Australia repeals maligned 2-year-old carbon tax
POSTED BY: AURaptor
UPDATED: Sunday, December 1, 2024 16:34
VIEWED: 4174
PAGE 2 of 5
Might be a fuckwit,but he's got this one right, at least.
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Yay, hooray for this. Screw the future, keep your head in the sand, kow tow to big business and the lowest common denominator.
A step back. Well one of many for this edjiit.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Now that the Abbott government has succeeded in repealing the carbon price, who stands to win and who stands to lose?
On the face of it, the winners from the repeal of Australia’s carbon price will be the 371 liable entities paying the tax and consumers who forked out more for goods and services as the emissions charge was passed on.
Losers will include firms that have profited from their relatively low carbon output compared with rivals, such as Snowy Hydro and Hydro Tasmania. Accounting and corporate advisory firms are also likely to cut jobs as demand for their expertise dims.
The effects of the Senate’s repeal of the carbon price – $25.40 a tonne as of July 1 - will take some time to play out.
Since the carbon price fell most directly on the power sector, its removal should produce winners in that industry, save for the hydro plants and wind farms which operate at near-zero emissions.
However, as former Citi analyst and clean energy campaigner Tim Buckley notes, the coal-fired power producers have been stoked with billions of dollars in compensation to ensure they absorbed the carbon hit.
“The government gave almost 100 per cent free permits to the generators, who were allowed to bank the cash,” Mr Buckley said. “Then they’ve charged consumers for the cost of the carbon and taken the difference as a profit.”
AGL on Thursday (July 17) said the repeal of the carbon price would reduce earnings before interest and tax by about $186 million. The sum includes the loss of $100 million in "transitional assistance arrangements" for its Loy Yang A power plant in Victoria and about $86 million from anticipated falls in its wholesale power prices paid to its renewable energy and gas generation units.
Perverse result
Likewise, the big trade-exposed energy users, such as the aluminium and cement industries, were given 94.5 per cent of their permits.
Perversely, since allocations were made on industry averages, some aluminium producers actually profited from the carbon price. That benefit will presumably evaporate along with the tax’s demise.
“Australia's aluminium smelters were heavily protected from the carbon price and in some cases were over-compensated,” said Hugh Bromley, an analyst with Bloomberg New Energy Finance, noting the industry's effective carbon price for the 2013-14 financial year ranged from minus-$34 per tonne of carbon-dioxide equivalent, to $6 a tonne.
“A plant such as [Rio Tinto’s] Bell Bay effectively made an additional $220 for every tonne of aluminium produced, while some plants on the mainland faced a cost of around $115 per tonne of aluminium,” Mr Bromley said.
Industrial beneficiaries of the end of a carbon price include the chemicals industry, particularly sectors such as refrigeration that use chemicals with a high greenhouse gas potency. Land-fill operators are other winners since many would have collected large upfront costs for waste they may not now need to manage.
“You’re talking 50 years of emissions that they are passing through,” Mr Bromley said.
Other producers of greenhouse gases, such as coal miners and gas producers, will also benefit from the absence of a carbon cost.
These sectors, particularly the new LNG exporters, happen to be among the fastest growing sources of carbon-equivalent emissions, with their expansion likely to make it harder for Australia to meet its goal of reducing 2000-level emissions 5 per cent by 2020.
Firms able to tap the Abbott government's alternative to a carbon price to achieve that target - the direct action plan to pay polluters to curb emissions - will also be beneficiaries, assuming workable legislation supporting the policy can get through the Senate.
Details of the policy - including how baselines will be enforced - remain unclear, as is the precise amount of money available. Environment Minister Greg Hunt insists he will have access to the full $2.55 billion Emissions Reduction Fund for the plan, although the May budget allocated only $1.14 billion over the four-year forwardNOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by Magonsdaughter:
Yay, hooray for this. Screw the future, keep your head in the sand, kow tow to big business and the lowest common denominator.
A step back. Well one of many for this edjiit.
Don't care 1 bit that a carbon tax won't impact the planet 1 iota, do ya ?
Or that such taxes are bad for jobs and business ?
Guess not.
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
If you read the article you can see that repealing the carbon tax will also impact on businesses and jobs.
And as for no benefit to the planet, this is where its pointless to discuss with one who is amongst those with their arses in the air and their heads in the sand over the impact of heavily poluting industries on this planet.
Perhaps you dont have kids and/or dont care about future generations.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
I have no interest in reading mindless propaganda.
All I can say is " Ha-ha! You don't have a carbon tax anymore ! " 
Quote:
Perhaps you dont have kids and/or dont care about future generations.
Because now your precious carbon tax won't save the day ?
OMG... you're frelling NUTS !
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
You're the flat earther and you are calling me nuts???????????????????
And yeah, I'm sorry that this government has basically u-turned on anything that might support investment into renewable energy sources and are caught up in supporting heavy polluting industries with a limited lifespan.
But nevermind, by all accounts this matter is not ended , it's just a setback and delay, not an end to it. Abbot is an unpopular PM with limited power in the Upper House and we don't have fixed terms. I'm still hopeful.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by BYTEMITE:
I think all we can really do if you intend to resist continuing dependence on oil or if you're concerned about the climate is buy into non-fossil fuels. Here in Utah it's so sunny that it's not hard to design a net zero building, or even one that sells generated power back to the grid.
And companies that rely on fossil fuels, particularly energy companies are terrified of this.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by Magonsdaughter:
You're the flat earther and you are calling me nuts???????????????????
So, because I don't buy into the scam that is AGW, I also believe the Earth is flat ? Or the centre of the Cosmos ? 6,000 years old too, huh?
Hysterical hyperbole , and nothing else.
Quote:
And yeah, I'm sorry that this government has basically u-turned on anything that might support investment into renewable energy sources and are caught up in supporting heavy polluting industries with a limited lifespan.
Support investment ? Please. If there's a way to build a better mouse trap, you don't need to tax the living hell out of the ones which already exist. And are working just fine. Any industry that needs govt to unlevel the playing field isn't a worth while industry at all.
In fact, it's a con job.
Quote:
But nevermind, by all accounts this matter is not ended , it's just a setback and delay, not an end to it. Abbot is an unpopular PM with limited power in the Upper House and we don't have fixed terms. I'm still hopeful.
It's over. The end. Fin. Deal w/ it and move on.
Get use to it and try to do something useful now.
Fathom the hypocrisy of a government that requires every citizen to prove they are insured... but not everyone must prove they are a citizen
I'm just a red pill guy in a room full of blue pill addicts.
" AU, that was great, LOL!! " - Chrisisall
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by AURaptor:
Hysterical hyperbole , and nothing else.
Yeah, that's how I see your posts as well.
Quote:
Support investment ? Please. If there's a way to build a better mouse trap, you don't need to tax the living hell out of the ones which already exist. And are working just fine. Any industry that needs govt to unlevel the playing field isn't a worth while industry at all.
In fact, it's a con job.
Oh because it's currently a level playing field. Perleeeeeassse, give me a break. How much are these industries in bed with governments already, determining policies. My god, between the mining and media industries, we might as well not bother with elected government at all over here.
And let me tell you something about these high polluting industries, we the taxpayer picks up the cost of the environmental impact of their production, so why shouldn't higher polluters pay more?
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME