Now here’s a man who will say and do anything
This was disappointing but predictable news yesterday:
The Abbott government has opened up another front in its war on renewable energy by pulling the plug on investments in the most common form of alternative energy, rooftop and small-scale solar.
As a storm raged over the government’s directive to the Clean Energy Finance Corporation [CEFC] to no longer back wind energy projects, it emerged that it has also put a stop to solar investments other than the largest industrial-scale projects.
The CEFC, (we are told in the article):
. . . had made it possible for low-income people and retirees to invest in solar and take advantage of the power bill savings that flow.
And that, because of this latest move:
“Tony Abbott is keeping people trapped paying higher electricity prices . . . “
Let’s stop there and go back a couple of years.
Here’s (just one instance of the hundreds of times) Tony telling us we’d be be pocketing $550 because – you guessed it – he was scrapping the dastardly ‘carbon tax’ and electricity prices would tumble by that amount:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D-ADNkD9mM0&feature=player_detailpage&list=UU3rLL1h9swUpQszCPJPVoOg#t=202
And here he is explaining it in absolute detail:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0RUN1PIRaHU
And now, with his latest directive, people will be trapped paying higher electricity prices.
Yep, he’s a man who will do and say anything.
By the way, who among you experienced a drop in your electricity prices when the ‘carbon tax’ was repealed?
38 comments
Login here Register here-
David -
Graeme Rust -
Michael Taylor -
Steve Laing -
Florence nee Fedup -
deanyz1 -
Möbius Ecko -
Florence nee Fedup -
Florence nee Fedup -
-
Harquebus -
richard grant -
PopsieJ -
Itsazoosue -
John Kelly -
Harquebus -
Rossleigh -
Matters Not -
Harquebus -
The AIM Network -
Harquebus -
The AIM Network -
Matters Not -
Harquebus -
Harquebus -
Wally -
Matters Not -
kerri -
Wally -
Harquebus -
Florence nee Fedup -
Matters Not -
Harquebus -
Florence nee Fedup -
Harquebus -
Wally -
Harquebus -
eli nes
Return to home pageMine in WA went up average $40 per 2 monthly billing
Mine sure never went down, inn fact it went up,
I think mine went up $550.
Still waiting…
Mine went up early in month before so called tax was repealed. Have not noticed any fall. Biggest con century.
I received a $140 rebate after the dastardly deed – along with the mandatory statement that this was a direct result of the Government scrapping the Carbon tax. It was a one – off. Now my kWh charge has gone up again. I installed solar PV last year. Electricity charges went up and my feed – in tariff is only 6.5 cents per kWh. There is a review coming up, I will be putting in a submission.
Then there’s the news yesterday Councils and business have absorbed the Abbott Government’s pledged $550 annual carbon saving so most consumers are getting at best half the promised $550.
News articles on this are behind pay walls.
By the way this is against the law as Abbott laid it down but apparently the ACCC isn’t going to do anything about it.
Returns on CEFC over 7%. Not bad earner for taxpayers. Jobs created leads to increase tax revenue as well. All we have from Abbott, is he wants it gone. No argument why?
Love Hunt trying to convince us no problems between him and Joyce, if not true, should be problems. Why was Joyce, and I suspect Hunt left out of loop.
Pingback: Now here’s a man who will say and do anything – Written by ROSWELL | winstonclose
Good. Solar Pv is waste of precious fossil fuel energy anyway.
My electricity provider announced a 10% increase in the weeks prior to the scrapping of the carbon tax.
Our electricity bill has not dropped at all another lie by Abbott.
I am surprised how naïve the majority of Australians are. More troops in Iraq/,coal quotes, carbon tax $550 better off are all attributed to Tony A- butt as his sole decision but its not, it is the LNP as a whole policy, and just before the next election Tony A-butt will be dumped and a new set of LNP lies will emerge to capture the sheepie and get returned
When you look at the LNP remember the saying ” for evil to survive good men have to do nothing ” they are all the same both sides of politics
Notice how slimy Turnbull started this thought manipulation by saying he thought the terrorist threat was over estimated and Barmy Joyce being against the new coal mine. Wait until the new subs are built in Japan because ” you can not trust Aussie union workers ” and the secret TPP trade agreement comes into effect and then it may dawn on Aussies that this present government is the most useless, evil. lying lot that Australia has ever had ,
I was trying to find some nformation on energy subsidies and came upon this:
http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2014/oct/13/wind-power-is-cheapest-energy-unpublished-eu-analysis-finds
Would the Australian coal industry survive without government subsidies? Does anybody have any info on this?
