The carbon tax and Aussie car making

BroadyFord · 11-07-2011, 12:06 PM

Ford talks tough to parts makers

http://www.goauto.com.au/mellor/mell...2578CA00053CA8

11 July 2011
By IAN PORTER
FORD Australia has warned local parts makers they need to start to work immediately to offset the effects of climate change and the carbon tax or risk becoming uncompetitive and losing out to imported parts.

And the Cooperative Research Centre for Advanced Automotive Technology also stressed the need to keep improving management and production processes in order to survive what are difficult times in the industry.

Ford president Bob Graziano told the annual conference of the Federation of Automotive Products Manufacturers it was important that suppliers recognised the difficulties climate change posed to both Ford and to the suppliers’ own businesses.

“Climate change is front and centre on the political stage,” Mr Graziano told the FAPM members. “I fear that, perhaps, it may not yet be front and centre on your stage.

“Climate change will impact the price of a host of energy-intensive commodities: metal, glass, plastic and fuels. All of these are inputs to your businesses, and any price changes will find their way along the supply chain.”

He warned suppliers they had to work hard to minimise any price changes caused by climate change and the carbon tax.

“It is imperative that we recognise just what climate change can mean to our businesses.”

He said suppliers should not wait for all the detail on climate change to emerge before taking action.

“It is a ‘now’ issue,” he warned. “How will you address the demand to reduce energy use, or commodity use by streamlining your processes? How will you enhance quality and throughput? And how will you achieve all of this without loss of competitive relativity against imported products from a wide range of developing countries?

“You need to ensure your organisations are fully committed to these programs.”

Mr Graziano said there was plenty of assistance available to suppliers and no reason not to act now.

“There are a suite of supplier development programs currently on the table (through the FAPM). These are complemented by a similar suite of programs on offer to you by the three vehicle manufacturers.”

He said there wasn’t a supplier that could not benefit from the help that is available, just as there was no vehicle manufacturer that could not benefit.

“Ladies and gentlemen, the vehicle industry needs you to step up like never before. Australia needs you to step up.

Mr Graziano believes the local industry is in a delicate position with historically high trade exposure, a reference to the high dollar and the lowest tariffs of any car-making country.

“I need to appreciate that Australian motorists are prepared to, and do, buy cars from any country in the world. You need to appreciate that components and technologies can be sourced from any country in the world.

“This is not a subtle cost-down message. Rather, it is a statement of fact. Globalisation has changed the ground rules forever.”

The chief of the AutoCRC’s supplier improvement program also urged suppliers to take advantage of a range of business improvement programs developed for the Automotive Supplier Excellence Australia (ASEA) program.

ASEA director Linsey Siede admitted he was frustrated by the general lack of recognition among parts makers of the need to improve, saying it reflected poorly on the standard of management in the industry.

Only a minority of the 200-plus parts supplies in Australia had realised they could benefit from being benchmarked against the best and shown where to focus improvement efforts, he said.

Indeed, in a reflection of this apathy, only around 20 companies thought it worthwhile attending last week’s conference, leading Mr Siede to note that “the elephant is not in the room”.

GTP-814 · 11-07-2011, 12:32 PM

apathy (in attendance numbers) goes to show that most believe that Gillard’s new tax wont effect them, but they all contribute to the total cost of Australian made vehicles. If supplies do not lift their game then parts will be sourced from overseas, which will mean a reduction in local employment, which leads to increased unemployment & increased taxes again (on us) to pay for unemployment benefits.
Multiple this may dozens of industries & if we don’t remain competitive on an even playing field, Australia will become a service industry only with no manufacturing

**Luke Plaizier** · 11-07-2011, 01:28 PM

I'd argue that most suppliers are up against the wall and running on margins so small that most of them just plain could either not afford to attend, or could not afford the lost revenue of sending staff.

