Most Australians will be better off under the carbon tax
Most shielded from carbon tax, say analysts Brisbane Times, May 11, 2012 – The federal government has “more than compensated” low and middle Australia for the carbon tax in this year’s budget, according to an academic body that last year found average households would be better off under the system. While large businesses rather than individuals would directly pay the carbon tax, the flow-on effect would see householders pay through the tax’s impact on petrol, gas and electricity prices.
Last October, the University of Canberra’s National Centre for Social and Economic Modelling found Australian households will be an average $2.50 per week better off under the federal government’s carbon package….. Last night, NATSEM principal researcher Ben Phillips said the additional announcements in Tuesday night’s federal budget made the package “very generous” for low income earners.
The “cash splash” included a $600 boost to family tax payments, a one-off school children cash bonus up to $820 and up to $210 for the unemployed, single parents and young people.
“Not only will they be covered for the carbon price, but they will be covered well in excess of that carbon price,” Mr Phillips said……
Commonwealth Bank economist James McIntyre said the CBA estimated about 80 per cent of Australian families were shielded from the impact of the carbon tax.
The crucial point was the tax cuts for people with a taxable income of $80,000, he said.
Mr McIntyre said in the 2009-10 tax year, 83 per cent of the population had taxable income below $80,000.
People earning between $30,000 and $65,000 will get a tax cut of $303 – equivalent to about $6 a week – and smaller tax deductions remain up to $80,000.
Mr McIntyre said that was why the government targeted that income level for tax cuts.
He said the federal government payments “over-compensated” many families and adequately compensated most.
“I think it over-compensates around 33 per cent of households, 40 per cent of households get about two-thirds of the compensation,” he said.
“And for the remaining households – above $80,000 – there is small compensation – but it covers around 15 to 20 per cent of the cost.”…. Details about payments to various recipients can be found in the fact sheets here.
http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/queensland/most-shielded-from-carbon-tax-say-analysts-20120510-1yfbm.html#ixzz1ubqMRq8a
How Germany steadily and rationally turned against nuclear energy
From Advocates to Enemies: Nuclear Decline in Germany World Policy Blog May 10, 2012 -By Paul Hockenos The fact that Germany, in the aftermath of the 2011 Fukushima disaster, redoubled its efforts to phase out nuclear energy has nothing to do with hysteria or postwar angst. On the contrary, a majority of Germans, including much of the political class, has been unconvinced of its merits since the early 1980s; the source of this anti-atom consensus lies not in emotional populism but rather in the persuasive, fact-based arguments of a powerful, grassroots social movement that has long included nuclear physicists and other bona fide experts.
During this four decade long campaign, start-up think tanks, academic scholars, and professionals with nuclear industry experience, among others, were instrumental in convincing most Germans of three main points: nuclear energy is a high-risk technology; renewable energies are viable; and there is no fail-safe way to dispose of radioactive waste.
Of the many misconceptions that cloud the perception of Germany’s energy stands, one is that Germany is somehow on its own in Europe, on the fringe of the continent’s mainstream. In fact, Ireland, Austria, and Norway had dismissed the nuclear option years ago. Greece, Portugal, Italy, and Denmark don’t and will never have atomic power plants. Like Germany, Sweden, Switzerland, the Netherlands, and Belgium are in the process of phasing out nuclear power. Spain has banned the construction of new reactors.
In terms of popular opinion, over 80 percent of Germans oppose nuclear energy, a figure that climbed higher in the wake of Fukushima and is comparatively high in Europe. But 90 percent of Austrians object to the nuclear option, and Austria even has no-nukes enshrined in its constitution. In 2011, 94 percent of Italians voted against nuclear power in a popular referendum. And then, of course, there are the pro-nuclear nations, led by France and the Czech Republic, where 68 and 67 percent of its citizens, respectively, are in favor of it. (In the U.S. the figure is 70 percent.) Poland is currently initiating a nuclear program.
