Labour & IFA fight the carbon tax

djpbarry · 28-04-2010 4:42pm

Why are you assuming a profit has been made? How much will it cost to provide 25% of Ireland’s electricity from nuclear power for 40 years? How much will it cost if a large number of other nations adopt the same approach and push up the price of uranium?

... the mining of the fuel, the processing and/or storage of the spent fuel and the decommissioning of the plant. I’m sure there are other factors I’m not including.

It sure has. But unless you’re comparing the great unwashed to Neanderthals, then your point is moot.

At what point did I deny that the necessary technology exists to solve a large number of our problems?

P. Breathnach · 28-04-2010 4:42pm

Do pay attention. Milliband is not a member of any Green Party.

djpbarry · 28-04-2010 4:42pm

Did I say that?

Y’know, yourself and ei.sdraob might be better served responding to what is actually being posted, rather than assuming that I’m a hippy-tree-hugging-save-the-whales-Green-Party-loving cliché.

Macha · 28-04-2010 4:48pm

Processes involved in nuclear energy that create carbon emissions:
-uranium mining
-uranium milling
-uranium conversion and enrichment
-plant construction
-operation
-fuel processing
-interim storage
-permanent sequestration of waste
-decomissioning

djpbarry · 28-04-2010 4:49pm

So if your neighbours begin to dump their refuse onto your property, you’ll be dealing with the matter privately and will not be involving the Gardaí?

Who cares? You don’t care what Gore or DiCaprio says, but you’re concerned about Miliband’s opinions?

Permabear · 28-04-2010 5:16pm

This post has been deleted.

Macha · 28-04-2010 5:25pm

You still haven't provided any evidence that greater levels of education result in more sustainability. You also haven't provided evidence that leaving it up to voluntary decisions will bring about the sort of fundamental changes necessary.

Permabear · 28-04-2010 5:34pm

This post has been deleted.

Permabear · 28-04-2010 5:48pm

This post has been deleted.

Macha · 28-04-2010 5:52pm

No I wouldn't. Seriously, would you stop taking the extreme of my argument and attacking it? I didn't say ESD is "an utterly pointless endeavour". What I did say is that education alone is not going to get us there.

I didn't say there was zero correlation, I said it would not solve the problem by itself. You are the one who is claiming that it will solve the sustainability challenge alone and therefore the burden of proof lies with you.

I think you're going away from the topic at hand.

Indeed - I'd love to know why you're obsessed with the Green Party policy on Irish in a discussion about carbon tax!

Permabear · 28-04-2010 6:00pm

This post has been deleted.

Macha · 28-04-2010 6:06pm

I'm sorry - are they not? Also, how much does it contribute? Does it give us the best ROI?

Oh OK so it isn't education alone now. What else? And how much does education help?

Eh yes it does: http://greenparty.ie/en/policies/education__1

You'll also be delighted to know they have a policy on volunteering, seeing as it's so crucial to your strategy for achieving sustainability

:

http://www.greenparty.ie/en/policies/volunteering

Permabear · 28-04-2010 6:13pm

This post has been deleted.

Permabear · 28-04-2010 6:18pm

This post has been deleted.

Macha · 28-04-2010 6:55pm

Evidence?

Hah. You're making the usual mistake of assuming that sustainability is a scientific crisis that needs more scientists so we can solve it! Sustainability has many roots, not just in science and it isn't just a matter of getting more scientists on the case. As I said earlier, are there more scientists in Denmark than here? Are we less educated? Where is the direct correlation between science students and sustainability? If you're going to remove all environmental regulations, you'd better be sure your plan B is going to work!

But in any case, a simple ctl+f would have helped:

BTW - I can teach you the basic principles of sustainability (just four of them) in about 5 minutes and you don't even need to have done your JC to understand them.

Permabear · 28-04-2010 7:06pm

This post has been deleted.

Macha · 28-04-2010 7:19pm

Evidence? You don't need a degree in science to understand the basics of sustainability, as I have already pointed out.

Hang on, in the renewed programme for government, there were specific aims at public education for the purposes of sustainability. For example, in the area of composting food waste. There have been past government-sponsored campaigns such as Power of One, Tap Tips, Change and 10:10 (which attracted howls of anger about what a waste of money they were, I might add).

There are also a whole host of measures for education more generally, which would include science. I agree that there is a serious lack of science education & research going on in Ireland but I am still waiting for you to provide some evidence that connects this to our sustainability crisis.

I did my masters thesis on this very topic a few years ago and I can tell you that the scientific research shows that out of educational programmes, appealing to people's better nature or financial incentives, it was the latter that worked best in motivating people towards more sustainable practices. I've read the studies.

