavily on coal for money and WA needs China to buy the coal or its iron ore is just rust not steel.

    Wealthy people dont like change they made their money on cheap fossil fuels and there is nothing to sell once you build infrastructure for renewables.

    They will fight tooth and nail to keep the Liberals in to slow down the change and fund the misinformation on global warming in media.

    #533839
    pavbenthpavbenth
    Member

    I share your utopian bubble to a degree, Tipper. (Hope I am not taking up to much space… And that smell, it wasn’t me!)

    You said, “… unfortunately economists I’ve had enough of as well as the capitalist regimes that seem to have our best interests at heart”. Sure, we can dismiss them but, whilst ever capitalism dominates, their skills are required. Not all economists are bad. In fact, a great many probably share the views of you and I. After all, economics hasn’t got anything do with money necessarily. It’s concerned with “production, distribution, and consumption of goods and services”.

    #533840
    pavbenthpavbenth
    Member

    Gah. This forum is damn glitchy sometimes. I wrote a comment and it got eaten. Anyways.

    Tipper – I share your utopian bubble to a degree. (Hope I am not taking up too much space!) However, economics exists regardless of whether we live in a capitalistic society or other. Economics is concerned with the “production, distribution, and consumption of goods and services”. Not money necessarily like so many assume.

    #533841
    pavbenthpavbenth
    Member

    Gah. This forum is damn glitchy sometimes. I wrote a comment and it got eaten. Anyways.

    Tipper – I share your utopian bubble to a degree. (Hope I am not taking up too much space!) However, economics exists regardless of whether we live in a capitalistic society. Economics is concerned with the “production, distribution, and consumption of goods and services”. Not money necessarily like so many assume. Whilst ever our portion of the world relies on capitalism, it will sit at the heart of any solution.

    I agree, capitalism is the cause of the problem – and all other evil.

    Personally, I think the solutions lay elsewhere. Revolution is required. Consumerism has to stop. The solution is a longer way off than we expect. Hence, unless we’re willing to overturn the existing system, we need to work within it.

    #533842
    SnagsSnags
    Member

    The evolution is inevitable its a mathematical certainty that one day the carrying capacity is reached and the loan cant be serviced by printing more money.

    We see that in Europe/US now just wait for the mix of climate change population growth and resource depletion to be added to the mix.

    The revolution requires the economics to not add up and there to be no hope of them ever adding up and people demanding change.

    It can happen over the price of a loaf of bread.

    The Cornucopian BAU types like to pretend the magic pudding will keep delivering and if we dont know the facts it might somehow make reality go away.

    …. future generations will pay the price of our greed and ignorance

Viewing 9 posts - 31 through 39 (of 39 total)
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.