Lukeyson

mik · 11-07-2011, 02:30 PM

sadly your probably right Lukeyson, and Mr Graziano`s very words "the local industry is in a delicate position" may well be under stated i suspect,
and i`d say it`s not only local car industry either.
no thanks to on ongoing ozy govco`s.

roberts · 11-07-2011, 07:07 PM

ask Julair and she will say, we dont have to build things in australia thats what the chinese are for, now get to the mines so china can make more.

uranium_death · 11-07-2011, 09:22 PM

In stating my dislike for the new carbon tax, I had a person give me an earful for opposing their view.
Problem is that their view is purely from an environmental one. What they haven't taken into account is the economical effect on short-sighted knee-jerk things such as this which may result in industry closing down moving overseas. You get unemployment, further reliance on the welfare system and we continue to manufacture less...less exports. Economy sinks...

But apparently my opposal is selfish...

THey stated that 97% of global warming "experts" support global warming...well of course they do! It's their job! Without the scare-mongering, what else are they going to do? Write a 400 page thesis on why they were wrong?

That's like saying that 100% of Church Ministers/Priests etc. believe in God...

Cuba is looking better and better all the time...

I just believe that we should all do our bit. Support industry that uses recycled and/or produces recyclable products.

2011G6E · 11-07-2011, 10:50 PM

I like the way we are told to "listen to the climate experts" about the subject, yet the government head of the climate change committee, who has been giving us sage predictions about what is going to happen with "the climate" is not a climate scientists, but is an economist...

I think a lot of smaller parts industries will see this as the nail in the coffin. A hell of a lot of businesses...not only car parts makers...are already feeling the pinch of ever-increasing electricity costs, and a carbon tax will only flow on to consumers...anyone who says it won't is just plain naive.

They'll also pay more for parts to be delivered. Petrol for "ordinary peoples" cars will be exempt (until the Greens finish thier review into petrol excise of course...) but the fuel for semi trailers that take goods around the country won't be, so those extra costs have to be passed on somewhere, and not magically absorbed like the Greens obviously think they will.

If it costs you more to ship your parts and goods across the country, someone has to pay the extra...and if that extra pushes your parts over the limit of the price of overseas stuff where they are smart enough to refuse to have a carbon tax, then the customers might just turn to other, cheaper, sources.

mik · 11-07-2011, 11:13 PM

not just parts, food , fuel, clothes/ building materials, everything will go up.

glavas · 12-07-2011, 07:24 AM

see what happens when you vote for a socialist government??? and have communists in the senate.

ltd · 12-07-2011, 10:12 AM

Julia Gillard was in the back seat of her Comcar, travelling through country NSW on her way back to Canberra. It seemed like a normal day when all of a sudden, the car rounded a bend and BANG! SMASH! CRASH! The car hit something. When the car came to a halt, she said to the driver “Woyte wois that?” (What was that).
The driver responded; “I don’t know, I’ll have a look” upon which he exited the vehicle and looked around the front end of the car. Shaking his head, he came back to the car and told Julia; “It looks like we’ve hit a cow, I noticed a farm gate back there a kilometre or so. I’ll let them know what happened and call for help”. Julia checked her mobile phone for reception, but since her new NBN deal and the stitching up of wireless competition, her phone failed to have any service. So she told the driver; “Allroight, goio and goit help. I’ll woit hoire” (Allright, go and get help I’ll wait here).

An hour passed, then two, and then three until finally a total of 16 hours passed before the driver returned. Julia was absolutely in a rage that she’d been made to wait so long. She demanded of the driver “Woit thoi foick toiook yoi soi loing?” (What took you so long?)
The driver responded; “I’m sorry, I don’t know what happened”. “First, they took me in to the house, offered me a beautiful home cooked meal until I could eat no more, opened a rare 40 year old bottle of scotch, told me to have my way with their beautiful 24 year old daughter, then demanded I sleep for a couple of hours to recouperate. Then the neighbours came around and we had a party with them as well. I just couldn’t believe it”
“Hoiw ois thoit evoin poissible? Whoit did yoi toill thoim?” (How is that even possible, what did you tell them?) Julia asked.
“I told them the truth, I walked up to their front door and when they opened it I simply said; I’m Julia Gillards driver and I just killed the cow”.

