The Galileo Movement are offering to send out 1 – 5 cartoon posters to you to coincide with that Tax-on-Everything that starts this Sunday. To order, email Galileomovement AT gmail.com. Let’s help the people of Australia understand just why we will be paying billions.
The Galileo Movement are looking for 100 people to donate $5 each to cover the costs of printing and posting. I like this idea. I’ve ordered and donated. Do join in.
The Galileo Movement suggest posting this on shops and business in their local area and displaying it on windows or notice boards — anywhere it will be seen.
I like it… đ
(Click on the image to enlarge it)
A special big thank you to artist Steve Hunter who has allowed The Galileo Movement to use his illustration. Click here to visit Steve’s website. (He’s good!) [Try here if that first link stops working, his site is moving.]
You can download copies and print them yourself: Â
http://www.galileomovement.com.au/images/poster_campaign_800c.jpg.
“Thank you for your support!”
“The Galileo Movement”
I want this poster all over the US as well of what Obama would like to put in place if he gets a 2nd term.
It was what he intended for the US and is still trying to get surreptitiously with undisclosed initiatives like the Future Earth Alliance and the US participating in UNESCO’s dream to radically restructure higher ed and economies through the Bologna Process.
Thanks Jo.
00
I reckon voting machine maker Diebold- I think it is, already knows who will win US election,IF Obama Bin Laden doesn’t declare an emergency and invoke the Continuation of Government option AND cancels the election altogether.
00
The emergency being that Mitt Romney might get elected …?
00
The outlawing of criticism is a pretty telling step on the road to tyranny.
This New Law proscribing any attribution of price rises to the New Carbon Tax seems a rather desperate measure. Indeed one worthy of the regimes of such great leaders as Stalin, Pol Pott, Hitler , and that most notorious of ‘incorruptibles’, Robespierre himself.
How on Earth can a Government of a Free World nation such as Aus. get away with such oppressive measures in this day & age ?
Freedom requires eternal vigilance. The US Constitution wouldn’t allow such a offense to pass.
Is there no protection from such assaults on liberty in Australia?
Could this poster campaign be the start of some mass disobedience ?
Trust the petty tyrants to put something up there that is so easy to turn into a martyrdom for freedom.
Best challenged while it’s fresh perhaps, before it becomes the norm.
00
As in the days of Robespierre the Banks made a killing –
http://www.sonofrobespierre.com/home/food-speculation-banksters-making-a-killing-literally-2/
00
Then think of how Australia’s UN controlled government is creating the demise of this nations food bowl – the Murray Darlin Basin.
Labour is stripping water from farmers to grow food.
City dwellers will one day come to the realisation that dollars in whatever form will not sustain life and that ultimately the farmer is the nations life provider.
00
Deja Vu after the Communist revolution in Russia THE Government STRIPPED the country side of all food to feed their powerbase in the cities and Left the farming communities to starve
00
I do not think that most city people are aware of the already adverse impact left political agenda is troubling our rural people.
00
NO!
00
We already have a couple of Tshirts printed with “It’s all because of the Carbon Tax”
00
You do realise that the line
is used by supporters of the tax to mock those who are against it? The Labor party even used question time in the senate using exactly this line. I just thought you should know this before wearing it in public.
00
Sounds like you need a $1.1 million fine.
00
I like how it’s already $1.1 million, from the outset. Would that be to ensure the UN get their 10% cut from the racket without denting the millions ?
00
Still, anyone can play at that game.
After a great big long list of everything that’s clearly affected..
……….
………
……
. State clearly:-
“All of the above are categorically NOT due to the Carbon Tax, because to say anything else would invite punitive & disproportionate action, previously unprecedented in any free land such as this.
10% of revenues raised by the Carbon Tax however ( which Does NOT come from any of the above) goes to fund administrations alien to this country.
00
We see a picture of Australia going down the gurglar, but wealth doesn’t disappear it is merely transferred.
00
The comment at the bottom of the diagram caught my eye: “Massive Economic Pain for No Environmental Gain”.
And as I read that, I thought, “So what is the point?”
The point is, I believe, that the comment should read, “Massive Economic Pain for Personal Political Gain”.
The senior members of the ALP are at the top of their game in Australia, and either they accept that, or they have to move into a bigger socialist pond – the UN.
Apart from in Europe (another socialist construct), the Kyoto agreement has made little headway. And the vast majority of nations were waiting to see what came next. What the UN needed, was another developed country to climb on board in order to give the whole scam a little more credence.
The carrot (or carrots) being offered are plush, all expenses paid, jobs at the UN. Juliar is looking to follow in Helen Clark’s footsteps, and I wouldn’t be surprised if Kevin wasn’t offered a job as well.
What an unholy alliance …
00
While Kevin has recently renominated for preselection, I am still of the belief that all along he has been seeking a position at the UN, and I would say he would be more likely to go there than Julia.
I’m not sure now if his nomination for that preselection is a red herring. Maybe he’s doing it to say that he kept his promise when he lost the PM position, and now he thinks that the imminent bloodbath will be so huge, even he might lose his own seat, thus fulfilling his promise, and giving him free rein to move on. Either way, if he does get that preselection, (and I wonder if there may not be moves afoot at that preselection) I don’t think he’ll be campaigning too hard, sort of just going through the motions.
I just cannot imagine Kevin as just playing the role of a loyal back bench party hack.
At least Eddie now gets to smile in his old age, full in the knowledge that now there’s not just one PM who was worse than him, but two!
Tony.
00
Rereke,
This is a little OT but does this sound right to you?
http://iceagenow.info/2012/06/incredibly-rare-cold-zealand/
I thought i saw my first iceberg in Invercargill (well it turned out to be Swann Island but still….) it was the coldest place i have ever been to so is this story anything unusual?
Cheers
Crakar
00
Crakar,
I don’t think the weather mentioned in that article it is that unusual.
The Lindis Pass (and all of the other South Island alpine passes) are closed at times during the winter. Invercargill is the southernmost airport in New Zealand, it snows there too, and in Dunedin.
I spent my formative years in Dunedin, and it always snows there in winter, and I hated driving âup countryâ in the winter. Having to put chains on a car, in the middle of nowhere, with a cold 20 knot wind blowing the snow down your neck, is not fun.
The South Island has several superb ski fields in Central Otago, and another near Christchurch at Mount Hutt, and another in the Central North Island.
None of these would exist if New Zealand did not get cold enough for snow every year.
What was different, and probably what seeded the referenced article, is that the West coast of the South Island (which is where Greymouth, Westport and Hokitika are located) is usually very wet in winter. In fact it is very wet for most of the year. This winter, the warm, moist air that flows down the East coast of Australia and then spins around in the Tasman sea and on to the West coast of the South Island, didnât. Instead, it hit the West coast of the North Island and moved southwards. When it got to Cook Strait, it met a stream of cold air coming up from Antarctica, whereupon Wellington got snow for the first time in at least thirty years.
The referenced article is from an Auckland newspaper. I am surprised, and somewhat impressed, that the author even knows where Greymouth, Westport and Hokitika are located. Aucklanders are a parochial bunch.
00
I’m as skeptical as the next bloke about CAGW, but really, I found several outright lies in that poster just at first glance:
(#1) global warming and climate change are facts demonstrated by thermometers; therefore they are not fabricated; its the Catastrophic bit of AGW which is in doubt, so the claim is false, The world has warmed a bit since the Little Ice Age and a very small part of that warming is due to human activities. That much is conceded by just about everyone who can think straight. Its whether this tiny human-caused bit of warming is a serious issue that is in doubt.
(#2) its not a massive rise in the cost of living, unless you think that around a 1% increase is “massive” (sure, electricity bills will go up by 10% or more, but they are only a component of cost of living).
(#3) big CO2 producers are doing LOTS of things to reduce their carbon footprint, so to claim that they are not is just utter, utter bulldust
(#4) real (other) environmental problems are not totally ignored.
Please, Jo, stop promoting this utter bullshit and get back to the science. Its a focus on the science that made me want to read your blog in the first place.
00
Stephen,
#1 – I would have said some things differently, yes, but I had no involvement. My choice was to ignore the only organised effort like this, or just accept that it’s not perfect, but it’s more informative than many government funded posters. They call CO2 “pollution”, and say “only polluters will pay”. They also say solar and wind are “clean” and will be inexpensive.
#2 – The cost of living increase will slowly ramp up as Australian companies move offshore, reduce production here, sack people. It will take years for the full effect to flow on. Costs will slowly spread through the system. Ultimately the government is trying to switch the nation to energy which is 2 – 10 times more expensive. Everything we do, move or make uses energy.
#3 – The price is not high enough to push big producers to make serious changes to the source of their energy (if it was, it would bankrupt them). Carbon credits from overseas are sometimes useless, sometimes fraudulent. The US without a carbon scheme has reduced it’s emissions more than the EU. These schemes are not about helping the environment.
#4 – It is a cartoon, not a white paper. Try to judge it by those standards…
00
.
Jo – never apologise to an obvious troll.
He isn’t making points, he’s taking shots.
Even MattB would be embarrassed at the paucity of his comments – if MattB can be embarrassed about anything.
00
jo, thanks for your reply. In reply I would point out:
(1) that a claim along the lines of “well their posters are worse” fails to address my objection(s). Your points are true, however not particularly relevant as a rebuttal to my point #1
(2) I accept your point about timeframes on cost-of-living; yes, at some unspecified future time it could be higher … but then again, it might be lower than at present if the world fails to follow suit (and I doubt they will) and/or if the current pricing falls from its ridiculously high per-tonne. You are also going beyond the argument in the poster (which is specifically addressing the Carbon Tax) and drawing in other (though somewhat related factors) like renewable energy policies/subsidies.
