Carbon tax budget increase

emo72 · 06-08-2018 5:56pm #1

So the kite flying has begun. According to Leo Varadkar we have to "grasp the nettle". And we are being softened up for an increase in the budget.

The problem is most people would want to be green and not waste electricity or gas. It's expensive enough, but we have to heat our homes. It's not exactly a luxury, it's not something we can avoid. Heat or freeze, what are they trying to encourage us to do?
There is no alternative, we are dependent on Russian gas and the ESB to provide our energy.

The solution is to attempt to try cleaner energy production, but that's not up to us, it has to be there, created by the state, then we can use it. It's just another form of taxation that we can't avoid. It's certainly not fair!

VonZan · 06-08-2018 7:18pm

Surely the strategists in Fine Gael HQ can come up with a better plan than to just tax carbon based fuels. If that's the plan then we might as well just start burning our trash at home.

blanch152 · 06-08-2018 10:06pm

First thing they need to do is increase the carbon tax.

Second thing they need to do is increase the excise duty on diesel.

Third thing they need to do is allow those who are generating electricity from solar to sell surplus back to the state.

Fourth thing they need to do is shut down the peat-burning stations.

Fifth thing they need to do is remove the restrictions on wind turbines being built near rural homes

Sixth thing they need to do is ban all one-off housing in rural areas.

Seventh thing they need to do is instruct DCC to allow high density high rise in Dublin City Centre

Eighth thing they need to do is build the Metro, DART Underground and electrify the Dublin commuter rail.

Ninth thing they need to do is incentivise retrofitting.

Oh I could go on and on, but it would be great if the government actually did do something to address the environmental issues.

Dr Brown · 11-08-2018 12:22am

Even if this global warming BS was real which it isn't a tiny country such as Ireland has little to no impact on global carbon emissions.

Varadkar is just virtue signaling.

oscarBravo · 11-08-2018 3:04pm

Dr Brown wrote: »

Even if this global warming BS was real which it isn't a tiny country such as Ireland has little to no impact on global carbon emissions.

Varadkar is just virtue signaling.

It could be worse. He could be stupidity signaling.

Akrasia · 11-08-2018 3:21pm

Dr Brown wrote: »

Even if this global warming BS was real which it isn't a tiny country such as Ireland has little to no impact on global carbon emissions.

Varadkar is just virtue signaling.

Blah blah blah blah blah. Every single time global warming is mentioned people like you crawl out of the woodwork

Carbon taxes are an essential tool in combatting climate change. Do I like paying more taxes, of course not, but its the right thing to do

Fr Tod Umptious · 11-08-2018 3:26pm

Dr Brown wrote: »

Even if this global warming BS was real which it isn't a tiny country such as Ireland has little to no impact on global carbon emissions.

Varadkar is just virtue signaling.

Global warming is real.

What's BS is trying to stop it.

The main reason people say we have to stop it is because place x will be too hot/too cold/ too wet/ too dry etc for future generations.

So fcuking what.

Generations in the future will adapt to place x being too hot/too cold/ too wet/ too dry and live accordingly.

Akrasia · 11-08-2018 3:30pm

Fr Tod Umptious wrote: »

Global warming is real.

What's BS is trying to stop it.

The main reason people say we have to stop it is because place x will be too hot/too cold/ too wet/ too dry etc for future generations.

So fcuking what.

Generations in the future will adapt to place x being too hot/too cold/ too wet/ too dry and live accordingly.

The stupidest and most short sighted thing I have read in a long time.

emo72 · 11-08-2018 3:41pm

Increasing taxes doesn't fight climate change. Providing an alternative clean energy does.

But anyway, it's the national herd creating methane is the actual problem. But that can't be criticised.

Fr Tod Umptious · 11-08-2018 3:43pm

Akrasia wrote: »

The stupidest and most short sighted thing I have read in a long time.

Why though ?

The earth has been heating and cooling for billions of years and species have either died out or evolved.

How is this different ?

firemansam4 · 11-08-2018 3:44pm

blanch152 wrote:

Second thing they need to do is increase the excise duty on diesel.

Why? Petrol is more harmful to the atmosphere than Diesel.

lawred2 · 11-08-2018 3:46pm

Dr Brown wrote: »

Even if this global warming BS was real which it isn't a tiny country such as Ireland has little to no impact on global carbon emissions.

Varadkar is just virtue signaling.

It's real. It's quite simply moronic to deny the wealth of evidence available to you.

emo72 · 11-08-2018 4:07pm

lawred2 wrote: »

It's real. It's quite simply moronic to deny the wealth of evidence available to you.

Of course climate change is real. It's constantly in flux. Always has been always will be.

Also Ireland is absolutely tiny, but I agree, that's no reason to try nothing. Let's be the best we can be is always my motto.

Infini · 11-08-2018 4:36pm

Only thing Ill say is I wont be impressed if fuel increases in price again. We pay ridiculous levels on tax for fuel as it is and this just irritates people more.

The J Stands for Jay · 11-08-2018 4:44pm

firemansam4 wrote: »

Why? Petrol is more harmful to the atmosphere than Diesel.

Because diesel kills people. Also, is petrol actually more harmful to the atmosphere, or are you basing that on the amount of CO² produced?

BaronVon · 11-08-2018 5:18pm

blanch152 wrote: »

First thing they need to do is increase the carbon tax.

Second thing they need to do is increase the excise duty on diesel.

Third thing they need to do is allow those who are generating electricity from solar to sell surplus back to the state.

Fourth thing they need to do is shut down the peat-burning stations.

Fifth thing they need to do is remove the restrictions on wind turbines being built near rural homes

Sixth thing they need to do is ban all one-off housing in rural areas.

Seventh thing they need to do is instruct DCC to allow high density high rise in Dublin City Centre

Eighth thing they need to do is build the Metro, DART Underground and electrify the Dublin commuter rail.

Ninth thing they need to do is incentivise retrofitting.

Oh I could go on and on, but it would be great if the government actually did do something to address the environmental issues.

You left out building a nuclear power plant, the cleanest, most reliable form of electricity production available!

firemansam4 · 11-08-2018 6:07pm

Diesel particulates can be harmful to people in citys mostly, but that is nothing to do with what a carbon tax is about. New dpf technology will hopefully reduce the harmful effects of diesels to humans.
Petrol engines are less efficient and produce more CO2 for this reason, as such they should be penalized every bit as much as diesel should be.

Akrasia · 12-08-2018 5:14pm

Fr Tod Umptious wrote: »

Why though ?

The earth has been heating and cooling for billions of years and species have either died out or evolved.

How is this different ?

Its different because we're the ones causing the warming, and we're going to be the one's facing the apocalyptic consequences if we don't cop ourselves on.

The planet will be grand, but human civilisation as we know it may not be compatible with a planet 4c hotter than it is today. We're seeing devastating droughts, heatwaves and wildfires around the world today and we've only warmed by about 1c.

Atlantic Dawn · 12-08-2018 5:17pm

We already have one of the most expensive electricity and gas prices in the EU, why don't they go the whole hog and impose a window tax to tax the daylight coming in to our houses while they are at it, bunch of chancers.

badtoro · 12-08-2018 6:13pm

blanch152 wrote: »

First thing they need to do is increase the carbon tax.

Second thing they need to do is increase the excise duty on diesel.

Sixth thing they need to do is ban all one-off housing in rural areas.

Don't have any issue with the other things you mention but as a rural dweller I'd be very much against the three above, as I imagine would most other rural people.

12-08-2018 7:26pm

A carbon tax to do what, exactly?

My gas bills are a fortune as it is and I would love nothing more than to cut them.