BroadyFord · 12-07-2011, 10:37 AM

Car-makers ‘to wear carbon tax cost’

http://www.goauto.com.au/mellor/mell...2578CA001E577C

STRONG competition from imports is expected to force Australia’s three motor manufacturers to absorb the extra cost of the carbon tax – estimated to be between $112 and $150 a car – rather than try to pass it on to customers.

The industry says the tax will further erode the profitability of the manufacturers, who are “bleeding from the eyes” due to the high value of the Australian dollar that aids importers and discourages exports.

One of them, GM Holden, already has signalled its intention to take up “issues affecting Australia’s ability to compete globally for foreign investment” directly with the federal government.

Holden and the two other manufacturers, Toyota and Ford, are expected to be included in the “top 500 worst polluters” list of manufacturers subjected to the tax that the federal government on Sunday set at $23 per tonne of carbon dioxide.

While Toyota said the tax would add $112 to the cost of each locally built Camry or Aurion, a preliminary estimate by the Federal Chamber of Automotive Industries has set the burden at $150 a vehicle, for a total $30 million bill across the local auto manufacturing industry.

Both estimates are lower than the $220-to-$412 a vehicle suggested by PricewaterhouseCoopers Australia in a report prepared for the FCAI and Federation of Automotive Parts Manufacturers in May.

FCAI chief executive Andrew McKellar told GoAuto that, as well as the carbon tax at the manufacturing level, all vehicles – including imports – would be subject to an extra tax on air-conditioning gases that will add about $20-$23 a car or about $15 million across the industry, bringing the impost on a locally made car to about $170.

So, all up, we would say the total cost is somewhere in the order of $45 million to $50 million a year for the industry as a whole,” Mr McKellar said.

“While that might not sound a lot per car, there wouldn’t be too many brands that would be in a position to pass that on to consumers, certainly not the local manufacturers.

“They will wear that in their margins and in their reduced profitability, and that is not a good thing when it comes to competing for capital from their global parent companies.”

Mr McKellar said the FCAI had urged the government to offset the costs of the tax on local manufacturing industry and start with a nominal carbon tax of $10 or less per tonne.

Neither of these requests had eventuated in the tax package announced by the Gillard government at the weekend, he said.

Mr McKellar said initiatives to encourage the uptake of low emissions technologies by industry – also urged by the motor industry – were a positive aspect of the tax package, but those measures failed to make up for the loss of the Green Car Innovation Fund that has been killed off by the federal government.

“If anything, it doesn’t even take us back to where we were a year ago, but we still have the additional cost coming on to industry,” he said.

“Those are issues which concern us and it won’t make it any easier to secure future investment mandates here in Australia.

“The main impact of those cost increases will be to erode margins and profitability, even more so than they already are.

“It is fair to say that at the moment local manufacturers are bleeding from the eyes from the strong value of the Australian dollar and the strong competitive pressures that they face.

“So to add additional costs to that at this stage of the economic cycle, it is not an economic reform, it is the opposite.”

Mr McKellar urged the government to reassess the impact the tax would have on industry competitiveness.

He said tax on air-conditioning gases should “go back in the melting pot for reconsideration”.

“In the next few years, the industry will be looking to replace those gases with a much lower carbon equivalent, so I think there is a technological solution there in the offing for that part of the problem,” said Mr McKellar.

“To be imposing additional cost won’t speed that process, it will just add cost, and unnecessarily.

“We urge the government to revisit those issues. There needs to be an ongoing dialogue with manufacturing industry because we really do need to rethink the sort of approach that has been put forward here if we are to avoid potentially undesirable consequences.”

Toyota, Ford and Holden all said they were still assessing the detail of the package.

However, Holden said in a statement that it did not fit the Government’s criteria as an ‘emissions-intensive, trade-exposed industry’ (EITE) and therefore would be eligible to only partly offset the impact under the Clean Technology Program.

“Specifically, Holden believes it will be able to apply for co-investment funding for its R&D (research and development) and manufacturing initiatives to help reduce emissions and improve vehicle efficiency through the Clean Technology Investment Program Investment Program, Clean Technologies Food and Foundries Investment Program and Clean Technology Innovation Program,” said the Holden statement.