(3) your rebuttal point that the price on CO2 in Australia is too small to make the big emitters make “serious changes” is true, however this fails to address the point I made; the claim in the poster is that the big emitters will “do absolutely nothing” … so I put it to you again that the posster claim is just false
(4) yes, its just a poster … but it doesn’t hurt the argument to ensure that the content is True … and I believe it harms the argument if the content contains material which is demonstrably False. With a few minor tweaks it could be far more effective.
00
MV: That was my thought, but the email address appears to be real and the commenter genuine. Jo
Stephen,
1/ The cost of living will not be less if the rest of the world fails to follow suit. It will be even more. We’ll be doing it on our own competing with countries that don’t bother.
2/ As for big companies doing “absolutely nothing” – in the cartoon sense, I think it’s obvious readers will know this is an exaggeration. In any case, given that evidence suggests that reducing our carbon footprints is not an environmental benefit anyway, and I don’t care less whether they produce more or less carbon dioxide, I’m not going to reject the poster based on that (remember no one gave me the option of writing it either).
3/ I’m not just saying “their posters are worse” – I’m pointing out that in this guerrila war, the political reality is we have hardly any funds, while they have billions, and we have only a few MSM editors who will listen, while they have newspapers (Fairfax) promoting green causes.
We can only beat our heads against the wall in so many ways.
On the whole this cartoon is a good one, but if I had my say, I’d suggest first that Steve draw in a shonky smiling salesman so there was no chance anyone would think this should be judged as anything other than a cartoon. Then second, I would tweak some words. You are right, this could have been even better. I agree with you.
I’ll put my personal secretary onto it and reprint those posters just as soon as the Exxon cheque comes in đ
00
.
What can I say Jo?
Frost has got you falling over yourself, explaining yourself, justifying yourself.
On your OWN website, no less.
You are not dealing with a typical troll.
This guy is a professional – he knows how to pull your levers, and that is exactly what he is doing.
Observe and learn.
But DON’T apologise – he will only use it against you.
00
Hi Jo,
Appreciate your measured responses. What a pleasant change from what usually passes for ‘debate’ on a blog. Here’s how I would re-write that poster given the chance:
* UN and Green Groups fabricate a crisis by cherry-picking scientific facts and mistaking computer modeling for reality
* ALP misleads the public and introduces a Carbon Tax on “top 500 CO2 producers”
* Australian citizens hit with unnecessary cost of living rises (electricity, fuel, food)
* government returns tax money collected in attempt to placate angry voters
* Top 500 CO2 Producers do little to curb CO2 emissions (so the environment doesn’t measurably benefit)
* real and pressing environmental and humanitarian crises don’t get the attention and funding they deserve
… and the last two items can stay just as they are. I don’t think it loses any of its punch. But its much more accurate and therefore more easily defended which subjected to critique.
One of the biggest problems with Warmists: they play fast and loose with the facts, not to mention over-reaching in order to try to scare people. Mustn’t fall into the same trap.
00
Stephen I’d probably change the first line to read: UN and Green governments paid to find a crisis and corrupted the science. (But we could tweak for hours designing a poster that will likely not get printed. Even you agree that the line about “Going down the toilet” can stay.
Punchy pieces can be edited to death.
MV: I like commenters who disagree with me and are not trolls. It’s so much more interesting. Thankyou. đ
PS: MV, I had an advantage — I can see his email address.
00
Thanks Jo, happy to leave it there. Eye of the beholder and all that. I have a fixed IP address, so if you have any administrative facility that lets you look back through logs, you’ll find that I have been a long-time reader (well, a longish time in web years anyway). Anyway you’ll quickly see that I’m not a political stooge if you Google my email address, though I doubt that MV is convinced.
——————————
Stephen, like MV I was suspicious, there has been a pattern of “first time commenters” who pretend to be a skeptic while criticising the blog. But they always have a fake ID, it’s usually obvious that they know nothing about being skeptical. Your ID was unusually easy to confirm — that mattered, but MV couldn’t see those details. – Jo
00
.
Jo
A long time ago you told me almost exactly the same thing about MattB.
And look how well that turned out.
00
Oh the irony; it burns, it burns …
00
Just in case anyone missed the source of my amusement:
* 27/6 7:10am I posted 4 points of contention
* 28/6 2:58pm MV responds to my 4 points with 4 attempted rebuttal points
* 28/6 3:02pm MV forgets my 4 points and his replies to my 4 points and posts “He isn’t making points, he’s taking shots…” conveniently overlooking that MV is himself not making a point with this post but is taking a shot by labelling me a troll
You probably couldn’t make it any funnier if you had a whole room of script writers working on it…
00
.
(#1) – “Climate change” is a nonsensical term. “Global warming” happened for about 25 years, now the trend is reversing, perfectly in accord with the known, observed cyclical nature of climate.
There is not one skerrick of evidence – observed or otherwise – to suggest any involvement of humanity whatsoever.
(#2) – Power bills have almost doubled over the last five years or so, in large part due to “renewable energy” intellectual wet dreams. Power bills will now go up another 10% (at least) for the carbon tax. Then they will go up another 1% in the extra GST. So will the power bills of companies like Coles and Woolies. You think they are not going to pass on those costs? Not to mention costs for state govts – power for schools, hospitals, police stations etc – who do you think is going to pay all that?
It’s not just electricity, the cost of everything is going to go up. Each and every year.
And the compensation only covers the rises in the first year.
(#3) – The biggest CO2 producers are the coal fired power stations. Enlighten us. Explain just what, exactly, a coal fired power station can do to significantly reduce their carbon footprint?
And even if they technically could, how would they finance it? Nobody is lending to the operators of coal fired power stations anymore, because of the carbon tax.
(#4) – Name one other “environmental problem” that has had $100 billion thrown at it in the last ten years – in the USA alone? Okay, name 100 “environmental problems” that have collectively had a hundred billion spent on them? No? Well then, how about a thousand?
.
Crawl back under your rock, troll.
Skeptical? – What a laugh.
00
Damn it i go off to do some work and while i am gone out pops the trolls comment from moderation and MV beats me to the smack down.
Well done MV, love your work.
Cheers
00
On the contrary, humans increasing CO2 levels does cause some warming … its a tiny, tiny, tiny amount, and the negative feedbacks arguably make it irrelevant … but the physics is sound enough, so your claim is just flat out wrong.
Yes, it will. But it won’t be “massive”. Even if double the current estimates, say 2%, that is hardly massive. We survived the cost-of-living increase of the GST which was about 3% easily enough. There is also plenty of reason to think that the price-per-tonne is unsustainably high and will have to be reduced. Or, hopefully, the Coalition will repeal it because its a bloddy waste of time and effort. But I say again: its won’t be massive.
Relevance? The claim was that “the top 500 producers DO ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to reduce their carbon footprint”. All I need is a single example of a top-500-producer doing something to reduce their caarbon footprint. Well, here you go: http://www.smh.com.au/business/bhp-poised-to-reveal-dramatic-carbon-plan-20120606-1zvje.html … claim falsified.
The claim was not about other environmental issues having $100B thrown at them … the claim was that “real environmental and humanitarian problems are TOTALLY IGNORED” … so why don’t you provide some evidence, for example, that pollution issues, hunger issues, etc are being totally ignored?
You seem to suffer from a comprehension problem. Next time, instead of ranting and erecting straw man arguments, try addressing what I posted. You might find it educational.
Oh, before I forget: for someone who likes to throw the Troll word at others, you do a remarkably good impression of one yourself. Have you had lots of practice, or is it a gift?
00
http://johnosullivan.wordpress.com/2012/04/12/pro-greenhouse-gas-theory-press-release-goes-up-in-smoke/
00
The “physics” of epicycles was “sound enough” – in its day. It was still wrong.
I note you managed to avoid actually presenting any such “evidence”. Telling, that. Simply saying something is so, doesn’t make it so.
Besides, whatever was happening, has stopped and appears to be reversing itself DESPITE rising CO2 levels. Explanation?
The latest figures for electricity price increases due to the carbon tax for THIS year average out to 8.95%. The TOTAL calculated by Treasury was 10% over the next four years. So we have used up 90% of the “budgeted” allowance in the first year.
The GST increase was a one-off. The carbon tax and the ETS mean prices go up EVERY year forever. And there is a floor price of $15.00 a tonne. So it really doesn’t matter about what “market prices ” do. As for the Coalition doing anything, they are following the “advice” of the Climate Commission – headed up by Flim Flannery. Enough said.
Which, of course, is a sneaky way of saying “I’m going to avoid the point you raised about power stations, create a strawman, and address that instead”. No matter. I happen to have been involved in BHPB’s plans to reduce their “carbon footprint”.
Let’s just say it has a lot more to do with accounting than fossil fuels. If you split a big enough entity into enough smaller reporting entities, eventually you get to the point where none of them have a carbon tax liability. Rio are doing the same thing.
On this one I’ll score you half a point. Truth is, these issues aren’t being “totally ignored”, they are being actively made worse. Millions in Africa are ruthlessly denied access to cheap, reliable fossil fuel energy, forcing them to cook with dung and drink filthy water. Millions more are starving to death because of food price increases as a result of biofuels. Do you deny this is happening?
As to me being a troll, I’ll let the locals decide on that.
As for you, who do you work for?
The Liberals, the NATS, or the QLD LNP?
A right wing troll – fancy that?
00
.
Would I be right in guessing you are attached to Greg Hunt’s office?
Turnbull is too smart for these tactics.