Despite being built in 2002, my house has appallingly bad insulation and did have a really bad boiler. I’ve recently taken advantage of the scheme to upgrade to a condensing boiler, which meant I got €500 back, but I still had to fork out €3,000 for this.

I’d love to replace my doors and windows (which have really poor double glazing, I’m surprised they were allowed to fit these) but I can’t afford to shell out the thousands that would cost.

I don’t need to be penalized for using gas, I (like most people) need help to cut down on the usage.

Dr Brown · 12-08-2018 8:44pm

Akrasia wrote: »

Blah blah blah blah blah. Every single time global warming is mentioned people like you crawl out of the woodwork

Carbon taxes are an essential tool in combatting climate change. Do I like paying more taxes, of course not, but its the right thing to do

Meanwhile China is building a new coal power station every week.

It totally pointless for Ireland to cut its carbon emissions unless the US and China also cut their emissions which isn't going to happen any time soon.

Akrasia · 12-08-2018 9:26pm

Dr Brown wrote: »

Meanwhile China is building a new coal power station every week.

It totally pointless for Ireland to cut its carbon emissions unless the US and China also cut their emissions which isn't going to happen any time soon.

China have cancelled hundreds of coal powerstations and permits have declined by 85% last year, and the amount of actual power generated by coal power stations in China is declining rather than increasing, but never let the truth get in the way of a good reason to blame someone else for a shared problem.

The Chinese are going to be the world leader in renewable energy and they're going to make a fortune selling the technology to the rest of the world while we have eejits here complaining about their gas bills

When it becomes cheaper to install solar panels than to pay for gas heating, people will change over. This requires subsidies, grants and building regulations requiring better energy efficiency, and it also requires carbon taxes on fossil fuels.

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2018/jan/10/china-on-track-to-lead-in-renewables-as-us-retreats-report-says

12-08-2018 10:13pm

Akrasia wrote: »

China have cancelled hundreds of coal powerstations and permits have declined by 85% last year, and the amount of actual power generated by coal power stations in China is declining rather than increasing, but never let the truth get in the way of a good reason to blame someone else for a shared problem.

The Chinese are going to be the world leader in renewable energy and they're going to make a fortune selling the technology to the rest of the world while we have eejits here complaining about their gas bills

When it becomes cheaper to install solar panels than to pay for gas heating, people will change over. This requires subsidies, grants and building regulations requiring better energy efficiency, and it also requires carbon taxes on fossil fuels.

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2018/jan/10/china-on-track-to-lead-in-renewables-as-us-retreats-report-says

I get the carrot and stick approach, but at the moment it seems to be that the small carrot isn’t working, so we’ll just get a bigger stick.

Akrasia · 13-08-2018 10:25am

I think the carrot should be a lot bigger too. This is the reason why international agreements to cut emissions should have hefty penalties for states that don't meet their targets. States need to invest in emissions reduction, and there needs to be incentives to make it cheaper for them to act, than to fail to act.

Ultimately, even if governments borrowed heavily now to fund new energy and transport infrastructure and to improve energy efficiency in the housing stock and industry, it is still cheaper than paying the cost of adapting to climate change.

There will be adaptation costs, we're already locked in to some level of adaptation, but the more time we waste now, the higher these costs will be, and they can get extremely high.

James Brown · 13-08-2018 3:25pm

There's little point in raising taxes based on carbon emissions unless there's follow through. People will pay what they are forced to pay. Unless we invest the monies in alternate or more efficient fuels a higher cost won't help matters.

Trasna1 · 13-08-2018 3:41pm

emo72 wrote: »

Increasing taxes doesn't fight climate change. Providing an alternative clean energy does.

But anyway, it's the national herd creating methane is the actual problem. But that can't be criticised.

Indeed. If Ireland was serious about tackling emissions it would be going after the big hitters, like agriculture but instead we are growing the national herd.

Transport, surprisingly, contributes a much smaller proportion to carbon emissions than you'd think. Certainly much smaller than would warrant the attention it's getting.