Holden said it supported the need to reduce its carbon footprint, and that of manufacturing in general, and believed the compensation measures were a step in the right direction. “However, it is important to understand how much competition there will be for funding from other manufacturing sectors,” Holden said.

“It is also critical to understand the extent to which the compensation package will address the competitive disadvantage imposed on local manufacturers who compete in a market where 85 per cent of new vehicle sales are imported models.

“Over the coming days we will be reviewing the details of the scheme to better understand how the package will be implemented.

“In particular, Holden will be discussing with the government the issues affecting Australia’s ability to compete globally for foreign investment.”

Ford Australia is playing its cards closer to its chest, saying it was reviewing the anticipated impact of the carbon pricing scheme.

“Once this is finished Ford will express its views through the Australian Federal Chamber of Automotive Industries,” a Ford spokesman said.

Toyota Australia president and CEO Max Yasuda said Toyota supported action on climate change, but that the carbon tax was expected to increase Toyota Australia’s manufacturing costs by up to $15 million a year – about $112 per locally manufactured vehicle.

“The local automotive industry is currently facing difficult business conditions including the high Australian dollar, increased overseas competition and a fragile local supply chain,” he said.

“In light of these conditions and in the absence of transitional assistance for trade exposed non-energy-intensive industries, such as the automotive industry, Toyota Australia would have preferred a lower starting price ($10-$15) to ease the transition process and free-up capital to invest in low-emissions technologies.

“A high start price of $23 places Australian manufacturing at a disadvantage compared to imports and is a significant challenge for business.”

Mr Yasuda said Toyota Australia was concerned about air-conditioning gases being subject to an equivalent price outside the Clean Energy Future Scheme.

“It is inappropriate to place a cost on gases that currently have no commercially available alternative,” he said.

Mr Yasuda said the new Clean Technology Investment Program did not address the need for a co-investment program, unlike the now defunct Green Car Innovation Fund.

Australian motoring clubs have welcomed the decision to exclude petrol from the carbon tax, but they have asked the government to clarify the details, including whether other fuels are included.

RACV general manager public policy Brian Negus said that, under the tax exemption, families, tradies and small business people would not be targeted by a petrol price increase as a result of the carbon tax.

“However, RACV believes there needs to be more detail on whether these benefits will apply to commerce, industry and the broader community,” he said.

“While RACV welcomes this announcement, clarity is sought on whether other motoring fuels such as diesel, LPG and ethanol will also be exempt from the carbon tax.

“RACV also seeks details on the how this exemption will work, and whether there will be a cent-for-cent offset from fuel excise or whether petrol will simply not be included at all in a carbon tax.”

2011G6E · 12-07-2011, 11:36 AM

The trick is, we aren't being told who exactly these "500 highest polluting companies" are...it's a secret, and the public isn't allowed to be told.
http://www.couriermail.com.au/money/...-1226092374055

Quote:

THE Federal Government says about 500 companies will pay for the right to pollute - but can't reveal who they are to the public.
Commercial privacy laws prevent the Government from naming companies that will pay for their carbon emissions under the scheme.

It means the companies, and the number of companies, that are forced into paying could remain a mystery.

The Government has used information taken from the National Greenhouse and Energy Reporting Act 2007 (NGER Act) to make its estimation regarding the 500 biggest polluters and to model its carbon pricing scheme accordingly.

But when contacted by news.com.au, a spokesperson for the Department of Climate Change and Energy Efficiency referred to section 23 of the same act, which states an unauthorised disclosure of information is punishable by "imprisonment for two years".

There's usually only one reason a government keeps something like this such a tightly held secret...

...and that's because someone, somewhere, is making an awful lot of money out of it...

ray38l · 12-07-2011, 11:52 AM

Can the governor general force an election? If so how do people make it happen?
Hopefully truck drivers start protesting now. Truck drivers could bring the country to a halt real quick. But juliar has given them a 2 year grace period from the tax. Seems like she did that to stop them protesting.

sudszy · 12-07-2011, 02:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ray38l

Can the governor general force an election? If so how do people make it happen?
Hopefully truck drivers start protesting now. Truck drivers could bring the country to a halt real quick. But juliar has given them a 2 year grace period from the tax. Seems like she did that to stop them protesting.