Rather, what makes Germany stand out among the nuclear skeptical nations is, firstly, that it is an industrial heavy weight of global renown. Germany’s isn’t a mild-mannered service-based economy, but one based on unusually energy-intensive industries: automobiles, heavy machinery, chemicals, engineering, and electrical appliances. Secondly, Germany has plainly stated that it will kick the nuclear habit while meeting EU climate goals and weaning itself off fossil fuels. Germany’s ambition, complete with a strategy to do so, is to switch completely to renewables after 2050 without jeopardizing its industry. This project, called the Energiewende, or “energy transition,” is what makes Germany unique–and has the world watching it……
Germany’s Energiewende isn’t the reaction of a spooked people to Fukushima. Indeed, it has arguably been part of Berlin’s energy agenda since the early 1990s. Now every political party says it’s on board. Opinion polls show Germans convinced of a future based on renewables, and even willing to pay slightly higher energy bills to pay for it.
The accidents in Three Mile Island, Chernobyl, and Fukushima galvanized public opinion. But the grassroots campaign begun in Wyhl kept up the pressure. Its ability to shun sectarian politics and constantly reinvent itself kept it vital. Today, groups like Campact, a nationwide anti-nuke group, relies heavily on the Internet and social media. Campact has over 500,000-address e-mail list that enables it to put together demonstrations at record speed. It is also a platform for people to be engaged via the internet, through mass petitions, email campaigns, and blogs. The nationwide group Ausgestrahlt focuses on supporting the network of smaller, local groups across the country with campaigning materials and ideas, enabling them with more clout. X-tausendmal quer specializes in blockades of nuclear waste transports, while another Gorleben-based group, Castor Shottern, takes civil disobedience a step further by sabotaging the train tracks along which nuclear waste transports run.
And today there’s even another new constituency: the green-collar workers of the renewable energy industry. They’re conspicuous at demonstrations in their work clothes and badges, yet not out of place. The almost 400,000 clean energy jobs in Germany, many in the down-trodden eastern states, and the promise of more is another sound argument in the quiver of Energiewende proponents. http://www.worldpolicy.org/blog/2012/05/10/advocates-enemies-nuclear-decline-germany
Germany’s irreversible move from nuclear power to renewables
VIDEO http://www.todaysthv.com/news/article/210528/288/Germany-plans-to-go-nuclear-free-within-a-decade Germany plans to go nuclear free within a decade, Today stv.com, May 10, 2012 “…. Protest against nuclear energy in Germany began shortly after the Fukushima disaster in 2011 and Berlin reacted. After a safety review Angela Merkel’s government decided to shut down eight of Germany’s 17 reactors immediately and abandon nuclear energy altogether by 2022. She says, “We want to make sure that our power supply is safe,” Merkel said. “But at the same time it must be reliable.”
Germany’s answer is renewables! Aside from solar power, the country embarked on an ambitious quest to build dozens of off shore wind parks with thousands of turbines in the North and Baltic Seas. Most of the assembly happens in the northern town of Bremerhaven and local officials say the rush into renewables has led to an economic boom here.
Nils Schnorrenberger says, “We had an unemployment rate of 25 per cent six years ago. Now it is 14 per cent and the companies gave 2000 people jobs just here in Bremerhaven.”..
. Ever since the Chernobyl disaster, Germans have had a troubled relationship with nuclear energy with regular protests against new plants and nuclear waste transports. Since Fukushima, however, the country’s decision to quit atomic power seems irreversible, even in the face of challenges and uncertainties ahead.
Pacific Island Nations Lead the Way on Renewable Energy
Pacific pledge to switch to renewable energy http://www.radioaustralia.net.au/international/2012-05-11/pacific-pledge-to-switch-to-renewable-energy/941934 11 May 2012 Pacific Island nations have pledged to dump diesel and similar fuels they use to produce energy and replace them with renewable power sources.
Blowing in the wind, The Pacific nations will take their message to the Rio Plus 20 Earth Summit in Brazil in June. [ABC]
Tuvalu, Tokelau and Cook Islands’ leaders outlined their renewable energy targets this week.
Their pledges came at a meeting of small island states in Barbados, West Indies.
Their nations plan to rely on sources like coconut biofuel, solar energy and wind energy by the end of the decade.
Their declaration will be taken to the Rio Plus 20 Earth Summit in Brazil next month. Michelle Gyles-McDonnough, of the United Nations Development Program, told Radio Australia it was “tremendous leadership on the part of
small island developing states”
Donor partners – Denmark, Norway and the United Kingdom – had committed to support the small island states in their transformation, he said.
