Carbon Abatement Scheme
Posted by: col001
18th Aug 2012 02:19pm
Arguably the most controversial piece of legislation passed by the Gillard government would be the Carbon Abatement Scheme, better known as the Carbon Tax. The world price on carbon stands at $10 to $15 per tonne. The market rate is expected to remain at a approx $15 per tonne in 2015, when we revert to an ETS. Are Australians currently paying too much or should we be paying anything at all?
Since 2006 greenhouse emissions from energy generated sources have been showing a downward trend, meaning less dependence on fossil fuel generated power. The trend is undoubtedly the result of the growth in home and farm solar panels, and other sources. There is an argument we could meet 2020 emission targets with or without the carbon tax. Growth areas in emissions remain agriculture and transport. So why has the government targeted power generation? Also is the carbon tax really an indirect tax and not part of a carbon abatement scheme as they claim?
Many comments I have seen refer to CO2 as a pollution. Pollutants are chemicals, particulate matter or biological materials that cause harm or discomfort to living matter. Life as we know it would not exist if we did not have CO2. So why do some call it a pollutant when it doesn't really fit the meaning of a pollutant?
Since 2006 greenhouse emissions from energy generated sources have been showing a downward trend, meaning less dependence on fossil fuel generated power. The trend is undoubtedly the result of the growth in home and farm solar panels, and other sources. There is an argument we could meet 2020 emission targets with or without the carbon tax. Growth areas in emissions remain agriculture and transport. So why has the government targeted power generation? Also is the carbon tax really an indirect tax and not part of a carbon abatement scheme as they claim?
Many comments I have seen refer to CO2 as a pollution. Pollutants are chemicals, particulate matter or biological materials that cause harm or discomfort to living matter. Life as we know it would not exist if we did not have CO2. So why do some call it a pollutant when it doesn't really fit the meaning of a pollutant?
You must be a member to reply to this chat topic. Click here to sign in.
Help Caféstudy members by responding to their questions, or ask your own in Café Chat, and you will get the chance of earning extra rewards. Caféstudy will match these and donate equally to our two chosen Australian charities.
Australian Marine Conservation Society are an independent charity, staffed by a committed group of scientists, educators and passionate advocates who have defended Australia’s oceans for over 50 years.
ReachOut is the most accessed online mental health service for young people and their parents in Australia. Their trusted self-help information, peer-support program and referral tools save lives by helping young people be well and stay well. The information they offer parents makes it easier for them to help their teenagers, too.
Challenge Challenge is a not-for-profit organisation that supports children and families living with cancer, 365 days a year.
Our support is free and immediate, helping to lighten the cancer journey by addressing the practical, social, and emotional needs of all our members.
Our support is free and immediate, helping to lighten the cancer journey by addressing the practical, social, and emotional needs of all our members.