So what are they protesting about, if a $23 tonne carbon tax comes in how much will that raise their costs? do you know, do they know.....ignorance is bliss, just bleat on about how the world owes them a living?

Simple answer, 7 cents a litre!@#$. The price of diesel is going to change by more than that amount in the next two years just due to middle east shenanigans, you can bet on that.

Please tell me how this is going to grind any business or trucky into the ground. And no they dont have to absorb the cost, just add it to the cost of the service they provide. The customer wont pay?, so we are all not going to buy food or services anymore......

Yes of course it will increase our costs at the supermarket, not the trucky's problem, ours, but by how much, why not sit down and do the sums at 7cents/litre.

Here's some info to help: big rig fuel consumption(25-30 tonne cargo) = 40-50L/100km
Lets pretend all your food comes from sydney to melb(1000km) and vice versa...you buy 20kg of food per week......extra cost = a couple of cents.

ray38l · 12-07-2011, 03:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sudszy

So what are they protesting about, if a $23 tonne carbon tax comes in how much will that raise their costs? do you know, do they know.....ignorance is bliss, just bleat on about how the world owes them a living?

Simple answer, 7 cents a litre!@#$. The price of diesel is going to change by more than that amount in the next two years just due to middle east shenanigans, you can bet on that.

Please tell me how this is going to grind any business or trucky into the ground. And no they dont have to absorb the cost, just add it to the cost of the service they provide. The customer wont pay?, so we are all not going to buy food or services anymore......

Yes of course it will increase our costs at the supermarket, not the trucky's problem, ours, but by how much, why not sit down and do the sums at 7cents/litre.

Here's some info to help: big rig fuel consumption(25-30 tonne cargo) = 40-50L/100km
Lets pretend all your food comes from sydney to melb(1000km) and vice versa...you buy 20kg of food per week......extra cost = a couple of cents.

and then the next year it rises again and keeps on rising. Once it is a market based system no one person be it prime minister, president or whoever has any control over it. But hey you're a govco fan so go ahead believe juliar. Every modelling governments do to predict cost of living costs is always so far off target its not funny.
There are so many flaws in this tax it isn't funny. For a starters the total carbon emissions will rise under the tax. The gains are made as a percentage of what they think will be total emissions.
Another thing that makes no sense is they want to encourage farmers to get rid of there farting cattle and plant trees instead. A nice idea if all of Australia turned vegan but that's not going to happen so we would have to import all our meat which means more pollution.
Yep the communist greenies have really thought this through.

SEZ213 · 12-07-2011, 04:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ray38l

Another thing that makes no sense is they want to encourage farmers to get rid of there farting cattle and plant trees instead. A nice idea if all of Australia turned vegan but that's not going to happen so we would have to import all our meat which means more pollution.
Yep the communist greenies have really thought this through.

That's completely fruitless, the Chinese are now establishing a western diet, so even if the Aussies did stop cattle farming and started planting trees...there will certainly be one massive country to pick up the shortfall in our beef production...and increase carbon emissions...

I think the bubble is going to burst on Australian car manufacturers, and unfortunately, it will probably be at the hands of this clown...

sudszy · 12-07-2011, 08:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ray38l

. Every modelling governments do to predict cost of living costs is always so far off target its not funny.

Okay Ray, put up your modelling and numbers and show us how it is all wrong.

Quote:

Originally Posted by ray38l

There are so many flaws in this tax it isn't funny. For a starters the total carbon emissions will rise under the tax

Not even the greens are that happy with it Ray, Abbott really does deserve your congratulations for getting it watered down to what it now is.
Im struggling to see how you reckon emissions are going to rise, this is based on your theory that importing beef that we'll no longer be farming will offset closing down power stations that use low grade coal etc.

Quote:

Originally Posted by ray38l

and then the next year it rises again and keeps on rising. .

and in three years time instead of an extra 2 cents to transport 20kg a distance of 1000km, it will cost nearly an extra 3 cents!.........dont throw out those five cent pieces yet!