If we overnight converted to electric cars, it would have an insignificant impact on national emissions. Converting Moneypoint to nuclear would be far more effective.

But at the end of the day, fuel prices have been higher at the pumps and this hasn't stunted growth so the see that the economy can tolerate it. So they want a slice of that action, dressed up as an environmental measure. That don't have the balls to call it for what it is. A plain old simple tax rise.

Akrasia · 13-08-2018 4:14pm

Matt Barrett wrote: »

There's little point in raising taxes based on carbon emissions unless there's follow through. People will pay what they are forced to pay. Unless we invest the monies in alternate or more efficient fuels a higher cost won't help matters.

but people are investing in alternative energy and energy efficiency measures, and more people will do this as it becomes more financially attractive.

If electricity costs 1000 euros a year, and a solar pv instalation costs 5000, then it has a payback time of 5 years

if electricity costs 1250 euros a year, that payback time becomes 4 years.

If there is also a grant of about 1k for the installation, then the payback time gets closer to 3 years.

If there are mechanisms to allow customers sell excess power back to the grid, then these solutions become more attractive still.

Then there's the home heating costs. If oil goes up by 20%, it becomes more attractive for homeowners to upgrade their insulation, or get a more efficient boiler, or switch to a stove

Combine this with grants from the government to assist homeowners to make any of these upgrades and you have a win win situation. homeowners have lower long term running costs and also lower carbon emissions.

Akrasia · 13-08-2018 4:24pm

Trasna1 wrote: »

Indeed. If Ireland was serious about tackling emissions it would be going after the big hitters, like agriculture but instead we are growing the national herd.

Transport, surprisingly, contributes a much smaller proportion to carbon emissions than you'd think. Certainly much smaller than would warrant the attention it's getting.

If we overnight converted to electric cars, it would have an insignificant impact on national emissions. Converting Moneypoint to nuclear would be far more effective.

But at the end of the day, fuel prices have been higher at the pumps and this hasn't stunted growth so the see that the economy can tolerate it. So they want a slice of that action, dressed up as an environmental measure. That don't have the balls to call it for what it is. A plain old simple tax rise.

We need to come up with a technology that will methane reduce emissions from livestock. There is a kind of seaweed that when given as a supplement to cattle, it cuts methane emissions by more than 90%. Universities are working to try to isolate the enzymes responsible for this and once they figure it out, it would be a game changer for agriculture

With livestock emissions, it's not as urgent as co2 emissions at the moment, because methane emitted today will be gone from the atmosphere in 10 years, while CO2 has a residence time of over a century. We don't want to reach a tipping point however, so cutting methane emissions is still a very worthy objective

firemansam4 · 13-08-2018 5:13pm

Akrasia wrote:

If electricity costs 1000 euros a year, and a solar pv instalation costs 5000, then it has a payback time of 5 years

Akrasia wrote:

if electricity costs 1250 euros a year, that payback time becomes 4 years.

I dont know that much about PV technology but even if we had a FIT system like the uk has, I was under the impression that payback times are way more than you are suggesting. I tried a simple online calculator for a system in NI for a cost of just over 6000 sterling and it shows a payback time of over 11 years, and that was assuming a large directly south facing roof.

badtoro · 13-08-2018 6:30pm

Akrasia wrote: »

If electricity costs 1000 euros a year, and a solar pv instalation costs 5000, then it has a payback time of 5 years

What, if any, additional costs are with each "system", sod all for esb once its in afaik, yes there are price increases. But, what is the life expectancy of solar, does it require maintenance or replacement, does performance degrade over time etc? I know an example given in George Lee's piece lately didn't seem right unless one had costs of about €7k a year - cost was €35k and payback in 5 years.

