-
@gt12 globally it's an even bigger number.
Here in Oz the complaints about renewables subsidies completely miss the fact that the government blows many times that on fossil fuels BUT it does include diesel subsidies, that also help farmers.
Why Gina Rinehart - richest woman in the world - needs diesel subsidies to run her massive mining operations is anyone's guess.
Welfare for the rich
-
@gt12 said in Solar Power and Storage - a nerd's view:
Seemed like the best place for this? That’s a big number.
I'm not a fan of studies that attribute costs that are simply made up:
The study includes the negative externalities caused by fossil fuels that society has to pay for, not reflected in their actual costs. In addition to direct transfers of government money to fossil fuel companies, this includes the indirect costs of pollution, such as healthcare costs and climate change adaptation. By including these numbers, the true cost of fossil fuel use to society is reflected.
They did the same with tobacco in Australia (http://www.tobaccoinaustralia.org.au/17-3-the-costs-of-smoking-to-australian-society). But once you cut it down to genuinely attributable data it tells a very different story - smokers are a net benefit: They pay more tax and die early.
-
@NTA said in Solar Power and Storage - a nerd's view:
Why Gina Rinehart - richest woman in the world - needs diesel subsidies to run her massive mining operations is anyone's guess.
Welfare for the richThere's a common misconception that subsidies are redistribution - they're not. At best they're foregone revenue and when the stated intent of diesel tax is to be spent on public roads, why should someone whose diesel engine never sees a public road pay for it - particularly when it could be a generator..
-
Many of these studies are bullshit. They often include "subsidies" which are legitimate tax write-offs.
-
@antipodean said in Solar Power and Storage - a nerd's view:
They did the same with tobacco in Australia (http://www.tobaccoinaustralia.org.au/17-3-the-costs-of-smoking-to-australian-society). But once you cut it down to genuinely attributable data it tells a very different story - smokers are a net benefit: They pay more tax and die early.
Tobacco is a different beast tho - the pollution from burning fossil fuels affects everyone in the "drop zone", and not a targeted group who knowingly participate in the act of consumption, and therefore taxation.
Throw in direct emissions and fugitive emissions - that Australian companies presently aren't paying for, and the reparation cost that the miners aren't paying, and you've got a fairly favourable environment.
-
@NTA All you need to do if you're going to invent those sorts of negative externalities is add the positive externalities as well. I'd imagine the ledger would be firmly in the positive. One only has to look at the balance of payments to start with.
-
@antipodean I'm not against anyone making a profit. But the full costing of their activities needs to be accurate.
If the cost of rehabilitation for a mine site makes it unprofitable, then it was never profitable. The taxpayer ends up footing the bill.
A carbon price makes a lot of sense, if implemented correctly. Might even mean nuclear.
-
@NTA said in Solar Power and Storage - a nerd's view:
@antipodean I'm not against anyone making a profit. But the full costing of their activities needs to be accurate.
** If the cost of rehabilitation for a mine site makes it unprofitable, then it was never profitable. The taxpayer ends up footing the bill.**
A carbon price makes a lot of sense, if implemented correctly. Might even mean nuclear.
Is that true? Given the hoops that mining companies need to hop through to get approval (not to mention the very high cost associated with this process) I find it hard to believe that the taxpayer exclusively picks up the bill.
-
@Rancid-Schnitzel sample article: https://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-11-05/coal-mine-rehabilitation-cost-could-hit-taxpayers/10463302
It isn't everyone, but unfortunately not all the environmental costs are taken into account, or the companies can go bust before the full cost of rehab is covered. Under NSW law at the time of that article (Nov last year), refilling the mines isn't a requirement.
It becomes a sticky point as the purpose of the mine is done, profit is no longer being generated, and a quick change of details and the company doesn't exist any more.
As for the hoops: they exist but so do building approvals, and we've got apartment blocks in both Olympic Park and now Mascot cracking and showing signs of structural integrity.
Anecdote: as a kid we used to drive up and down the New England highway a bit, and through the Hunter Valley you could see evidence of the coal mining (trucks, conveyors, power stations at Vales Point etc) but never really the mines. Recently I drove back that way and they've started coming over the hill toward Singleton in a way that was a bit shocking.
However, it isn't as shocking as if you take the Putty Road and end up around Denman and get a good look at the pits themselves. Lot of coal dug up around there, with whole hillsides etc. missing that you aren't going to backfill no matter what you do - there simply isn't enough dirt to cover it.
It isn't easy to govern this sort of thing, particularly for long-running mines like those in the Hunter Valley.
-
Evolution of different solar cell technologies. Multi-junction PV's are going to hit 50% efficiencies soon
-
@NTA said in Ashes 2019:
@MajorRage said in Ashes 2019:
@NTA 40 up here is 50 down there fella .... Take your pick!
We're all pretty much fucked at this point. I'll buy some land up in the high country with what remains of a water supply.
Move to Canada? 4 seasons, loads of fresh clean water?
-
@MajorRage said in Solar Power and Storage - a nerd's view:
@NTA said in Ashes 2019:
@MajorRage said in Ashes 2019:
@NTA 40 up here is 50 down there fella .... Take your pick!
We're all pretty much fucked at this point. I'll buy some land up in the high country with what remains of a water supply.
Move to Canada? 4 seasons, loads of fresh clean water?
Or New Zealand
In any case, best not to think about it too much, or worry about petty shit.
EDIT maybe even the feedback loops will get too much for even those places to hold, or overpopulation and migration to those areas will destroy them anyway. @TeWaio probably has a better handle on all that.
Once we're reduced back to Hunter-gatherer status the place can recover.
-
@NTA Well, if climate change is your thing, I'm no sure a country that exposed to the ozone free summer sun is a place to be. My 70 year old Mum doesn't go outside during summer between 11 and 4 anymore.
But I don't know enough to really comment further than that.
-
-
I got a quote a few months back from HRV Solar, to get 6kW of panels put on my roof. I think they are a partnership with Vector for solar.
Anyway, I should say was a partnership not are, as I just got an email stating that effective immediately, they have ceased that business and any quotes are now invalid.
I'm spending too much money on a kitchen and bathroom refurb anyway, so maybe can look at options again towards the end of next year.
-
@Stockcar86 Try Harrisons -or do it yourself. I'm DIY this time around.
Are you north facing? Pitch of roof? 6KW isn't really enough for most households.
Solar Power and Storage - a nerd's view