00
None of the above, sorry mate. Would be nice if you could just pigeon-hole inconvenient things wouldn’t it? I don’t work for any political party or any government/quasi-government organisation. I have little time for the pollies you mention. Right wing? Yep, I am … but I am a stickler for facts and truthfulness … and we won’t win this ‘war’ by being economical with the truth. That’s exactly the sort of approach that has landed the Warmists in their current pickle where increasing numbers of people just won’t listen to them any longer.
00
welcome to the weird world of MV and craker. You are pigeon holed by them now I am afraid because you had the temerity to ask questions and to suggest that being inaccurate is NOT a good way to make a convincing case.
Well done for presenting text for a poster leagues better than the alarmist drivel of the featured product, and for keeping the cheer anything if it supports my view even if it is nonsense crowd at bay.
00
Hang on a second GA, Buffoonery Bill was gibbering on about some utopian world where you get methane from a tip and burn to make electricity and you avoid paying a carbon tax plus you get to make a handsome profit at the same time.
Unfortunately he/they/it failed to mention the CO2 they will produce etc etc. The [snip crass] then has a go at the name i use (crakar24) and in you come like a knight in shinning amour to defend the idiot.
Piss off GA you are a bigger idiot than Buffoonery Bill. Piss off and wallow in your carbon tax induced stupor. Relish in the thought that you are about to pay a tax on everything you see, hear, touch, smell and feel for no benefit you simpleton.
00
I just checked and there is no one called BB in this bit of the thread, he appears elsewhere.
Are you sure your hinges are attached? Usually you’ll concede an obvious point. Are you seriously saying that extracting trapped (that word again) methane and generating salable electricity does not turn a profit? Are you saying that doing so is not one way to reduce a council’s chance of exposure to paying carbon tax? Seriously are you?
00
Ah you were being an arsehole to MV and myself in front of Stephen Frost not Buffoonery Bill my mistake.
Seeing how that other idiot has failed to answer even the simplest of questions i will ask you GA.
IF we did nothing and let the methane seep out of the ground, how long would it take for all the methine to escape?
How much methane would there be?
How much carbon tax (yes i know it sounds stupid) would we pay?
Or………..
If we suck the methane out how much do we get, how much still escapes?
How much CO2 is produced during the process of turning said methane into electricity?
How long doe sthe methane last before it all escapes/gets sucked up?
How much does it cost to set a couple of generators (Buffoon describes it) and all the associated cabling ect?
In the end is it more cost effective to simply let the methane seep out over years? or is this just another example of stupid symbolism that you and your morionic friends (Buffoon Bill) have a habit of dreaming up. You know like building wind farms and the like?
00
Craker. Why would you want the answer to all those questions from an anonymous leaf character on the web? For that matter if you are asking these questions and don’t already know the answer then your whole torent of abuse to BB was done without actually knowing if he was right or not.
you are demonstrating this again
you know how much damage this sort of ignorance based abuse causes? Where is Wes George when I need to offload you onto someone else?
00
GA for some strange reason Buffoonery Bill decided that the “24” in my name was the number of my IQ. Now i cannot delve into the mind of an idiot to try to understand why they behave the way they do.
All i know is they are an idiot and if you wish to defend idiots then you will be labelled one yourself.
If this idiot wants to beleive that the council is making electricty from methane for next to nothing then good on him, secondly if thinks it is a good idea that he gets ripped off by paying a premium price for it then good on him again.
The problems occur when you say “hang on a second” and they respond with gibberish and shit so fine let this idiot beleive what they want i give up talking to these people.
You can comfort yourself by the realisation that it is now only 3 days until we save the planet.
00
Hi Gee Aye,
I see you’ve caught up with what crakar24 is on about.
Pay particular attention to post #16.1.2.2.8 if you have not read it already.
crakar24,
If you read through the posts ond followed my link to the Energex page shown on my post #16.1.2 you would understand the processes. Clearly you didn’t bother. It’s not that difficult to understand. I also note you just learnt methane can be extracted during the sewage treatment process and used for power generation. Ain’t technology wonderful.
Cheers.
00
.
Hi Gee Aye
I see youâve caught up with what Bungalow is on about.
Pay particular attention to post #16.1.2.2.11 if you have not read it already.
B
iaungalow Buaill,If you read through my questions regarding your post at #16.1.2 I may understand the processes. Clearly you didnât bother. Itâs not that difficult to answer. I also note you just learnt methane can be extracted during the sewage treatment process and used for power generation. Ainât technology wonderful.
Cheers.
Dave
I have to do this through you Gee Aye (Massive influence)as it seems you are the medium or central to Bills responses! Maybe a just an external moderator that gravitates people like BILL?
00
I am more a large than a medium but jokes (haha) aside… I honestly don’t care about this other spat apart from what it reveals about human nature and the individuals involved.
Craker to add to your sins you are now resorting to the tactic of demanding of someone you disagree with, to respond with vast amounts of information and detail as so that you can feel like you’ve won a debate. This debating technique is cheap (“I won because you didn’t answer my question”) but fraudulent. You can easily check that converting methane from landfill makes money from many sources. It seems to me this is all BB is saying but you can’t handle this fact. Is this because you think this means that BB is implying some AGW subtext to his argument. It may well b that he is but it is not obvious and it does not make him wrong with regards to methane, Why are you denying this? Instead of asking multiple questions, do some study and come back with something useful.
00
Dave… ditto for multiple questions. What a lazy method of debate. Go look up a book.
00
.
Gee Aye ⌠ditto for singular answers. What a lazy method of response.
Your contribution is amusing at times but somewhat … how would you say, pedantic!
Bill has stated over $1 million in the pocket PA for a genset at a landfill site!
Just stick a few pipes in the rubbish & go!
I suppose you could call me lazy for asking questions on the methodology on how this is achieved – but it is part of the cost factors being demanded by government!
As for your own carbon Large footprint, it is not good (I thought you were just a medium – then you really need a Philodendron leaf) – as early failure of body functions can occur – but maybe good for reduction of human weight total affecting planetary shift!
00
MV mentions the electricity price
When a senior power station employee at Mt Piper NSW was asked about the likely increase in electricity retail prices he said he’d have to research that one. He came back a few days later with a figure of 40¢/unit by 2017. ( In June 2012 I pay 22¢ so this looks more like +80% over the next 5 years)
Given that they make electricity for only 4¢/unit to-day, the 80% does look a bit high but my point is that Treasury might not know what it’s talking about or it’s lying.
Home owners may make slight changes to their usage of electricity and cope but industry has little room to economise so manufactured products will cost more and industry will increasingly move off-shore and perhaps that’s part of the plan.
00
I was reading an essay and came across this passage. It is in relation to the destruction of the middle class but seems so appropriate to the climate change hoax as well.
“âSometimes when faced with problems that are confusing and troubling it is easier to think what someone tells you to think, particularly something that touches a deep and dark nerve in your nature, rather than carry the burden and ambiguity of struggling with the facts and thinking for yourself. Repeating a party line is a shorthand way of avoiding real thought. And the predators are always there to take advantage of it. They welcome trouble and often foment crisis in order to advance their agendas.â
âAnyone can be misled by a clever person, and no one likes to readily admit that they have been had. It is a sign of character and maturity to realize this, and admit you were deceived, and to demand change and reform. But some people cannot do this, even when the facts of the deception are revealed. It seems as though the more incorrect that the truth shows them to be, the louder and more strident they become in shouting down and denying the reality of the situation. And anyone who denies their perspective becomes ‘the other,’ someone to be feared and hated, shunned and eliminated, one way or the other.â
00
Rod Stuart
A well thought out article which should be widely publicised.
When the body is not fed properly it becomes ill. But people would rather treat the symptom and not the cause as the truth as to the cause of their ailment is too unpalatable.
00
It doesn’t seem to work when I insert a link.
[Now fixed – Fly]
00
Dunno if it’s just me, but the “International Banker” bit is normally code for a certain group of people & it is something that really shouldn’t be on an anti Carbon Dioxide Tax poster.
00
.
If the shoe fits . . .
00
Who is this certain group of people that shall not be named on a CO2 poster Mr Zee and why should they not be named?
Cheers
00
Name me one bank that does not claim to be International
00
As a jew, an engineer and a skeptic, I am shamed by this…
http://www.jewishnews.net.au/joining-forces-to-clean-up-carbon/26573
00
The flowchart is a down-the-drain spiral, for sure.
When you initiate a control mechanism without first establishing either a feedback function or an output monitor, you never know if what you are doing has any benefit. The effectiveness is only visible as a “stopping” effect. Does a power plant shut down because it produces too much CO2 and and is not cost-effective to fix? There is your result. Does the planet get cooler/not get warmer? Are your dollars actually helping anything? Not possible to know.
Taxation without effectiveness: that should be the new, revolutionary mantra. T’hell with taxation without representation: our representatives don’t represent us anyway. But it would be nice if our taxes were used effectively. Only anything other than the lifestyles of the representatives, I mean.
00
The question is have we crossed the event horizon or is there still a small chance we can escape from “circling the bowl”?
00
Sorry.
00
The carbon tax in the poster, is it single or dual flush?
At the next election Labor and the Greens will be dual flushed.
00
As we approach carbon dioxide tax day July 1, the stupidity of the Abbott Liberal Party position and bi-partisan support for the fraudulent junk science of Flannery’s Climate Commission is exposed by GreenLaboUr.
As Combet et al stand in parliament and laugh at Abbott for his claims about Whyalla being wiped off the map on July 1, the stupid conservative party of Australia deserves to be laughed at for it’s ‘climate science change’ policies.
Those who claim that once Abbott is voted in, he will change his position, fail to see that this is exactly what Gillard did with her “there will be No carbon (sic) tax” lie.
