Australia’s emissions are only about 1.1% of the global total. But it is scientifically wrong to say half a billion tonnes of CO2 don’t matter, experts say
I politely disagree, the argument from my perspective isn’t whether we should tackle climate change, we should and I’m in the <1% of Australians with Solar/Solar Battery/Heat Pump/EV and take public transport to work when I need to go into the city, so I have clearly put my money where my mouth is
BUT I/we have to face economic reality
If solar panels for example were purely good for the environment, say for example solar power generated got you a FIT of 0c
Victorian households could soon be paid next to nothing for the rooftop solar energy they export to the grid, after a proposal from the state pricing regulator to slash the minimum feed-in tariff from 3 cents per kilowatt-hour (kWh) to to 0.04c/kWh, starting in July.)
Say it generated 0c feed in and all the power you used was charged by the electricity company regardless of where it came from, so you got solar panels just for the environmental reasons
Would we see millions of roofs with solar panels on them? No. Same as with EV’s, the number of people who are willing to spend extra money to support environmental causes is <1%
The reason why the majority of people get renewables is for the economic benefits, in the case of solar and battery your electricity bill practically goes to 0, EV’s no petrol, less maint, can charge using your solar, heat pumps are more efficient than straight electrical, no gas etc, for 99% of people the economic benefits are the primary reason they go to renewables/EV’s etc (which is why supercar/hypercar makers are having trouble selling EV’s when their target market does not care about the economicals)
The question is, should we economically harm ourselves in order to reduce our co2 emissions and to that my answer is no
If Australia blipped off the map tomorrow, all our co2 savings would be consumed by India within a few years making our entire 100% co2 reduction near meaningless:
This is a global fight against Climate Change and the world doesn’t care about per capita, it cares about raw output, and on the global stage our raw output isn’t high enough to kill our economy over, especially not when other countries co2 dwarfs ours:
We should be taking advantage of renewables for the same reason everyone else does, it’s cheaper power, it allows us to be energy independent, co2 reductions come naturally as we switch to far more efficient electric/renewable energy sources.
But to hurt people/our economy is a whole other question, so I’m a bit stuck in the middle, Net Zero is worth aiming for but not full pelt especially since we’re well on our way to significant emissions cuts anyway as our coal power plants are on their way out:
I politely disagree, the argument from my perspective isn’t whether we should tackle climate change, we should and I’m in the <1% of Australians with Solar/Solar Battery/Heat Pump/EV and take public transport to work when I need to go into the city, so I have clearly put my money where my mouth is
BUT I/we have to face economic reality
If solar panels for example were purely good for the environment, say for example solar power generated got you a FIT of 0c
(which might happen https://reneweconomy.com.au/solar-duck-sends-rooftop-tariff-close-to-zero-snaps-focus-to-home-batteries-and-slashing-use-of-grid-power/
Victorian households could soon be paid next to nothing for the rooftop solar energy they export to the grid, after a proposal from the state pricing regulator to slash the minimum feed-in tariff from 3 cents per kilowatt-hour (kWh) to to 0.04c/kWh, starting in July.)
Say it generated 0c feed in and all the power you used was charged by the electricity company regardless of where it came from, so you got solar panels just for the environmental reasons
Would we see millions of roofs with solar panels on them? No. Same as with EV’s, the number of people who are willing to spend extra money to support environmental causes is <1%
The reason why the majority of people get renewables is for the economic benefits, in the case of solar and battery your electricity bill practically goes to 0, EV’s no petrol, less maint, can charge using your solar, heat pumps are more efficient than straight electrical, no gas etc, for 99% of people the economic benefits are the primary reason they go to renewables/EV’s etc (which is why supercar/hypercar makers are having trouble selling EV’s when their target market does not care about the economicals)
The question is, should we economically harm ourselves in order to reduce our co2 emissions and to that my answer is no
If Australia blipped off the map tomorrow, all our co2 savings would be consumed by India within a few years making our entire 100% co2 reduction near meaningless:
This is a global fight against Climate Change and the world doesn’t care about per capita, it cares about raw output, and on the global stage our raw output isn’t high enough to kill our economy over, especially not when other countries co2 dwarfs ours:
We should be taking advantage of renewables for the same reason everyone else does, it’s cheaper power, it allows us to be energy independent, co2 reductions come naturally as we switch to far more efficient electric/renewable energy sources.
But to hurt people/our economy is a whole other question, so I’m a bit stuck in the middle, Net Zero is worth aiming for but not full pelt especially since we’re well on our way to significant emissions cuts anyway as our coal power plants are on their way out:
https://ourworldindata.org/co2/country/australia