Akrasia · 13-08-2018 8:56pm

I was using round numbers to illustrate the point. The actual cost and payback of every pv installation depends on the size, type and location of the installation

The point is that there are two factors in whether people will switch, the cost of the existing energy supply, and the cost of switching to renewables

A carbon tax is aimed at making it more attractive to switch by making the low carbon alternative more competitive. The carbon taxes are also accompanied by grants to offset capital costs in moving to the greener technology

Most people won't move if it doesn't make financial sense for them to do so, so if the aim is to have big reductions in CO2 emissions, government policy needs to either mandate changes by regulations (building regs, panning etc) or incentivize people to change on their own, and not just people, but industry and commercial activity

firemansam4 · 14-08-2018 12:13am

Round numbers? Your figures are miles out from the reality as far as I can see.

How many people in Ireland do you think right now can afford around 6 or 7 thousand euros which will take 11 years to pay back? I would hazard a guess only a small percentage of the population. For many they are not and will not be in that position to make that kind of investment.

I can understand the need to deter people away from carbon based fuels, but to just simply keep raising the carbon tax who for many just don't have the means to invest in greener technologies will not work.

I do agree that there needs to be other ways to do this, things like planning regulations to force these technologies on new builds. Or other strategies need to be looked at.

Akrasia · 14-08-2018 9:40am

firemansam4 wrote: »

Round numbers? Your figures are miles out from the reality as far as I can see.

How many people in Ireland do you think right now can afford around 6 or 7 thousand euros which will take 11 years to pay back? I would hazard a guess only a small percentage of the population. For many they are not and will not be in that position to make that kind of investment.

I can understand the need to deter people away from carbon based fuels, but to just simply keep raising the carbon tax who for many just don't have the means to invest in greener technologies will not work.

I do agree that there needs to be other ways to do this, things like planning regulations to force these technologies on new builds. Or other strategies need to be looked at.

They're not 'simply' raising the carbon tax, they're also subsidising home improvements and supporting the development of wind farms in the upcoming Renewable Electricity Support Scheme. For low income households. The state will provide lots of these improvements for free with the warmer homes scheme.

And if householders can't afford a solar PV installation. They can still be more energy efficient. Anyone using incandescent or halogen lightbulbs can switch to LED. Replace appliances with A++ at their end of life, use dryers and dishwashers more efficiently etc.the incentive to reduce energy consumption increases when energy costs are higher.

And energy companies are incentivised to buy more power from renewable sources to avoid carbon taxes so in the long term, it will speed up the phasing out of coal turf and gas power generation.

badtoro · 14-08-2018 10:07am

Akrasia wrote: »

they're also subsidising home improvements

The state will provide lots of these improvements for free with the warmer homes scheme.

And if householders can't afford a solar PV installation.

Nada for new builds afaik except regulations (€€€).

zl1whqvjs75cdy · 14-08-2018 11:17am

badtoro wrote: »

Nada for new builds afaik except regulations (€€€).

They don't need it though, they're built to standards that old houses aren't

badtoro · 14-08-2018 12:43pm

donkeyoaty0099 wrote: »

They don't need it though, they're built to standards that old houses aren't

Thye're not free, standards cost money, which was my point. Example that oil is the cheapest heating, yet put in new build planning without a renewable and you'll be refused. There is just the stick for people doing new builds.

Akrasia · 14-08-2018 1:45pm

badtoro wrote: »

Thye're not free, standards cost money, which was my point. Example that oil is the cheapest heating, yet put in new build planning without a renewable and you'll be refused. There is just the stick for people doing new builds.

It a completely justifiable regulation. Oil might be cheaper at the construction phase, but in the long run it is much more expensive and more polluting than some kind of renewable heating or passive heating design. Its always cheaper to engineer better standards into a new build than to retro-fit half arsed upgrades to an existing property later on.
You're paying back a mortgage, if it's an extra thousand a year but your energy bills are 1500 a year cheaper, you're better off.

I was renting a 30 year old house a few years ago, it cost an absolute fortune to heat and still felt cold. I'm living in a 10 year old house now and it's less than half the heating cost per year.