South Australian government backing miners, bankrupting Aboriginals with legal costs
State seeks day in High Court over land rights, BY:SARAH MARTIN, SA POLITICAL REPORTER The Australian May 11, TRADITIONAL owners have warned that a government High Court challenge over land rights in South Australia’s mid-north could send them bankrupt.
In the High Court today, the South Australian Labor government will appeal to have a finding against it overturned. Lawyers will seek costs of up to $300,000 from the Adnyamathantha Traditional Lands Association.
The South Australian Supreme Court ruled in December that former Aboriginal affairs minister Grace Portolesi had “deprived the traditional owners of the opportunity to protect and preserve their heritage” by failing to respond to a request for authority over their land at Lake Torrens, about 345km north of Adelaide.
The court found the government ignored the request from traditional owners for control over the land for about seven months.
However, on the same day Ms Portolesi responded to their request expressing “concerns” over the application, she approved the destruction of significant cultural sites on the land by a mining company, Straits Exploration.
Lands association chairman Vince Coulthard said he was surprised the government was attempting to overturn the ruling and impose costs on the group.
“It could potentially bankrupt us, but maybe that is what the state government wants,” he said.
“I feel it is a mean attack on us, given this whole thing could have been avoided.”
The court found Ms Portolesi had denied traditional owners “procedural fairness” by authorising drilling at the Lake Torrens site while failing to respond to a request for a delegation of ministerial powers to the traditional owners.
Under the Aboriginal Heritage Act – which the government is now reviewing – the minister must transfer authority to traditional owners if requested……..
The High Court will consider today whether it will accept the state’s application for a hearing. http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/indigenous/state-seeks-day-in-high-court-over-land-rights/story-fn9hm1pm-1226352471154
BHP Billiton putting Olympic Dam expansion on the back burner
Australia’s Copper and Mining Hopes Expected to be Staggered, Resource Investing News, By Shihoko Goto, 11 May 12 “…..Earlier this month, both Rio Tinto and BHP Billiton suggested that they are reconsidering investment plans in an effort to lower risks amid rising costs and uncertain demand. Greater pressure from governments, particularly in developing countries, to tax mining companies as resource nationalism rises worldwide is also a concern……..
BHP’s head of aluminum, nickel, and corporate development, Alberto Calderon, said that the company will be staggering its expenditure in order to match its cash flows – which could slow down the development of mega-projects, including its Olympic Dam copper-uranium project – so as to maximize value, reduce risk, and balance short- as well as longer-term returns.
The Olympic Dam project has been slated to be taken to the board for approval this year, but BHP has stated that is will “live within its means.” Still, it is unlikely that the Olympic Dam project will remain a priority for BHP Billiton…. : http://resourceinvestingnews.com/36093-australias-copper-and-mining-hopes-expected-to-be-staggered.html#ixzz1ubSgvacP
Australia’s budget : handouts to mining companies far exceed carbon price
Reaction to Federal Budget 2012 SMH,May 8, 2012 http://www.smh.com.au/business/federal-budget/reaction-to-federal-budget-2012-20120508-1yba0.html#ixzz1uPdyOZDc
“……..DON HENRY, Australian Conservation Foundation chief executive Score: 6.5/10 “The federal budget’s failure to tackle wasteful, inefficient tax breaks that promote fossil fuel use and pollution is a blow to Australia’s environment.
Continuing the senseless diesel fuel handout to mining companies is a much bigger slug to Australian households
than any carbon price, with the handouts to mining companies projected to increase to $182 per taxpayer, per year, costing $9.4 billion over the forward estimates.
The budget includes full funding for the climate package, including assistance for households, a boost for
renewable energy through the Clean Energy Finance Corporation and the Biodiversity Fund – we warmly welcome this. But Australia should not be axing tax breaks for green buildings and slashing the aid budget, while leaving untouched billions of dollars of tax breaks for mining and resource industries to pollute our environment. The budget contains $14 of new spending on roads for every $1 spent on rail – this is the wrong priority.”
1 This month
of the week – Disrupting War & Militarism in Oceania. Active solidarity. Radical practice.
Antinuclear 