Maybe an idea is for the landlord to be able to claim the feed-in tariff. Wouldn’t provide a high level of payback but at least the landlord could get some level of return on the investment and the tenant would get reduced usage costs at the same time.
I have thought that if they mandated say a 2.5 kw system on ALL Investment props, … then it might make the rental playing field level, so owners couldn’t charge $50 extra a week coz Solar Power savings!! And then normal markets would likely keep rents in check.
But again, … no fkn chance.
Wasn’t there something in SA that incentivised landlords to install them?
Or was that before the election?
Maybe. Sub the install, … prop owner takes all feed in off their home bill or Biz, … but the payoff is Rent control for 5-10 years, … say, … no increase for 5, … then no more than CPI for the next 5 … Benefit then flows to the tenant …
I think i’ll wait for the cheaper battery.
They have access to purchase from someone else. Which means we miss out and feel good for not selling and pat ourselves on the back for being politically correct. Economically, we miss out and get to feel bad about that but feel better by telling everyone we did the right thing. But for whom does the bell toll?
1 Like
The NEG is dead. Turnbull has backed down and killed the emissions disowns target all together. Expect cabinet members to be fondling pieces of coal any moment.
Turnbull is running Abbott’s energy policy. So, all the pieces are in place now for the coal lobby. They will try to pass it with no emissions target, it will get defeated and then the attack dogs will be out drawing false lines about “renewables = high prices. Coal = low prices”. Sadly, the electorate are likely to buy this.
Abott doesn’t have an Energy policy. He wants it to be a perpetual election issue he runs on. He has no desire of ever agreeing to anything.
1 Like
So what make and model V8 do you suggest I get for my bald tyred Mazda 323, sounds exciting.
So your saying that not exporting coal makes NO DIFFERENCE to the end result as other countries will supply it. Did I read somewhere that we export a lot of our coal because it burns more efficiently that a lot of other competitor countries coal? Black coal v Brown coal.
Does that mean by Aust. not exporting the Australian black coal we could actually be making the global warming scenario worse because of the use of lower grade coal?
There are 3700 posts above. We’ve been there, done that.
2 Likes
Gee power prices where heaps cheaper under the carbon tax…
Two can play at this game
Yes some Japanese scientist interviewed said our coal was superior to others they had used.
My little ditty was said tongue in cheek. We are damned if we do and damned if we don’t.
And; yes one could say that, by not selling our coal to those who want it, we could be making an already existing problem worse, by not selling coal. And; then why not use it ourselves because as at this stage we are not substituting adequately with green power. Why are we not looking at ocean wave power as an alternative?
1 Like
Thanx mdso, so I guess I can extend the scenario to state that green pressures placed on political parties by “experts” and “media headline hunteds” has lead to the closure of a huge number of manufacturing plants, that employed, directly or indirectly 100s of thousands of skilled workers.
This was because Australia was competitive (just) when using Australian coal, given Aust. signing the Paris accord and the prices of power going through the roof, those manufacturing plants/companies and their associated jobs are now overseas, mostly in China, pumping out just as much carbon dioxide “poison” as we were in Australia…maybe more.
So in summary the net result is:
- no actual benefit climate change wise
- Australia now poorer
- China now richer
- huge numbers of kids on the dole
- A lot of middle aged skilled workers chucked on the scrap heap / suicides ect
Gee, I can see the common sense in the above
2 Likes
Is this supposed to be a serious post or parody?
2 Likes
Faaark, .
. I’m not sure, … but we may well have gone through the looking glass.
If it’s real, … it would make a prime example in any course on misinformed opinion.
…or for Tony Abbotts advanced Diploma in sophistry.
Hope you don’t mean Carnegie…
Poor people who don’t own ~40sqm of roof (or the right to use it, if that much proportionally exists) fall further behind…
We’re going to sell coal to countries who are still burning it, while they do. It isn’t going to last. That doesn’t mean we, a small, nebulous grid, shouldn’t modernise while huge joints like China are still getting what they can out of generation capacity while also switching to modern generation. All this ■■■■ is about coal magnates trying to sell their huge reserves and fretting they won’t be able to if the world moves on too quickly. If the political climate around coal changes here to negative it could make it even harder for them to get the green light to dig it up here. That’s all this farking thing is all about.