Informed swinging voters will see the vacuity and respond accordingly.
How Abbott could be laughing at Combet, if only he didn’t subscribe to the same junk climate science:
The stupid ‘climate change is real’ Abbott and his cohorts are no better than GreenLaboUr.
They can’t respond with all that egg on their stupid faces as they ‘believe’ Flannery as well.
And for what?
Via their ALPBC:
Voters need to realise we need create our own bi-partisan opposition against ALL politicians.
Divide & conquer is the elites plan, and, they are succeeding as we argue amongst ourselves.
00
How comforting.
That would be “advice” from Messrs Flannery and Steffen, ably supported by Karoly and Chubb.
And how good is the “advice” from the Climate Commission?
Their own disclaimer:
http://climatecommission.gov.au/disclaimer/
And THIS forms the basis for Coalition climate policy?
.
May the saints preserve us.
00
.
O/T but of interest – Monckton on Rio +20.
Apologies if it has already been posted.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i-NOjX9l4kk&feature=player_embedded
00
Mods,
Can you please release Stephen Frosts comment out of moderation as i would really, really like to reply.
TIA
Crakar
00
terrific poster. needs to be up everywhere.
look at this mess in NZ. making it up as they go along as usual:
19 June: NZ Herald: Phil O’Reilly: Emissions trading scheme must bring investors certainty
(Phil O’Reilly is chief executive of BusinessNZ)
Investors include those who could invest in opportunities arising from a price on carbon as well as those who face costs because of their carbon emissions.
Neither type of investor is likely to have much confidence that our ETS is stable and that an investment made today will not be uneconomic tomorrow because of changes to it.
There has been a lot of redesign and tinkering with the ETS.
Established in 2008, reviewed and amended in 2009, reviewed again last year and about to be amended again – it’s no wonder that businesses involved in the scheme have review fatigue.
Rather than focusing on their core business they are spending effort trying to protect investments already made based on past policy settings, or trying to guess what the next change might be…
Just because the price of carbon is low doesn’t mean there is something wrong with the design of our trading scheme.
The framework is fundamentally sound and capable of allowing a stronger price signal to flow through once the international carbon market revives.
Major design changes at this point are unnecessary since higher carbon prices are almost certainly on the horizon, especially if Europe recovers…
The allocation of free units allowed under the ETS is not a subsidy but a necessary protection against an uneven playing field.
Other countries’ lack of action on emissions reduction is what makes the playing field uneven, and until others take action this protection is vitally needed for New Zealand’s economic survival…
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=10813921
btw where is the investigative journalist who will link the 3 mothballed desal plants with CAGW alarmism, and tally up the costs already incurred and those that will be ongoing?
where is the Coalition who should be doing this themselves?
00
According to their very own “climate” web page, they are busy taking advice from the “Climate Commission”.
AKA Tim Flannery.
Given that the desal plants were originally built on “advice” from Flannery in the first place, don’t hold your breath waiting for any glimmer of sanity from the Coalition.
00
it is only on ABC regional that u will even find such a story. read the rest for Combet’s office brush-off and the garbled official response:
27 June: ABC Sunshine Coast: ‘Carbon tax will break my business’
By Janel Shorthouse and Annie Gaffney
Fruit and vegetable shop owner Matt Smith says the “unfair” rise in costs will “break my business”.
His new quarterly bill from TruEnergy is set to more than double from $47.62 to $107.83, while his peak rate charge will rise from 18 cents to 22 cents per kilowatt-hour.
“On an average my supply per quarter would be $2500-$2800, but now it’s going to be $5500 – that’s double the energy costs.
“So what we’ll probably do is struggle along for as long as we possibly can and then if we can’t keep our heads above water then like most small businesses we’ll be forced to pull the pin and close.
“As far as I can see, everyone out there in small business is trying to do the best they can and are the ones being penalised. If you have a go, you pay more,” says Mr Smith.
He says he’s also concerned about other additional costs he’ll face due to the carbon tax.
“What about transport. There are rumours from the trucking industry, like a case of bananas will have one cent a kilometre added to it coming from North Queensland, which means they’ll be $10 a box more.”
Mr Smith says the Government hasn’t made the cost changes clear for small business owners.
“I have six staff …we just don’t know what it’s going to cost us, it’s all up in the air, or who it’s going to cost, I know it’s going to cost me but I look after my staff well, I do the right thing by them.
“It’s not just me, it’s everybody and it’s already tough enough, we don’t need anything else,” says Mr Smith…
http://www.abc.net.au/local/stories/2012/06/26/3533515.htm
00
where is the mention of CAGW?
how many lies in this AAP piece run by Murdoch media?
how insulting and condescending is this to any thinking person?
more reason why i have switched off from aussie politics and MSM, and will be voting informally forever it seems:
26 June: Herald Sun: AAP: Climate change taking hold, summit hears
National Breaking News
Climate change taking hold, summit hearsFrom: AAP June 26, 2012 4:20PM Increase Text SizeDecrease Text SizePrintEmail Share
Add to DiggAdd to del.icio.usAdd to FacebookAdd to KwoffAdd to MyspaceAdd to NewsvineWhat are these?Queensland’s floods, Cyclone Yasi and the ongoing drought in Australia’s southwest are signs of the urgent need to adapt to climate change, a leading researcher says.
NATIONAL Climate Change Adaptation Research Facility (NCCARF) director Jean Palutikof says mankind has a lot of work to do to ensure it copes with the turbulence of a shifting climate.
“(Climate change) is insidious and essentially non-linear, and has the capacity to deliver shocks and surprises which we are currently not well protected against,” Professor Palutikof told the Climate Adaption in Action conference in Melbourne on Tuesday…
A host of national and international researchers are sharing their ideas on how individuals, businesses and governments can cope with the impacts of climate change.
CSIRO chairman Simon McKeon lamented mankind’s “love affair with fossil fuel”, saying that without it, the conference likely wouldn’t have been needed in the first place.
He also said endless debate in the media over the plausibility of climate change had hampered action.
“Change is hard enough, but when science isn’t given a fair go in the media it’s doubly hard,” he said.
Preventing food shortages and managing natural disasters are among the topics being tackled by some 700 people at the three-day conference.
Federal Climate Change Minister Greg Combet said in a brief video message that the impacts of climate change were increasingly demanding a more proactive approach to wild weather in Australia…
Indigenous Wurundjeri tribe elder, Aunty Diane Kerr, offered the simplest – and perhaps most telling – advice as she offered a traditional welcome to the land: “If you do care for the country, the country will care for you”.
The conference, jointly hosted by the CSIRO and NCCARF, continues until Thursday.
http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/breaking-news/climate-change-taking-hold-summit-hears/story-e6frf7kf-1226409286393
00
Where pat mentions Cyclone Yasi, this Cyclone has provided the Government a windfall.
The Cyclone created ten years worth of rubbish, all of it now having to go to landfill.
What this means is that landfill now creates emissions of Methane, priced at CO2 multiplied by 21 or $483 a tonne.
It has put the Council in this area up onto the list of the biggest polluters. Being small Councils, there is thought that this will drive those Councils to the wall. That money will have to be recovered, hence a pretty huge spike in Council rates for all the residents in that area.
They asked the Government for an exception, because Yasi was indeed an exceptional circumstance.
Umm, the Government said no.
Er, the same applies for flood damage too.
Hey Labor’s on a winner here.
And don’t dare mention prices are rising because of this off the Government’s bureaucracy will hunt you down and make you subject to fines worth millions.
Fundaments, the lot of them!
Tony.
00
Tony
Is the methane caused by farting white ants and how is it measured?
00
Hi Tony,
Not really, Tony. Firstly, most of the waste generated by Cyclone Yasi would have been what is referred to as ârelatively inertâ, that is building rubble, masonry, plasterboard, carpet and plastics etc. This sort of material has a low methane producing capability when compared with other decomposable material such as timber, paper and food waste and garden waste.
For that reason, most materials are sorted prior to disposal to landfill and wherever possible, diverted for recycling. This not only ensures that material entering landfill is minimised but that material with a high methane producing potential, household waste for example, can be placed in specially constructed cells within the landfill to maximise the capture of methane produced. Other material with high methane producing capability such as lawn clippings and garden waste can be diverted away from landfill. These materials can be easily ground up and composted and reused as garden mulch.
Not necessarily, Tony.
There is an easy solution. You simply install a series of pipes through the land fill to collect the methane. The gas is carried by vacuum to a generator and electricity is exported to the grid.
This turns into a win-win-win situation. For a relatively small investment, electricity can be sold back into the grid by the company, the council will get a small financial return and landfill emissions are reduced: under 25000 tonnes of CO2 emissions there is no carbon tax. Recovery rates vary depending on how the landfill was constructed, but modern landfills should achieve about 70% recovery. Emissions can continue for up to 50 years but generally start to taper off after around 30 years.
Read about it here : http://www.energex.com.au/switched_on/power_up/power_up_landfill.html
Tell your local council, theyâll think youâre genius.
Cheers!!!
00
There is an easy solution. You simply install a series of pipes through the land fill to collect the methane. The gas is carried by vacuum to a generator and electricity is exported to the grid.
..are you for real BB?
Is your name Mann or Gore by any chance?
00
Hey Black Adder,
Did you read the link?
We have a methane powered generator at our local landfill.
It cranks out 800kw/hr, enough to power 1200 homes. It’s a nice little earner too !!!
In fact they have just laid a new series of pipes in Cell No 2 to power another generator.
You’ve made a fool of yourself twice tonight : you have much in common with Tony.
Now go read the link.
Cheers!!!