The difference is the regulations, and I can improve energy efficiency further when my gas burner is due for replacement.

15-08-2018 10:03am

badtoro wrote: »

Thye're not free, standards cost money, which was my point. Example that oil is the cheapest heating, yet put in new build planning without a renewable and you'll be refused. There is just the stick for people doing new builds.

the value of a hose is based on the market, not the cost to build so the extra cost to a builder can be easily lost.

For a private new build, then the cost of renewables is just a simple part of the equation like sewage, electricity or a phone line.

badtoro · 15-08-2018 9:22pm

Aegir wrote: »

the value of a hose is based on the market, not the cost to build so the extra cost to a builder can be easily lost.

For a private new build, then the cost of renewables is just a simple part of the equation like sewage, electricity or a phone line.

Does not change my point.

Dr Brown · 16-08-2018 1:37pm

We have the carbon tax and now the sugar tax next the government will bring in the fresh air tax.

blackwhite · 17-08-2018 10:34am

infacteh wrote: »

You left out building a nuclear power plant, the cleanest, most reliable form of electricity production available!

I remember reading an article a number of years ago that had ran the numbers on this, and it worked out that the cost of building and maintaining a nuclear plant wouldn't have made sense given the scale of our energy requirements at the time.

It would be interesting to see whether our current energy demands, combined with the East-West interconnector (and the ability to sell electricity into the UK market) would have any impact on the viability of such a scheme now.

BaronVon · 17-08-2018 12:53pm

It would be very viable. The new Nuclear power plants come in a modular format, you can just add a module when your power demands increase.

There's no point driving an electric car, when that electricity is generated from coal/oil/gas/turf. Renewable power isn't reliable enough to be the main source of power generation, but nuclear power, backing up renewable power, is the cleanest, most efficient form of power production.

A large cost of nuclear power production is due to regulation, which could be reduced with the advancements that have been made in Nuclear power production. Unfortunately, I cannot foresee any time in my lifetime that Ireland will build a Nuclear power plant. There's not even any debate about it at the moment.

Dr Brown · 17-08-2018 1:10pm

infacteh wrote: »

There's no point driving an electric car, when that electricity is generated from coal/oil/gas/turf.

Cutting down on air and noise pollution is still a big advantage for electric cars regardless of where the power comes from.

A large cost of nuclear power production is due to regulation, which could be reduced with the advancements that have been made in Nuclear power production.

Its only right that nuclear power has alot of regulation.

If anything goes wrong it will cause a major incident.

Long term use of Nuclear power is a very bad idea. Its not a question if things will go wrong with Nuclear power plants but when.

blackwhite · 17-08-2018 1:24pm

infacteh wrote: »

It would be very viable. The new Nuclear power plants come in a modular format, you can just add a module when your power demands increase.

There's no point driving an electric car, when that electricity is generated from coal/oil/gas/turf. Renewable power isn't reliable enough to be the main source of power generation, but nuclear power, backing up renewable power, is the cleanest, most efficient form of power production.

A large cost of nuclear power production is due to regulation, which could be reduced with the advancements that have been made in Nuclear power production. Unfortunately, I cannot foresee any time in my lifetime that Ireland will build a Nuclear power plant. There's not even any debate about it at the moment.

From what I read at the time, there was a capital v scale debate - whereby the size that would need to be built to justify many of the fixed costs involved would have produced far too much for our needs at the time.
As I understand it, the new technologies that would be suitable for Ireland’s needs are still approx 10 years away

na1 · 20-08-2018 12:40pm

Trasna1 wrote: »

I

If we overnight converted to electric cars, it would have an insignificant impact on national emissions.

If we overnight converted to electric cars the motor tax for the electric vehicles will jump from current €120 a year to something like €500 a year
Because Motor Tax has nothing to do with the emissions.

Carbon tax budget increase

Comments