Still waiting for my $550. Meanwhile my power bill is showing a 10% increase year to date.
Anyone who uses the economic argument in the renewable energy debate gets an instant fail. Wind turbines are manufactured using still relatively cheap fossil fuels.
Gee, Harquebus, if you’re going to give people a pass/fail, then you need to publish your criteria and not just assert because you’re posting a link to a website then it is the font of all knowledge and everyone else is a fool.
Harquebus has a habit of posting the same link on any number of threads.
But he ‘fails’ to understand that ‘technologies’ develop.
Here’s a clue to what I’m referring to re the emergence of the ‘telephone’:
http://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-23448353
And while he has a point re current technologies and their relative carbon footprint, he fails to appreciate that the development of such technologies has some way to go.
Read his links and glean that.
Rossleigh.
You obviously didn’t bother to read the link that I posted so, for the umpteenth time and just for you.
Renewable generators do not return the energy used in their manufacture, construction and maintenance. Things to consider when factoring energy invested include the transport of everything throughout the extensive supply chain, the smelting of ores and silicon, the manufacture of consumables, plant and machinery, sustaining a workforce and the building and maintenance of associated infrastructure as well as all the electricity used in said supply chain etc. Without the still relatively cheap fossil fuels available to us, these devices would never be built. I say “still relatively cheap” because, a litre of fuel is approximately the energy equivalent of two weeks manual labour.
EROEI mate, EROEI. Read the article if you want an explanation.
The production of solar Pv panes produces four tonnes of toxic waste for every tonne of panels. Their “costs” are coming down because, China does not process the waste but instead, dumps it in the local community. That is an environmental costs that is not factored.
Wind turbines use tonnes of concrete and steel which, must be mined and smelted and for cement, baked in an industrial oven. There is not one process in the mining and processing of rare earth minerals which, are required for the magnets that is not destructive or poisonous to the environment. Another cost not factored.
As for links, most aptly named Matters Not, I try to keep them to a minimum and sometimes post them more than once because, not every one in this forum reads every article.
Gambling our future on technology that we haven’t thought of yet is in my opinion, “foolish”.
Harquebus, what has that got to do with this post?
The AIM Network
It was a response to Itsazoosue. Ask her.
Our apologies. You are correct.
Harquebus wrote:
So you ‘try to keep them to a minimum’. Well that’s your opinion. Personally I find your ‘posts’ and the repetition of same are somewhat egregious. As for ‘not every one .. reads every article’. True and perhaps fails to do so for very good reasons?
As for:
Hilarious, and this from a person whose ‘moniker’ with a historical meaning attribution normally associated with ‘an early muzzle-loaded firearm used in the 15th to 17th centuries’ Now that’s an apt moniker.
But there’s ‘light at the end of the tunnel’ so to speak for a moniker locked in the technological past:
Really? Yes and perhaps we should have stayed in the cave. But is it Plato’s cave to which he refers? I suspect it’s a real possibility.
The AIM Network
No apologies are necessary however, appreciated.
Matters Not.
You conveniently omitted the word “gambling”.
Keep it up mate. You crack me up.
Thanks and cheers.
I received a letter from both of my power suppliers stating that my power cost would be reduced due to removal of the carbon tax but it was nowhere near as much as they increased power by when the carbon tax was introduced. Then to rub a bit more salt into the wound a few weeks later they increased their prices above what they had taken off???
What other industry can sell a product with a 500% mark up between the wholesale cost and charges to the consumer?
Harquebus said: You conveniently omitted the word “gambling”.
While I did omit the word ‘gambling’ from my quote of your post, I didn’t think it was of significance. But apparently you do. So sorry for that.