00
1200 homes!
Climate change has been ‘tackled’.
The planet has been saved.
And a new series of pipes! Turn off the coal fired power stations!
Judging by the quality of your argument, BB, those cartoon characters at the top of your link would be attractive to you.
Your link is for 6th grade children.
00
Handjive,
Ahhhh!!!!
Now we know why you can’t understand it.
Obviously you didn’t even pass Plastcine class.
Seriously Handjive, this is a very cheap source of energy. It’s not meant to supplant coal sourced electricity but to supplement it.
Do the sums :
Our genny cranks out 800kw per hour for 365 days a year, less one days maintenance every three months.
From 1 July I will pay about 25cents per KWH for electricity. Lets say they sell back into the grid for 20 cents per KWH. That’s $160 per hour.
Or $1,386,240 a year.
And this will go on for at least 30 years and then at a diminishing rate for another twenty beyond that.
Not a bad return on investment.
And it does away with the requirement to pay the Carbon Tax.
Not that I would expect a sixth grade dropout to understand.
00
Hey Bill let me get this straight you have a generator (diesel i presume) and you spend 25 cents to generate one kilowatt/hour and you then sell it at 20 cents.
If so then i think you are slowly going broke you might want to rethink your get rich scheme.
Cheers
00
Handjive,
Can you tell me how much CO2 is produced by burning methane?
Heres the thing we take the methane out of the ground and burn it all in the name of saving the planet or some crap but in the end all we do is pump CO2 into the atmosphere, CO2 that would normally not be there if we hadnt poked around at that methane.
Its funny how stupidly gullible some people are isnt it.
00
Ărakar24,
No,I pay 25 cents per kwh for my electricity at home. It was just for comparative purposes. The generator is powered by methane extracted from the landfill. Why would you use diesel???? Are you stupid or sumfin’?
The cost of extracting the methane is minimal. So most of the revenue is profit.
As you guru Tony advises, methane is 21 to 26 times more potent that CO2. Given the landfill has basically zero emissions the Carbon tax is not payable.
Are you really that thick or are you just putting it on?
No,you really are that thick.
00
Oh and one more question crakar24.
What’s the 24 in you name stand for.
Your year of birth?………..No…..
Your age?…………………No……..
Your IQ?………………….Yes!!!!!!!
00
Buffoonery Bill,
Yes i understand that but you are taking methane out of the ground and burning it and hence producing CO2 how is this a good idea?
Are you better to leave the methane in the ground rather than burn it and pay a carbon tax?
How can most of the revenue by profit when you are nothing more than a dir-e polloodah.
00
crakar24,
The name is Bungalow Bill, don’t make youself out to be a bigger idiot than you actually are.
Why leave the methane in the ground?
You would not have the revenue from the sale of electricity…$1.3mill a year, and then you would have to pay the carbon tax.
I hope you don’t plan to go into business.
00
Well you see Buffoonery this is how it works, if you are an [snip crass] to me then i will be one to you. Hence from this day forth you will be known as Buffoonery Bill.
So mister big business man, if we leave the methane in the ground how much carbon tax do we pay? If we pump it out and burn it how much carbon tax do we pay?
What do we do with all the infrastructure once we burn all the methane? Did you factor in this cost mister big business man?
In regards to the number 24 in my name it is none of your business however looking at your name i would have to say that your name is William, you are a 41 years of age and [snip crass]
[snip crass]
00
crakar24,
It’s obvious, but I’ll state it anyway :
The methane will quickly vent into the atmosphere from landfill: it doesn’t stay in the ground as you think. Once landfill emissions exceed 25000 tonnes the landfill owners would be liable for the carbon tax. Diverting it to generate electricity means the landfill has basically no emissions and therefore no tax liability. As a result, tipping fees for the users of the landfill do not have to increase.
Cheers!
00
crakar24,
I didn’t see your post #16.1.2.2.8 when I made my previous post.
I was right.
24 is your IQ.
Grow up you infantile moron.
And ask Tony about the significance of the name Bungalow Bill or Google it.
00
.
Hi Bungalow B
uill,Just a few questions:
1. How much methane CH4 is emmitted per tonne of waste (landfill biogas)?
2. What is the percentage of methane purity extracted per tonne of gas?
3. How are the impurities eliminated for use in electricity productuction?
4. What is the level of impurities generated by landfill?
5. What is your generator (stated above) type to handle this?
6. The generator supplier that will operate over a 30 year time span & cost?
7. What is the cost of your generator in AUD/MWh for biogas? (without RET or CO2 Tax)
8. How do you estimate costs for landfill non-leakage of CH4?
9. What is the cost of of converting an existing landfill to biogas power?
10.What is the levelised capital cost of all works involved in power generation?
11.What are the O&M fixed costs of such a unit?
12.What are the variable costs of such a unit?
13.What is the transmission investment required for energy resale?
14.What is the CO2 emmissions that are related to the unit?
15.What is the over all difference between pollution halted/pollution saved.
16.What is the temperature reduction globally per 1,000,000 tonnes of landfill treated in this way as opposed to just venting or flaring?
Thanks
Dave
00
@ Bungalow Bill
June 28, 2012 at 12:58 pm
At least I can spell plasticine.
Quote: “Seriously Handjive, this is a very cheap source of energy.
Itâs not meant to supplant coal sourced electricity but to supplement it.”
Oh dear. You are serious?
Why would coal fired energy need to be ‘supplemented‘?
Quote: “Our genny cranks out 800kw per hour for 365 days a year, less one days maintenance every three months.”
What runs your ‘genny’ 365 days a year, less one days maintenance every three months?
Does it expel ‘carbon’ (sic)?
If so, how much, Mr eco-warrior?
Quote: “From 1 July I will pay about 25cents per KWH for electricity.”
Uh oh. Still on ‘the grid’? Cognitive dissonance anyone?
Quote: “Not that I would expect a sixth grade dropout to understand.”
Can you enlighten me on the difference between carbon (c) & carbon dioxide (cO2) with that 6th grade ‘educayshun‘?
00
Dave/crakar24
Firstly, I only responded to Tony to provide him with some information regarding waste, landfill, emissions and the Carbon Tax. The responses from Black Adder, handjive and crakar24 indicated to me they had not even bothered to follow the link I provided, or do any basic research : just a bit of mockery and ridicule as per your standard procedure. This indicated to me you really werenât interested in learning anything. Look at Stephen Frostâs posts. Your only comment was you were upset as you didnât get first chance at the slap down. Then MV comes along and, in boxing parlance, went down for the count on numerous occasions, with Stephen winning by knockout half way through the third round. Your responses are all too easy to predict.
In regard to your questions, you will find detailed answers on the internet, Google away to your heartâs content.
Broadly speaking however, the quantity of emissions is dependent upon the type of material in the landfill, the age of the landfill, and how it has been constructed. Even ambient temperature has an effect.
There are many manufacturers of generators, in the link given, Energex use a Caterpillar G3516. They sell for around $350k. They are serviced every three months, the cost I believe is around $20k. Costs to install the equipment would vary depending on the site. Collection pipes are now laid as the landfill is constructed, enabling a higher recovery rate of methane. There are other ancillary items involved, again go to the Energex website for details. Overall the production of electricity from landfill emissions is the cheapest of all the methods.
Methane is 26 times more potent than CO2, therefore landfills simply flared off the methane. You still had CO2 emissions, but it was the more environmentally friendly way to go.
If you are going to flare off methane it makes much more sense to use it to drive a generator and sell the electricity back into the grid. In the current environment, the landfill operator will have no Carbon Tax liability therefore his gate fees will not increase. As a bonus he will probably receive a payment from the owners of the generator for allowing them to use methane from the landfill.
The owners of generator will incur a Carbon Tax liability, however this is passed on to the energy retailer, who in turn passes it on to the consumer. The consumer gets an income tax reduction from the government as part of the whole scheme, to offset increased costs. The benefit of this is that it makes rooftop solar for example, a viable option, which we will probably take up in the near future.
Finally, I point out that I donât care much for politics, but what I see here and at other similar sites is a group disenfranchised extreme right wing political ideologues with their own agenda. Climate Change is just the vehicle; it has nothing to do with âthe scienceâ. You of course, will disagree. Take a look at this site: how many of the last twenty topics deal with âthe scienceâ? In areas where I have no expertise, I am happy to accept the âConsensus Viewâ. If nine neurologists diagnosed you with a brain tumor and one said it was a headache, which would you believe? Whilst I accept there are no certainties in life, (except death and taxes), I accept the âbeyond reasonable doubtâ principle. If it is good enough for our legal system, and people have been executed on the basis of it, then itâs good enough for âClimate Scienceâ.
Cheers.
00
And handjive proves me correct, once again.
You really are all too predictable.
Here’s some free advice handjive, grow up before it’s too late.
00
“If looks could kill it would have been us instead of him”
All the children sing
Hey, Bungalow Bill
(nyuk nyuk nyuk)
Say, I’ve kept out of this argument about Methane emissions right from the getgo. I debated whether of not to enter, but I was just curious, waiting for someone else to make the obvious link from May of this year and John Hewson’s post at The Drum about this exact thing.
I actually contributed to that Post of Hewson’s because of the plainly obvious mistake he made, and I’m afraid, it went so far over the commenters heads, it could have been on Concorde, proving to me that there are indeed very few people out there who have any comprehension at all about methane emissions from Landfill sites, how they can be used for electrical generating purposes, and even though those Methane emissions are in fact being utilised for small scale electrical power generation, they will still be subjected to the ETS, and that tells me that why would you bother to use them in the first place for this purpose.
