On the face of it, since Ross Garnaut, (who after all was very prominently a Rudd choice from back in opposition, with the backing of the states), reckons it’s a good idea, he should be able to reframe going along with the Greens idea as a bold interim step in the right direction made necessary by the coalition’s intransigence blah blah.

But Tone, who if I remember rightly has done a few miles in a previous incarnation as a press mercenary, got in first in the re-framing stakes,..
“(it’s) very significant that Professor Garnaut has urged the government to dump its emissions trading scheme”,
taunting Kev like a schoolboy “picking” another, trying to get him to crack. ..

Taking a leaf out of Kev’s “mess with his head” play-book perhaps, with blunt designed-to-get-under-his-skin language .. “we are on the verge of a humiliating backdown by Prime Minister Rudd who I suspect will not bring this legislation back because he fears its failure yet again”.

The fact that he had to roll out Julia to go to uncharacteristic lengths of mendacity as a distraction, in twisting Abbot’s answer to “what would you say to your daughters” into a moral prescription for all womanhood, is telling. Rudd hiding behind her skirts, she’s supposed to be the secret weapon, with Abbott’s measure?

He won’t be distracted, reeking as Rudd does of the smell of hoisted-on-own-high- flown-CPRS petard. Labor muck rakers bringing his daughters into it might gone just a bit too far and riled him. Presumably he’ll have learnt from his Roxon episode not to bite back directly at PrtyGrls when they have a sly go at you, it’s not a good look.

Should be an interesting parliamentary session, and it just could be that the planet and the Greens will be the winners in it.

You’ll be pleased to know that the science on climate sensitivity is now quite settled, established beyond all reasonable argument. The answer is 0.43C not 3C as those drongos at the IPCC think.

Also the world has been cooling quite sharply since 2001 (not 1998 as previously advised.) How he gets this out of the latest NASA GISS data from Open Mind I really don’t know. Last night on the TV I think he said it hadn’t warmed in the last 15 years. It’s hard to work out how he came to that conclusion.

And BTW he has irrefutable evidence that the real agenda is world government.

http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/blogs/greenlines/lord-monckton-is-on-the-fringe-barnaby-joyce/20100120-mlfq.html

and I was directed to this website by someone sprouting Monckton’s views

http://www.newswithviews.com/Daubenmire/dave177.htm

Maybe the whole thing will be just plain embarrassing.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2010/01/25/2800992.htm

“The sceptics are so well funded, so well organised. “They have nothing else to do. They don’t have day jobs so they can put all their efforts into misinforming and miscommunicating climate science to the general public, whereas the climate scientists have day jobs and [managing publicity] actually isn’t one of them.

“All of the efforts you do in an IPCC report is done out of hours, voluntarily, for no funding and no pay, whereas the sceptics are being funded to put out full-scale misinformation campaigns and are doing a damn good job, I think.”

Doesn’t that make you feel good.

This is the distinction between the levy mechanism and the CPRS mechanism.

Under the levy system you pay all of the bills but own the system in common at the end, and get electricity at rough the same price as now.

Under CPRS you pay all of the bills and they own the product and you pay more for the electricity at the end but where you are compensated against most of the cost along the way (maybe) most of the things that you buy go up in price.

That is my assessment of it. Labour Outsider thinks differently, fair enough. What do you think?

By the way, if you think that the JG thing (I didn’t know about that by the way) is dirty, you would do well to be reading up on all things Enron. Because these price increases, even though a chunk of them gets handed to the government to for Kevin to disburse and compensate the voters and his favourite political funders, the balance is to be accrued in the power company’s honey pot to build new power plants. And, well, we’ve all seen what happens when businessmen find honey pots.

Note the variation: CPRS being blamed for 60% (25/44) of IntegralEnergy customers’ increased billage, while for CountryEnergy its 34% (21/62), nearly halved. The actual network charge component variation between the businesses is 31/16/35%: IntegralEnergy only using 36% (16/44) of its increased billage to pay for network charges cf EA’s 53%, a 50% difference: Integral taking the money, and not giving customers service?

I note it was Integral who blew the whistle and sent JackGreen (Australia’s largest specialist renewable retailer) into administration when JG had a prolonged heatwave-associated (=inflated supply spot prices) cashflow problem. Integral made the call on the basis of a lousy half mill owed.

Result: Integral, and their partners in 20%-delivered-energy-efficiency-crime, snapped up 75,000 voluntary-vote-with-their-wallet JG customers, worth on average $1000 each, on the basis of a $5 million outstanding account. No matter that JG had $25 mill in outstanding customer accounts that JG could have used if they were given the time.

Take note any would-be independent Green Power utilities, the established big black-power bovver boys do not want anyone else in their game, they play hard-ball and take no-prisoners: they leveraged JG’s $5 mill temporary cashflow problem to seize and divvy-up $75 million in customers accounts, which is a hell of a leverage in anyones language. With the 10% bit player IntegralEnergy doing the dirty work. A pox on them.

http://news.smh.com.au/breaking-news-national/nsw-may-pay-62-more-for-electricity-20091215-kt6g.html

The first 20% scheduled increase has alrady been installed in NSW. Other states as well by by a different amount, you would have to talk to your electricity supplier to find out what happened in your own area. Robert Merkyl was the first to report this last year.

How does that work? You saying there’s a line item on your bills with CPRS against it? That can’t be because, as I understand it, there is no CPRS legislation, so billing against it would be an il/legal fiction.

In what manner have CPRS increases been billed iin NSW?

Linked text

But here is an interesting thought, and I have to point out that this is guesswork on my part which the widely read LO might shed some light upon. The first of the scheduled CPRS electricity price increases has been installed and we here in NSW have had 2 elctricity bills containing the increase (mothers are now talking about it). There are a staged series of price increases totalling 75% for NSW to 2013. Now it is my vague recollection that even if the CPRS were introduced tomorrow, it does not come into effect until 2013 ie payments on credits do not begin until 2013 and the government has no money for compensation until at least the first quarter after the introduction in 2013, 3 years from now. Therefore the public are facing the progressive cost of the CPRS with out compensation.

And then once the scheme is under way the government has guaranteed that there will be no changes for the next 11 years.

Perhaps LO might care to comment about these matters.