Valmont · 28-04-2010 10:19pm

I believe the burden of proof here lies with the AGW advocacy groups. Regardless of the veracity of the AGW hypothesis, I'm not convinced that top-down behaviour control and coercive 'green' taxation methods will save the environment. I'll be voting against any expansion of the government; whether it is to protect the needy or to save the trees, I don't care. When the government tells me that it's curtailing my right to do this or taxing my purchases of that, all in the name of the "greater good", I'm reminded of everything that can go wrong when you begin with such a sentiment and how its ambiguity lends it an unwieldy and dangerous propensity for distortion.

Macha · 28-04-2010 10:32pm

I don't have access to the reports any more but the studies clearly showed that people only respond to financial incentives.

Sweden has less than half the carbon emissions of Ireland. Do you think they achieved that through removing environmental regulations?

Good for you. Some of us do care.

Oh, yes because there's no such possibility of anything going wrong if we just strip away all our environmental legislation. The precautionary principle can work both ways so it's a moot point.

Permabear · 28-04-2010 11:09pm

This post has been deleted.

Macha · 28-04-2010 11:16pm

Your argument is so bizarre and abstract I really don't know what to say.

The science of climate change is incredibly complex and beyond even most masters-level students. You would need at least a degree in physics, if not more to understand the greater detail of it. Nevertheless, the basic tenets of the idea can be understood by someone who doesn't even have Junior Certificate Science. Moreover, as I have said quite a few times at this stage, I can teach you the principles of sustainability in 5 minutes.

You are trying to make some obscure link between the Green Party's Irish Policy and lack of Science in 3rd Level institutions, even though you have established ZERO connection between this and public attitudes to climate change and other environmental issues.. You just keep trotting out the same line over and over like a broken record. Moreover, you're now also dismissing any connection between public educational programmes like Power of One and environmental behaviour!

So, to you use your own words: I'm not remotely convinced.

Oh and I'm still waiting for your proof that voluntary actions will save the day.

Permabear · 28-04-2010 11:54pm

This post has been deleted.

Macha · 29-04-2010 12:12am

No you haven't, you've claimed it's a "fairly obvious connection" between all these things but if it's so obvious, you'll find it quite easy to provide some evidence for it. And then to connect this to people's apathy to climate change, the basic tenets of which can be easily understood by watching a 90 minute film or by doing a Junior Certificate Science course!

I am still waiting for evidence of that connection! And evidence of how the changes you advocate will result in greater levels of voluntary action on climate change. I don't even want to count back now how many times I've asked for evidence.

Oh and within schools there is the Green Schools programme that educates students on all environmental issues, including climate change and ECO-UNESCO is a big player in ESD in Irish schools. SEAI is also involved in this area as is the EPA.

Of course religious class should be gotten rid of! How that connects to climate change? Well, I'm waiting for the evidence.

Valmont · 29-04-2010 1:09am

Having spent 9 months living in a cabin on the fringes of the Alaska range, I care more about the environment than you might think. I just don't want to try and save it by expanding an already huge state and by instituting further taxes and ambiguous behavioural controls that aren't guaranteed to work. Perhaps I'm being naive but I think of other government sponsored mass-behavioural modification programs that haven't worked- the war on drugs is the first to spring to mind.

Macha · 29-04-2010 10:38am

As I said earlier, I recognise that expanding the involvement of the state is something people are uncomfortable with. I just don't think the alternatives being proposed here have anything to back them up. Today's version of capitalism does not place a value on the irreplaceable services that nature provides us. Until such time as it does, we will continue to exploit our natural resources and effectively reduce the carrying capacity of this planet.

As for government-led initiatives on environmental matters, there have been a number of successes, including the regulation and phasing out of CFCs, vast improvement in Dublin, Limerick and Cork's air-quality with the introduction of smoke control fuel. Levels were above the 98th percentile in the 1980s but have now stabilised well below that threshold. These are just two examples off the top of my head - there are many, many more.

dynamick · 29-04-2010 11:55am

Irish Greens do not favour large government, rather they favour moving taxation from income taxes to consumption and pollution taxes. By necessity this involves the creation of new taxes and the winners and losers that changes to tax systems always produce. Populist parties would not normally introduce changes to taxes even where there are more winners than losers as they know the electoral dangers.

Right now is a golden age for the greens in Ireland. The country is in a financial crisis and has realised that its tax take is far lower than in other European countries. Knowing that raising income and corporate taxes is the worst thing to do in a recession, FF is receptive to new green taxes that they can blame on their coalition partners. Income taxes in Ireland are already at a very low level:
42715800Figure-0.1.jpg

This is an OECD graph is from 2008 but even with the new income levies, our ranking is not changed. Lenihan has made clear that marginal tax rates will not increase any further. FF has agreed to remove the regressive elemnet from the income tax code (the PRSI ceiling) next year when PRSI and levies are replaced with a universal progressive charge.

Corporate tax is also very low with 12.5% for most companies and a new 0% rate for companies started this year or last year. The combination of low income and corporate taxes is a great incentive to do business here.