But again you demonstrate your particular and peculiar construction of ‘reality’.
To ‘gamble’ or not on the future is really a nonsense notion. I make ‘choices’ each and every day and in so doing I ‘gamble’. Daily I decide to drive or not drive. I gamble whether I should cross or not cross the road.
Perhaps more importantly I decide whether I will adopt an optimistic or a pessimistic stance as to how I view the world and the possibilities. And so do you. While you may, or not, be aware of that ‘choice’ or ‘gamble’ is of no consequence.
It seems to me that you are an out and out ‘pessimist’ and you select facts and figures to support same.
As for ‘cracking you up’. Perhaps you could define your terms.
Or to put it another way ‘define and clarify your concepts’.
I’ve commented here before! My pensioner parents got a whopping $25!
Me? I got nada, zip, niente, zilch!
@Harquebus How can you say that wind turbines are created using power created by low cost fossil fuelled generators?
In Australia a percentage of all companies power must be provided from renewable sources, that is how the rebate system for installing solar power works. Any renewable energy equipment manufactured in Iceland is most probably created using renewable energy so I think your continual assertion that “Wind turbines are manufactured using still relatively cheap fossil fuels.” is misleading if not incorrect. It is impossible to know specifically where the power on the grid originates so it could be claimed that all of the renewable energy generated today was used to produce more renewable generators.
You also fail to consider how much energy is used to transport fossil fuels to the location where they are burnt to generate electricity, a new wind turbine is only transported 1 time but so is the equipment in a coal fired power plant. I suggest that overall a wind power plant is miles ahead within a few years.
When doing a comparison in the manner that you do with renewables to fossil fuels you do not apply identical principles to both. I guarantee that much less power is consumed maintaining a field of wind turbines compared to a diesel generator or a coal fired plant.
Matters Not
I will take this up again with you another time. We are getting off topic and theAimn has already shown their concern.
Just quickly though, do you make decisions based on unknown quantities?
Wally.
Briefly and for the same reason, off topic.
A wind turbine will not generate enough energy in its lifetime to produce another wind turbine.
And that gentleman, assuming that you are both gentlemen, until we are on more suitable page, is where I would like to leave it, for now.
I look forward to our next encounter on this subject. It is one that I debate frequently.
Once renewals such as wind turbines and solar are built, cost of running and maintaining running very cheap, long into the futurearly.
Harquebus said:
Are you seriously suggesting Harquebus that it’s possible to do otherwise?
To suggest that you, I, or anyone else, makes decisions based on ‘known’ or ‘unknown’ quantities, in any absolute sense, is a complete nonsense.
Harquebus, perhaps,your problem lies in your failure to appreciate as to what questions ‘ought’ to be asked?
BTW, Harquebus, why are you using this ‘technology’ to communicate with me when you could be using carrier pigeons or telegram boys mounted on bicycles?
Not that I want to stimulate your thinking powers any more than necessary.
Florence nee Fedup: Failed the first test.
@theAimn. Apologies. Couldn’t resist.
Matters Not.
You are quite prepared to do so with unknown technology.
Apologies again.
Love being failed by you means I have it right.
Florence nee Fedup
Sure about that? If it makes you feel better, okay.
Hoping that you will be in the debate that I am sure is coming soon.
Avagoodwun.
@Harquebus
Why do you ignore Iceland’s thermal power, hydro electricity and solar when referring to renewable energy being used to manufacturing renewable energy generators?
As I said earlier you do not compare non renewables to renewables on an equal footing and your pessimistic view is as deceptive as Tony Abbott.
Wally
Hydro electricity is an exception. Solar energy scraped from millions of kilometres of ocean, transported and funneled through a turbine. This is scale needed for renewable energy and they also have their drawbacks. Again, another day mate. I would like nothing more than to continue this debate but, wrong page. The right one will come along soon enough.
Has little billy the stomach to challenge the rabbutt on tax or are we tilting at windfarms?
If only the rabbutt hadn’t lied about the $550 he promised, I could get a bet on little billy’s silence, on the matter of the taxpayer billions being given to polluters versus the polluters paying the price for carbon.