JG34JA · 12-07-2011, 08:35 PM

That LPG Falcon is looking really, really good about right now.

See, whether the science is right/wrong, whether the policy is good/bad, I know one thing. Costs are going up. 6 layers of new bureaucracy: someone's gotta pay for it! Costs for our 500 most productive, er, sorry, polluting companies, and then for everyone else. The rules have changed and there will be new winners and new losers.

As for the manufacturing companies, they already know that it is far cheaper to produce/source parts from countries which do not have a carbon tax, or our mad over-regulation and incredible wages/benefits systems and increasingly inflexible IR arrangements. They will follow the path of least resistance: note the recent slashing of Bosch's size and scope here, and that small businesses are closing at levels not seen since the 90's recession for starters. (I like how the projection of tax earned, relied upon in Govco forecasts, assumes none of the 500 pull the plug, or suffer lost market share and downsize due to extra costs.) This whole debacle is like living in an Ayn Rand novel, it's utterly surreal..

SEZ213 · 12-07-2011, 08:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sudszy

Okay Ray, put up your modelling and numbers and show us how it is all wrong.

Not even the greens are that happy with it Ray, Abbott really does deserve your congratulations for getting it watered down to what it now is.
Im struggling to see how you reckon emissions are going to rise, this is based on your theory that importing beef that we'll no longer be farming will offset closing down power stations that use low grade coal etc.

and in three years time instead of an extra 2 cents to transport 20kg a distance of 1000km, it will cost nearly an extra 3 cents!.........dont throw out those five cent pieces yet!

Of course they're not happy with it. They're missing out on more consumer funds as a result...and it's pretty clear they're against anything that makes the average person a little better off...

I'd like to understand how you think that this carbon tax is not going to effect the consumers - they weren't going to put GST on fuel either, and if they did, they were going to remove the excise...well that didn't happen did it...? So on top of the excise we pay GST...and GST on the excise as well...From the oil in the ground there is tax, and then more tax and then some more again.

So in 2015 (by which stage the carbon tax has gone up 2.5% each year in accordance with whatever theory they've pulled out of the air this time), they will introduce a carbon tax on heavy transport.

In the scheme of the 'report' - they have decided that the consumer will only get expenses of an extra 10 dollars a week, for which we are duly compensated (apparently) - there is NO guarantee from the government that these taxes issued to the 500 companies (who conveniently can't be named), will not shift these costs on to the consumer, or their wholesale customers who in turn will send it down the supply chain as well...case in point - The OP...

In a perfect world, this tax would probably be beneficial, but unfortunately, our leaders have a habit of not telling us the full story before they implement such things.

I wouldn't feel so bad about it if they were actually 'transparent', consolidation of revenue is not transparency...the tax is implemented on 500 businesses, and they're trying to convince us that we're going to be better off with tax incentives for 'some' but not all. Now unlike some people, I actually do give a rats about those who WON'T be better off under this scheme...3 million households...how is that fair for them?

I am told that my electricity will go up 3.30 a week, equating to around $170 a year, on top of the $198 increase that occurred from last years 15% rise for absolutely no reason...

I'm all for a reduction in wasteful ways, but I really don't think this is the answer...

And as far as .gov.au websites, I take them with a grain of salt to be honest - we weren't getting a carbon tax, that was a promise...but now it appears that people 'misunderstood' the words - "There will be no carbon tax under a government I run..."

**Burnout** · 12-07-2011, 09:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ray38l

Another thing that makes no sense is they want to encourage farmers to get rid of there farting cattle and plant trees instead.

It's has been noted for a number of years that 'Roos don't fart. The bacterium which prevents roos from farting has been identified as being compatible with the gut of ruminants (Cattle, Sheep).
Add this bacteria to the gut of domestic stock and "Bobs yer Uncle".

mik · 12-07-2011, 08:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sudszy

So what are they protesting about, if a $23 tonne carbon tax comes in how much will that raise their costs? do you know, do they know.....ignorance is bliss, just bleat on about how the world owes them a living?

Simple answer, 7 cents a litre!@#$. The price of diesel is going to change by more than that amount in the next two years just due to middle east shenanigans, you can bet on that.

Please tell me how this is going to grind any business or trucky into the ground. And no they dont have to absorb the cost, just add it to the cost of the service they provide. The customer wont pay?, so we are all not going to buy food or services anymore......

Yes of course it will increase our costs at the supermarket, not the trucky's problem, ours, but by how much, why not sit down and do the sums at 7cents/litre.

Here's some info to help: big rig fuel consumption(25-30 tonne cargo) = 40-50L/100km
Lets pretend all your food comes from sydney to melb(1000km) and vice versa...you buy 20kg of food per week......extra cost = a couple of cents.

it`s always easy for someone not in the industry sitting behind a keyboard and not putting in 350/800 litres per day to say 7 cents a litre is not much,
for sure diesel wil go up, it certainly does`nt need to go up any faster.
some truckys get paid monthly, some even wait longer than that, dont tell me truckys dont have to absorb the cost, they don`t just snap their fingers and get paid, and they also have to fight some times for years to get a price adjustment even though costs have gone up long ago, go out and get your own truck and work it for for a year or 2 and then tell me how easy it is.

mik · 12-07-2011, 02:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ray38l

Can the governor general force an election? If so how do people make it happen?
Hopefully truck drivers start protesting now. Truck drivers could bring the country to a halt real quick. But juliar has given them a 2 year grace period from the tax. Seems like she did that to stop them protesting.

i like your thinking, but truck drivers i`d say on the whole have pretty major overheads and can`t stay out long enough to make a difference, the whole population need to get off their backsides and protest, otherwise its all happening.

bigdude1011 · 12-07-2011, 11:59 AM

As much as I hate her guts, I would much rather her than Tony Abbott. It would be nice to have a decent internet connection

MustangNut · 12-07-2011, 12:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bigdude1011

As much as I hate her guts, I would much rather her than Tony Abbott. It would be nice to have a decent internet connection

Except that with the economy dead - who could afford to subscribe ?

flappist · 12-07-2011, 12:21 PM

It was interesting to note that although the carbon tax "will not affect petrol" that it WILL cost the sugar industry $80,000,000.

This ethanol stuff, you know the "renewable" fuel......where does that come from again?

SEZ213 · 12-07-2011, 12:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by flappist

It was interesting to note that although the carbon tax "will not affect petrol" that it WILL cost the sugar industry $80,000,000.

This ethanol stuff, you know the "renewable" fuel......where does that come from again?

And then it hits construction...we're in for a world of hurt...

UNR8D · 12-07-2011, 12:24 PM

^^ my thoughts exactly flap.

Gobes32 · 12-07-2011, 12:29 PM

Makes me wonder, can LPG be considered a "green" fuel? Because you would not place a green tax on LPG if it is in fact better for the environment than petrol.

ray38l · 12-07-2011, 08:29 PM

Sudszy, i thought you would actually know what the emission forecasts are for under a carbon tax/ets.
In the government report it states total annual emissions are currently at 578 million tonnes. in the same report it states that with there modelling total annual emissions with a carbon tax will be 621 million tonnes in 2020. That's one little fact that the greenies and labor never mention. So yes emissions will rise under a carbon tax, backed up by government modelling which you seem to like.

sudszy · 12-07-2011, 08:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ray38l

Sudszy, i thought you would actually know what the emission forecasts are for under a carbon tax/ets.
In the government report it states total annual emissions are currently at 578 million tonnes. in the same report it states that with there modelling total annual emissions with a carbon tax will be 621 million tonnes in 2020. That's one little fact that the greenies and labor never mention. So yes emissions will rise under a carbon tax, backed up by government modelling which you seem to like.

Dont know what you've been reading, but have just checked the data at:
http://www.climatechange.gov.au/publ...ojections.aspx

The current aim is to reduce emissions to 5% below the levels they were in 2000.
2000: 558Mt CO2 less 5% = 530Mt

That's to reduce output to 530Mt by the year 2020,

current output(you've got that part right) = 578Mt

so its a reduction!

The projected figure for 2020 with no action/carbon tax/reductions/ forecasts 690Mt, perhaps that is the bit you misread?