So now we have carbon tax, high VAT, emissions based car taxes, high excise duties and we're getting water tax, site valuation/property tax, rezoning windfall gains tax, incineration and landfill levies, even chewing gum tax. The recommendations of the commission on taxation report from last year were absolutely in line with green policy.

Government already controls many aspects of people's lives. The green party is socially liberal and generally is in favour of a loosening of state control over people's behaviour - so long as that behaviour does not greatly affect others and so long as people are willing to pay for the costs of their actions.

The greens are generally in favour of decriminalisation of drugs and a move towards a harm reduction policy. They have advocated use of cautions for small amounts of cannabis as a first step.

BluntGuy · 29-04-2010 1:37pm

I agree with a carbon tax, in principle. The priviso should be that carbon-free alternative options should be in place first and that the scheme to help offest costs for poorer people is also in place. This clearly isn't the case. And one must ask why this isn't the case. I e-mailed Dan Boyle and several other Green Party members over a month ago asking what provisions would be in place to aid poorer people when the tax is applied - none of them responded. Now I appreciate they may have been busy or whatever, but that is very poor form on such an important issue. Even a simple link to some info would've sufficed.

One can't help but feel that this is simply "a new tax". A regressive one at that. I am happy to be corrected on anything, but even looking beyond the FF spin, the Green Party have failed to impress me with their approach to this issue.

Macha · 29-04-2010 2:06pm

If you read back through this thread, I have specified a number of times the measures that are in place to help with fuel poverty. A recent Bord Gais report also came to the conclusion that there are significant measures that help with fuel poverty. The ESRI estimates the average cost per household to be €2-€3 per week.

As for it being a new tax, as dynamick has pointed out above, we have been very dependent on cyclical taxes and need to replace these with more stable forms of taxation. Income tax has declined steadily, business tax is low and a carbon tax is one of the options for replacing these rapidly dwindling sources of taxation.

Permabear · 29-04-2010 2:09pm

This post has been deleted.

Macha · 29-04-2010 2:15pm

I don't know. I don't feel I have to answer for him. I've already stated the measures quite clearly a number of times. The above is referring to new measures and I don't know anything about them but I do know that €50m from the carbon tax has been ringfenced to go into the SEAI Warmer Homes Scheme, in addition to the significant funding the scheme already receives.

And I'm still waiting for you evidence of the connection between science education and voluntary efforts on climate change.

Scofflaw · 29-04-2010 2:22pm

It's also worth asking why attention is focused on the carbon tax, when carbon tax is a very small component of the tax on fuels.

cordially,
Scofflaw

Permabear · 29-04-2010 2:27pm

This post has been deleted.

dynamick · 29-04-2010 3:10pm

The home heating levy was delayed since the start of the year to allow a grace period of 1 winter, while car fuels went up right away. I doubt much home heating oil is used in summer. The window is open beside me now.

The winter fuel allowance scheme for 2010/2011 has not been announced yet but it will be more generous than in previous years. A third of a million homes received winter fuel allowances of €20/week last winter. A third of a million homes received free electricity units last winter. Supplementary welfare benefits are payable to families in exceptional need. The 'warmer homes scheme' insulated 15,000 low income houses last year while the 'home energey savings scheme' will do 100,000 houses each year.

Unfortunately, a third of our housing stock was thrown up n the last 15 years under governments that allowed ludicrously poor insulation standards. The greens even managed to have new building insulation standard changed in Dun Laoghaire during the previous government but were over-ruled by the then minister of the environment, Dick Roache who wrote that making new homes well insulated would be 'too onerous' for builders.

Nobody in the green party will defend Éamon Ó Cuív. This man has been the primary proponent of dispersed housing and long distance commuting since 1997. He devised a bs romantic philosophy of the ancient right of the Irishman to drive 100km to work and have 7 bedrooms and spend his weekends in retail parks. Then he went around the country peddling the idea that urban dwellers should return to the countryside and drive everywhere to rediscover their heritage. He meant well but he did a lot of harm, particularly to the viability of rural villages and towns in the areas that he hoped to help.

Permabear · 29-04-2010 4:33pm

This post has been deleted.

Macha · 29-04-2010 4:55pm

The point has been made that these measures do not need to be implemented until we are closer to next winter.

This is not true for gas. According to SEAI's latest report:

dynamick · 29-04-2010 5:05pm

The winter fuel allowance scheme pays out money in the winter. This is when it is cold and people have to put the heating on. The fuel allowance scheme starts paying out in October. News of the new scheme will be announced before then.

The price of home heating oil swings easily by 40% one way or the other depending on world demand. The carbon tax is 4.3%. Labour is just flapping its arms.

When Labour gains power with Fine Gael, as it probably will, it will be in the difficult situation of having to choose between introducing further cuts or sinking the economy Greek-style. My bet is that they won't last more than a year in government.

Labour & IFA fight the carbon tax

Comments