Link to the Hewson Article at The Drum, dated May 21
Man, I loved that song. Still have my original (numbered) copy of the double LP White Album, now converted to digital as well, along with all my other 400 or so LP’s.
Tony.
00
Sometimes you see screen names, and it makes you smile, and there are some good ones here at Joanne’s site. You don’t know how many times I’ve had to explain mine at U.S. sites, so much so, that I added it to my Bio at my Home site.
This is off topic I know, but this Post has almost expired now, so I can afford to stray a bit.
Some of you know that I have a regular music post at my Home site, something I’ve been doing every Sunday for almost three and a half years now.
As part of that I did a series on Paul McCartney concentrating on his time with Wings. As part of the intro for that series I featured two songs from the time he was in some band before Wings, and this song concerning that screen name some have wondered about was one of those two songs.
It’s from December of 2010, so it’s not just something recent. Here’s the link if you wish to have a look, and for any of you interested in Wings, I’ve also included the link for that series as well.
The Paul McCartney Series (Part 1)
The Paul McCartney Series
Tony.
00
Hi Tony,
Thanks for your reply, I wondered where you got to!!!
Ah yes, one of the great albums of all time. I still listen to it frequently, though I canât cope with Revolution9!!! I purchased to full set of stereo remasters a few years ago and have transferred that on to my iPhone, so I can take them everywhere now. I must admit though my all time favourite is Harrisonâs âItâs All Too Muchâ off Yellow Submarine. There is just so much going on in that piece, and I always wonder what they were on at the time.
I also have about 400 old vinyl albums, plus many singles and EPâs. My wife keeps telling me to throw them out as they donât get played any more : I just tell her theyâll all be collectorâs items one day and weâll make a fortune!!!!!
As for the electricity from methane thing, I am surprised so many donât understand itâs possible and the simplicity of the process.
Obviously, prior to introduction of the CT these were a great way to make a few dollars for people like Energex. All in the pursuit of that cheap and abundant energy!! This has been taken to the next level with the widespread introduction of âfrackingâ, which I donât particularly agree with and peopleâs loss of rights on their own property is an outright injustice.
As you would understand there are many factors which determine emission levels from landfill sites. Many existing landfill would have been poorly constructed with little control over what went into them, that, despite emitting large quantities of methane capture rates would rarely exceed 40%. Newer landfills can achieve higher capture rates up around 75 to 80%. Capture of 100% would I believe be only possible in purpose built small scale disposal systems, and not really feasible on the larger scale. Time and technology will probably prove me wrong though!!
Even if they did tax methane at $483/tonne, all you would do is flare it off and pay CT on the CO2 emissions. If you are going to flare it off you may as well burn it a generator and get something back for it. The real issue here though is the 75% level, its interpretation and application. I would hope common sense will prevail.
I know in our situation our tip fees have not suffered any rise due to the CT, primarily because of the methane extraction system. That is one thing tip patrons should be happy about. What else the future holds is anybodyâs guess!!!
I donât really frequent that many blogs and would not post often. I only replied as I felt it may provide some information and assistance. Generally, I only read to get an idea of whatâs behind the mentality. Unfortunately, most of these blogs are mutual back slapping exercises or when somebody like me turns up, a slap down competition, something of which we are all guilty. I rarely read a pro AGW site.
You can see my attitude to politics from my earlier post, and there are reasons for that.
In regard to it being about the science, I am really dubious. In the last twenty topics here, I canât see too many about the science. That in my mind raises a few questions.
As for contributing to places like this, Iâll probably not bother all that much anymore. Free speech is a wonderful thing but itâs so often misused and abused.
Thanks Tony,
Cheers.
00
Tony,
Thanks for the McCartney links.
He would have to be seen as the single most outstanding composer – singer – musician the world has seen.
Just listen to his bass work on Rain and the way he and Ringo work together. And what an effort from Ringo!!!Then remember what you hear has been slowed down from the original recording. It was recorded in the key of A but slowed down so it sounds as if it is played in G#. I think there may be a posting of it on YouTube; you should have a listen.
As for Lennons “In My Life”, what can you say: and he was only 23 or 24 when he wrote it.
Music is much more rewarding to talk about.
Cheers.
00
Bungalow Bill,
while we’re off topic here about my great pleasure, music, you mention here:
My collection now includes a couple of hundred CD’s as well. I never went out and purchased the CD music I have on LP already because, well, I already had that, so why double up.
I started my collection in the mid 60’s, not as a collection per se, but just because I liked the music. I always had a medium record player, and some time in the mid 70’s one of the Governments at the time was bleeding military people badly as they quite literally fled. The loss of especially tradesmen and Officers with degrees was astounding.
So, they introduced what was a piddling sized re-engament bonus of $1000, which even then was not all that much and really didn’t stop the problem.
I was already going to sign on again as I loved the life, so that $1000 was literally, a bonus. Most of the guys frittered it away on not really much at all, but I saw this as a chance to get a good stereo outfit at the time.
I actually took a day’s leave on the pay day after I got my bonus. I had a great record shop I frequented in Newcastle, a tiny little place which was crowded with four customers. The proprietor knew me well, because once a fortnight I would visit to see what was new. I asked him to recommend a good stereo equipment only retailer, and he directed me there and even called them and told them I was coming and to look after me.
I arrived there at around 10AM, and finally left at around 4PM.
I knew what I wanted in the way of equipment and all that was left was to decide on brand names.
I was after quality stuff, not just what was there, and there was so much of it.
I wanted a good belt drive player, odd, because direct drive was the go at that time, and I got a good one, in the mid to high quality range. Same for an amplifier, Dual Cassette Deck, Receiver, good headphones, and Speaker Boxes.
The only compromise I had to make was I really wanted Bose 501 speakers, but that would have consumed the whole grand by themselves, so I had to settle for what I could afford.
As I mentioned, I was very careful, and the one guy who was with me all day, was really helpful.
The whole lot finally came to $980. After settling on all that stuff, he then ‘looked after me’. What he did was upgrade each item I had selected to the next item from the same manufacturer up the level from what I had selected. To say I was stoked was out of the question. Then, on top of that he threw in three boxes of a dozen each Hitachi UD C-90 cassette tapes. They were great as I could get a whole album on one side of a tape, hence two albums per cassette. I ended up with around ten boxes of tapes, and in the mid and late 90’s they all gradually disappeared as our youngest son found that some of the music Dad liked really was OK after all.
I would play the record for myself, alone, and if I liked it, I would then record it to Cassette, put the record away so it would stay pristine and then play the Cassette when I wanted to listen to some music. That also saved me from those ubiquitous parties we always had, and records always ended getting wrecked at them, so I just took some tapes along.
The item that lasted the longest was the record deck, mainly because not long after purchase I spent another hundred or so buying replacement diamond styli, and I got a dozen of them for that price. That deck lasted almost twenty five years.
When it ‘went to heaven’, I was long married and a good deck, besides being impossible to find was beyond a married man’s price range, almost a frivolity anyway.
So, I despaired of ever being able to play those records again. I actually got to the stage where I was in fact going to sell them to a dealer, for not very much mind you, and that one day they’ll be worth a fortune is a fallacy, although I do have six albums that are indeed worth a lot.
Then, in 2005, I casually mentioned it to my sister who is a computer programmer, and she mentioned that she had a digitising program, Magix 2.0 (and now they’re up to version 18 now) and even though she was a programmer, even she couldn’t work it out, it was that difficult. She gave it to me and said to fiddle around and see if it was any good.
It took me almost a month to perfect it, but once I did, it was perfect. I needed a record deck with a pre amp, and they were thin on the ground let me tell you. I finally got a relatively good one, in, of all places Dick Smith. I needed adaptor plugs and then plugged the stereo plug into the back of my sound card, and being a purist on that I got a much better sound card than what came with the computer.
You start the program, set it up, and then play the record and it converts it to wave format for the program. Then, after the whole album is recorded, in real time, you can work on the album in the program itself, virtually remastering it, and for me, that was just getting it back to original, getting rid of scratches, hissing, etc etc and converting it to the individual tracks on the album instead of one long file. It takes around three hours in all for a whole album, and in the end I had it down to around an hour and a half.
Then, you save it as a wave file, and then I had a separate program to convert from Wave to MP3, and here I selected a mid high range MP3 size. This significantly cuts down the file size without reducing any of the quality at all. Then just name the album write up the track listing and voila, it’s all there.
I have a dedicated Hard drive in an external caddy with just my music, and I have around 15 Gig, all of it MP3. All of it catalogued A to Z and easy to locate if ever I need backing music while I’m here at the computer.
The real beauty of converting it to track listing instead of one long file is that I can just save the tracks I want, as with most albums, there are some tracks you don’t specifically like, so I just deleted them.
It took me ten months to do all my LP records, and then a further two months to do the ones my good lady wife has from here collection of a couple of hundred or so.
It was actually fun doing it, and now I have the best of both Worlds.
If I want anything for the car or elsewhere, I can pick and choose tracks or albums, and just burn a disk for that.
I still have the LP’s here with me now, in the book case behind me, and hidden in that are some that indeed do have some value as collectors items.
An Original Import from Germany of Kraftwerk’s Autobahn, the beginnings of techno music. A 4 record boxed set of Mike Oldfield’s first 4 albums still in its own Quad Box with the magazines etc, one of only a few in Australia. An original first release Kinks Part One, from the UK, and Oz is the only place that has them. When it was released they stuck a couple of hundred on the boat to Australia for sale here. Then every pressing of the album was withdrawn along with all the EP’s and Singles when Coke sued the band and the Company because of the original version of Lola. The only place that had them was here in Australia. I have an (unopened) picture album of Floyd’s Division Bell, and they only sold a few of those LP’s as CD was all the go by then. As soon as I open it the value halves, still a hefty price.
The Japanese pressings of Floyd’s first two albums, rare because they remastered the originals and the quality is better than the original UK pressings, both still with the Japanes wrapping. The second Australian version of Ummagumma by Floyd, rare because the U.S. version has the Gigi album on the cover airbrushed to a blank white album cover, and that Australian version has it airbrushed to look just like the background. Rare(ish) because all later versions (except the U.S.) reinstated Gigi.
A lot of other albums I have are also gone forever, as they have not been done in CD at all.
Say, I know this is really long, but music is the second of my great loves. It was third, but my near thirty years of Grade Cricket are long behind me now.
When it comes to music, you could go on forever and not even scratch the surface.
Tony.
00
Tony,
We have more in common than you would imagine!!!!!
I’ll respond but it could be a few days: at long last a decent swell is about to hit here in Victoria, so I’ll be off for a few surfs over the weekend. And I’m sure the wife has a few things planned as well (clean up that bloody garage will you and look at that backyard!!!!) And the grandkids will probably turn up as well.
Who’d of thought this would happen……………ha ha !!!!!
Look after yourself.
Cheers!!!!
00
Grandkids!
Ours, who we moved here to be close to is now a 14 year old girl, and like all girls her age they just love that show, Glee, specifically aimed at girls her age.
She has all the videos and all their CD’s.
She’s here often now, after school and weekends and during the holidays, all this week in fact.
Each time she has a new ‘favourite’ song from Glee, I can sing along with her, and knowing that us ‘really old people’ don’t like Glee, she wonders how I know them all to sing along with her, so every time, I just reach for the original, and she wonders how some bands can get their versions out so fast, until I tell her that it’s the original. She’s blown away that I like the music that she does. I keep trying to tell her some of those songs are from a time when her Mum, our daughter was her age and she rocked along with them too.
Kids. Every generation thinks that it was they who invented the music.
I even made a Post about just that, using one of my all time Favourite songs, On The Turning Away by Pink Floyd.
Sunday Music – On The Turning Away
Tony.
00
We have two, twin girls now 16 months old.
Fortunately they are not identical, one has black hair, the other red, so there is no way I can get them confused. And they are pretty much the opposite of each other in most other respects as well.
It is funny how every generation thinks they invented the music!!!
But the most important point about your granddaughter is that it is real music she’s listening to, not some beatbox gangsta rappa whatever!!! A few years ago I saw some kid being billed as one of the top R&B acts. I expected something like Fats Domino, or maybe some Chuck Berry or early Stones but got some wimpy synth backed thing with not a guitar in sight!!!
How times change.
And the Floyd……………………..what can you say!!!!!!!!!!!!
To be continued……….
Cheers
00
sorry about the rubbish inadvertently pasted at the start of the article on the melb summit.
00
Bob Carter has an excellent piece on peer review and “settled science” at The Australian:
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/opinion/settled-science-no-such-thing/story-e6frgd0x-1226409521856
It is behind the paywall, so do the usual thing of Googling the title and clicking the link to bypass… The key line IMO:
00
Bulldust,
Just use this link to get the article for free.
00
I just talked to my sister who runs a general store in a small country town. The price of regassing a refrigerator will rise from $50 a litre until Friday to $500 a litre from next Monday. The store fridge and freezer needs about 5 litres.
00
Now think Coles and Woolies.
Now think how much the price of a new fridge will rise, and home air conditioners, all needing to be gassed up before delivery from the manufacturer to the dealers.
Now look at every single high rise building.
Now think of your car’s air conditioning unit.
Now think of your home air conditioning unit.
Now think of every coke machine.
Now think shopping malls.
And on and on and on and on.
This is a bonanza.
Don’t tell me it’s not about the money.
Tony.
00
Thats gold Tony!
Gold!
God Help us.. hang on, he cant!
Oakeshott or Windsor?? Can they help us??
No, they are too busy worrying about some muslims swimming in the water!! Millions die every year thanks to Bio fuels, what hypocrisy!!
So, what do we do?
Any thoughts trolls?
Hang on, where have they gone?
It`s taking a while to get over the Rio 20+ hangover hey?…
Jb, Catamon, Ross C, CSIRO … where are you?
00
Ian,
I think she’s being had. The increase due to the Carbon Tax for R410A is around $39.68Kg.
Tell her to get a few other quotes.
Read about it here:http://www.heatcraft.com.au/webdav/site/external/shared/Gas2Go_CarbonTaxUpdate_LR.pdf
Cheers!
00
Oh dear me Bungalow Bill.
This is from the R410A information sheet.
Now refer to this CO2 equivalence from the Australian Legislation.
CO2 Equivalence
As of July 1st, HFC is costed at CO2 multiplied by 650 or at $14,950 per tonne. HFC 125 is costed at CO2 multiplied by 2,800 or $64,400 per tonne.
The refrigerant gases will be levied on those who supply the gases, eg the distributors. They will then pass on those increases to all consumers.
I know this is ad hom, but Bungalow Bill, you’re a (ah forget it)
Man, just keep commenting here. We need idiots like you so we can show that you’ll stand by the meme no matter what, even when by your own comments, you are shown to be so comprehensively wrong.
Tony.
00
Hi Tony,
The publication I linked to came from Heatcraft, a supplier of refrigerants. They are the one’s saying R410A will increase by $39.68kg due to the Carbon Tax, not me. Or did you somehow miss that? That increase is pretty much in line with the figure quoted to me by a refrigeration mechanic at work last week.
I do not sell refrigerant, never have and never will.
Maybe you should tell Heatcraft, they’re the one’s in the business. I’m sure they’ll appreciate your advice on how to run a business.
I’m only the messenger.
Or are you too stupid to figure that out.
I get the impression you are so far up yourself with your expertise in every field known to man you don’t realise when you have made a stupid mistake.
Cheers!
00
Iâm only the messenger.
Or are you too stupid to figure that out.
I get the impression you are so far up yourself with your expertise in every field known to man you donât realise when you have made a stupid mistake.
Cheers!
Bungalow Bill 27.06.2012.
Wow, BB, you really are an idiot!
Not only do you trash the high priest of everything Carbon, which Tony is…
you trash all of us with your ignorance of the facts…
…go home to your sceptical science and
dodgy GERGIS hockey sticks.
It is starting to get embarassing.
00
Hey Black Adder !!!
Read my post #19.2.1.2
Then do the sums.
This is too funny.
Cheers.
00
Oh dear Tony !!!
Go to : http://www.environment.gov.au/atmosphere/ozone/sgg/equivalentcarbonprice/calculator.html
Go to the drop down menu and select R410A.
Then go to go to the column on the far right and lo and behold a total carbon tax levy of $39.84/kg, pre GST of course.
And that is from the Govenments own website.
Are you man enough to apologise????
Cheers!!!!
00
So Bill,
just wonderin’ here.
The refrigerant R410A is now (just one of) the replacement refrigerant gases used, and as you can plainly see from that Government list, there are many of them, all costed at differing values.
Now, as you are no doubt fully aware from when you shot me down here, that refrigeration systems that are capable of actually using R410A are only gradually starting to come into being, and that only started last year.
As you are also no doubt fully aware, oh and let me quote directly from the data so I don’t get accused of just making it up.
So, umm, let’s see if I’ve got this right now.
So, you’re just advocating that people just use the R410A, full in the knowledge that you say it’s OK.
So, let’s go your direction then. Every single fridge, freezer, in every application that was built earlier than last year now needs to be replaced so it can run on this R410A.
Just wonderin, mate. What sort of usage are looking at for systems capable of using R410A. 1% … One tenth of one percent … One hundredth of one percent.
Everything built before last year cannot use R410A.
But, hey, as Bill said in 19.2. it’s OK.
Tony.
Umm, I suppose I should show where I got the info from eh!
Air Treatment Inc. Heating and Air Conditioning.
00
Meaning of course that older units use the older gases, priced comprehensively higher as you can no doubt see from the CO2 Equivalence, meaning of course that what Ian Hill said at Comment 19 was perfectly reasonable and correct.
Also, see how you’re all set to dob them in to the Government’s CO2 Police and the ACCC, as you mentioned at Comment 19.3 below, and wouldn’t you have had egg on your face then.
Tony.
00
So, even using your figures there with the r410a costed at just on $40 per KG, and with one litre of r410a weighing in at 6.6 KG, then one litre of r410a comes in at $264, so it sort of stands to reason that if those earlier refrigerants are costed at higher than the new r410a, then $500 per litre to regas a fridge as Ian Hill mentioned could well and truly be in the vicinity of $500 per litre.
Sometimes we lose sight of what really happens when incorrect terminology is used, and see just how easy it is for the Government to quote that wonderful low looking price of only $40 per Kg, when as mentioned above, this fridge requires 5 litres of the gas.
And seriously, what figure might you think the Government would use.
$40 per Kg
$264 per Litre.
Someone spent a lot of time on this for the Government reducing everything to the lowest (looking) figures to make it seem like it’s not really all that much after all.
Tony.
00
Hi Tony, you were up late werenât you !!!!
R410A has been in common use since the late 1990âs, and much of todayâs refrigeration already uses it. Given the lifespan of refrigeration and the progress of technology most refrigeration units are replaced long before they need regassing. My four year old Mitsubishi split system aircon uses R410A.
As for retrofitting older R22 units, given the improvements in technology, most R22 units would be decommissioned before they required regassing. It would be safe to assume that if an R22 unit did require regassing it could be done from existing or recycled stock. Alternatively there are substitutes, R407C (CTax $35.26/kg) or R404A (CTax $75.15/kg), though some minor modifications are required. You can refer to this : http://www.heatcraft.com.au/en/home/refrigerants_gases_&_oils
The PDF link is at the bottom of the page.
You should read my post again.
I am not advocating anything and I never said anything of the sort. You just made that up to bolster your argument. As I said earlier my four year old aircon uses R410A and Heatcraft have viable options for R22 users. Stop making things up, your credibility is becoming seriously shredded.
The document you quote from refers to the USA.
Try this one, it refers to Australia: http://arkfield.com.au/industry-news-r22-phase-out-dates/
No: I suggested Ian advise his sister to do it. And anyway I wouldnât have egg on my face.
Read on.
Well no.
Where do you get your physics from?
R410A is a liquefied gas, and your trying to tell me itâs 6.6 times heavier that water. At 6600kg/m3 you are in serious heavy metal territory.
In actual fact it weighs 1.04kg/litre. Refer to Wiki.
The Heatcraft Price List shows R410A at $76.21/kg. That price does not include GST or the Carbon Tax, so the new price will be $127.48/kg. or litre.approx.
Thatâs a long way from $500/litre(kg).
Iâll repeat it for you Tony, R410A weighs approx. 1kg per litre not 6.6kg per litre.
Youâre the one who should check your figures.
So in closing, Iâll quote your final comment from #19.2.1
Man, just keep commenting here. We need idiots like you so we can show that youâll stand by the meme no matter what, even when by your own comments, you are shown to be so comprehensively wrong.
Cheers!!!!
00
Bungalow Bill,
you say here
and therein lies the problem I have, and yes, I do indeed owe you an apology.
In my very early morning rush, I missed one step when I was doing the calculations.
Where I quoted the weight of a litre of the r410a gas as 6.6Kg, that was where I was in error. In the plethora of calculations required for that, I forgot to convert it from Pounds to Kilos.
So, having done the calculation again, that weight is in fact just under 7 Pounds or 1.6Kg, so yes, you are indeed correct there.
Molecular weight of r410a is approx 4.63 times that of water.
A gallon of water (US) weighs 8.4 pounds.
Converted to Imp Gallon weighs 6.95 pounds.
Multiplied by 4.63, and then to convert to litres, multiply by .22
Then the step I left out, converting from pounds to Kilos.
Hence that 1.6KG
As to refrigerants there are a pretty big list as shown on the image I have linked to below.
r410a is not a relatively common refrigerant in common use here in Australia, and the reason is as I mentioned in my earlier Comment.
The most common refrigerant in use here in Australia is R134A, and as you can see from the list that refrigerant almost triples in price.
Also, I was just wondering where you got your original price of just on that $40 per Kg.
The attached image is in fact from Heatcraft, and lists R410A new price at $227.21 Kg.
So again my apologies for a misleading calculation.
This is the link to that image.
Heatcraft Price List For Refrigerants Pre and Post CO2 Tax
As you can see from that most refrigerants double of triple in price.
Tony.
00
Hi Tony,
And graciously accepted. Midnight was too late for me!!!!
As for R410A, Wiki gave it a mass of 1040kg/m3 at 30C. Which is what I’ve used.
The $40/kg ($39.68/kg actually) was the carbon tax payable on R401A calculated from the spreadsheet here:
http://www.environment.gov.au/atmosphere/ozone/sgg/equivalentcarbonprice/calculator.html
Just click on Import Levy etc to download.
Looking at Heatcraft’s Price List you posted, I notice that R22 has increased in price despite no Carbon Tax being applicable, (refer to the note at the bottom of the list).
Clearly there are other factors at play here for which the CT cannot be blamed.
I trust Heatcraft will be able to explain it to the ACCC if requested.
And I’m happy to withdraw the “smartarse” comments : they serve no useful purpose: I trust you are as well.
Cheers!
00
Sorry typo,
That should read :
The $40/kg ($39.68/kg actually) is the carbon tax payable on R410A calculated from the spreadsheet here:
Cheers!
00
Hi Tony,
Re my post #19.2.1.2.4
These prices were from Oct 2010 and have obviously been superseded.
Don’t always take the first option Google throws up!!!!!
The prices you link to in #19.2.1.2.5 are indeed the new prices, as detailed in their website. Yet they clearly state the Carbon Tax component is $39.68. That really is some price volatility!!!!!
Refer to their Refrigerant Carbon Pricing Summary here : http://www.heatcraft.com.au/en/home/price_guide
Look in the bottom RH corner for PDF link.
The increases due to the Carbon Tax pale into insignificance compared to the other rises!!!!
And it looks like Ian’s sister was right!!!!!!
What is going on?????
Cheers!!!
00
Actually the store will be under new management in a few weeks and it is they who want the refrigeration regassed. The good news is they will get it done this week.
00
Ian,
I’m sure the ACCC would like to hear about it too. She should give them a call.
Cheers!
00
Under the levy, the cost of some refrigerant gases could increase by 500 per cent or by more than $800 extra a bottle from July 1. It was introduced because a kilo of the gas can be equivalent to a tonne of carbon or more.
Climate Change Minister Greg Combet confirmed the gas increases, saying it took “account of their very potent effect on the atmosphere”. “Businesses supplying SGGs (synthetic greenhouse gases) will be able to recoup the cost in the normal way by passing it on to their customers,” a spokesman said.
The president of the Refrigeration and Air Conditioning Contractors Association, Kevin O’Shea, said service calls would double from $300 to $600 as a result of the levy.
Carbon tax puts fridge repairs on ice
00
Hold it! Wait! stop the presses!
Over at http://www.LifeHacker.com.au they have the solution! How we can cut the carbon tax impact!
Turn off the second fridge, dont use a clothes dryer, shorter showers!
Its all so simple, I dont know how any of us could have overlooked it.
And the comments below the article have it all worked out too!
00
Yes, if only we had realized that we would just need to make small concessions to the quality of our life for no environmental gain I would of been out there on the streets with GetUp!
00
Warcroft,
I cannot bring myself to turn off my beer
fridge!!
I want to expell CO2 as much as I can.
If there was one thing my Pop fought for in
WWII, besides my freedom….
was that I could always have a cold beer….
Lest we Forget….
00
.
My grandfather was a Rat of Tobruk.
He used to to joke that the thing that kept them going was the thought of having to drink warm German beer.
00
If anybody is interested,
We have installed the new environment friendly bulbs throughout our business, and sent all our old environment friendly bulbs – the ones with all the mercury – off to the local tip (because nobody else would take them away for free).
These new bulbs are so cheap to run, we leave them on all the time, because we have found that turning them on and off considerably shortens their life expectancy.
Unfortunately, the new bulbs dob’t put out as much heat as the old bulbs, so we have had to turn the heating up in order to comply with the safer workplace guidelines. Bit of a shame, that.
00
Wasteful.
Why not get everybody in danger of freezing to death to employ the MattB safety net?
Just wear another jumper.
00
Rereke,
You’re from Invercargill aren’t you?
Read this : http://www.icc.govt.nz/ServicesA-Z/Waste/Transferstations.aspx
CFL’s and normal fluorescents don’t go to landfill. The components are fully recyclable.
I have a house full of CFL downlights. The most frequently used ones have clocked up around 8000 hours with only two failures.
Our gas consumption for heating in winter has not changed and the aircon unit doesn’t run anywhere near as hard as it used to in summer. Go figure.
Cheers!
00
Warm beer…..uurrrgggghhhh!!!
00
Nobody ever admits to coming from Invercargill, except for a few Tasmanians who want to appear sophisticated.
I hail from further north. Mind you, that is not hard. The only places that are further south than Invercargill are: Stuart Island; Terra del Fuego; the Falkland Islands; and Penguinville.
00
Hey i thought it was called Swan island? Is it called Stuart? been a few years since i was there, can you clarify this please?
00
âClimate changeâ & âGlobal warmingâ, “Carbon Tax” & Carbon Pollution” is no longer cool.
The warmonistas are coming out:
The latest buzz word since Rio is “Climate Justice”, a far more honest admission to the redistribution of wealth from overtaxed developed nations to third world dictators and the UN.
00
All it means is that lawyers have found their way to the carbon dioxide trough.
God help us all.
00
Now you need the greeting card version, with THIS accessory:
http://www.soundexpressiongreetings.com/musical-greetings/sound_modules.html
00
Will the people of Hughes please vote for this man
http://www.wind-watch.org/news/wp-content/uploads/2012/06/Craig_Kelly-windturbines.pdf
00
Hey Bungalow Bill. May be this is more up your alley……..:
â$45,000 grant to Poo Power!
Poo Power! is one of 63 successful recipients from Inspiring Australiaâs âUnlocking Australiaâs Potentialâ program. The $45,000 grant has been awarded to the Yarra Energy Foundation to turn dog poo from parks in the City of Yarra into renewable energy.â
http://yef.org.au/m/news/id/bf04-45-000-grant-to-poo-power
They even have their own web page: http://www.poopower.com.au/index.html
00
Surely Buffoon shit would be better
00
SNAFU,
My dog could equal all of that on his own. I might apply for a grant.
Actually methane is produced in large quantities in the sewage treatment process.
The pumps used to discharge treated effluent to Gunnamatta from the Eastern Treatment Plant in Melbourne are dual fuel : designed to run on diesel or methane produced in the treatment process. Cheap energy.
Cheers.
00
Remind me not to be next to your dog when it does doo-doo (either that or make sure I’m wearing gum-boots).
00
SNAFU
OK, will do !!
I actually need a bag to carry the poo bags!!!!
Cheers!
00
I hope everyone is OK.
00