Australia's carbon (dioxide) tax

Wildy said:
Except in the world inhabited by the listeners of Alan Jones where that shorthand is evidence of a lie.
Click to expand...

Not only that, but the message is then distorted to "carbon dioxide is good, plants need it" and similar rubbish.
 
lionking said:
Not only that, but the message is then distorted to "carbon dioxide is good, plants need it" and similar rubbish.
Click to expand...

So they don't need it?! Whatever.

Anyway - on topic - please explain what information changed you from a skeptic to a true believer, how the carbon (dioxide) tax will save us from catastrophic global warming and by how much the tax and our efforts will mitigate it.
 
Last edited:
A.A. Alfie said:
So please explain [ . . . ] how the carbon (dioxide) tax will save us from catastrophic global warming and by how much the tax and our efforts will mitigate it.
Click to expand...
You already had it explained how the tax works. You have, so far, no counter to that. Which would not be a surprise if you didn't even know how it worked in the first place.
 
A.A. Alfie said:
So they don't need it?! Whatever.
Click to expand...

Are you being deliberately obtuse? Have you not read some of the denier crap about more carbon dioxide being a very good thing because it will promote plant growth? Is this your position?
 
Francesca R said:
How does one "emit carbon"? I have forgotten some of my chemistry degree but seem to remember it being solid in its elemental state.

"Emissions" invariably refers to carbon dioxide. The price on emissions (referred to as "carbon price") is per tonne of carbon dioxide emitted, not per tonne of carbon.

"Carbon tax" and "carbon emission" is just a shorthand.
Click to expand...
I did not do a chemistry degree or any degree, I did not even finish high school.
But if you burn fossil fuels, is not carbon a biproduct?
And does it not mix with O2 in the atmosphere to form CO2?
I am waiting a reply from someone much, much more knowledgable than me.
 
A.A. Alfie said:
So they don't need it?! Whatever.

Anyway - on topic - please explain .. how the carbon (dioxide) tax will save us from catastrophic global warming
Click to expand...


That's a straw man. No one has ever claimed that's the goal of a carbon price. A carbon price is merely a market mechanism to send a price signal to encourage polluting industries to begin reducing emissions.

And seeing as though the Labor Party's goose is well and truly cooked and we will soon have an new PM it would be instructive to start critiquing the policies we will have in place after 2013 - maybe you could outline a cheaper alternative policy to meet the bipartisan target of a 5% reduction on 2000 emission levels by 2020?

I await, breath bated, in anticipation of your response.
 
bit_pattern said:
That's a straw man. No one has ever claimed that's the goal of a carbon price. A carbon price is merely a market mechanism to send a price signal to encourage polluting industries to begin reducing emissions.
Click to expand...

Am I to understand you correctly? The goal of the carbon (dioxide) tax is not about stopping the world from catastrophic global warming?
 
wombatwal said:
But if you burn fossil fuels, is not carbon a biproduct?
And does it not mix with O2 in the atmosphere to form CO2?
I am waiting a reply from someone much, much more knowledgable than me.
Click to expand...
No carbon is not a product of burning (oxidation via combustion). It is not necessarily a starting material either (except for coal, which is approximately neat carbon). The burning of carbon or hydrocarbons is a chemical reaction in which CO2 is a product.

("Biproduct" is a maths term. In chemistry, by-product is the same as product, just not wanted)
 
Last edited:
Francesca R said:
No carbon is not a product of burning (oxidation via combustion). It is not necessarily a starting material either (except for coal, ehich is approximately neat carbon). The burning of carbon or hydrocarbons is a chemical reaction in which CO2 is a product.

("Biproduct" is a maths term. In chemistry, by-product is the same as product, just not wanted)
Click to expand...

While I don't disagree with this post, the majority of power here is, in fact, produced by burning carbon (coal).
 
A.A. Alfie said:
Am I to understand you correctly? The goal of the carbon (dioxide) tax is not about stopping the world from catastrophic global warming?
Click to expand...

It's not The Final Solution, no. It's one of many ways to help prevent it. Do you understand?
 
I think you've had enough information to answer your questions.

You still don't seem to have responses for a fair bit of stuff, however.
 
Francesca R said:
I think you've had enough information to answer your questions.

You still don't seem to have responses for a fair bit of stuff, however.
Click to expand...

What I don't have is any specific responses from the Gillard supporters about her claims made in my post (#8).
 
I don't see why it should be anyone's responsibility to answer those, which are not really the topic anyway. Maybe nobody else agrees with them either.

I'm going to assume you have withdrawn your assertion that the carbon tax is "useless" since you either misunderstood how it should work, or otherwise avoided supporting why it was useless.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom