The Nationals LNP

Photo Gallery
Community Switch
This week's rainfall
Barnaby's Blog
 

Barnaby's Blog

26
AUSTRALIA'S PROSPECTIVE MASSIVE & CATASTROPHIC METEORITE TAX

 

This morning I was watching Dr Karl Kruszelnicki as he described the probability of a massive meteorite hitting the earth in the next 50 to 100 years and the damage it would cause. The last one the size of a swimming pool hit around 1908 in Siberia and flattened 2,500 square kilometres of forest. Lately another meteorite has hit Jupiter (July 2009) and created an effect the size of the Pacific Ocean.  The extinction of the dinosaurs was apparently caused by climate change attributable to cooling caused by a meteorite. What terrified me the most was that Mr Rudd might have been watching the same program.
 
Mr Rudd would have to save the planet with a Massive Meteorite Tax (MMT). First of all he would work out who was going to be affected that is people living above ground. He could create a tradeable permit system to live above ground, permits which the government would issue, and reduce the number of permits each year. This would deliver a market approach to moving Australia underground. 
 
If you argued against the scheme Mr Rudd could say that you were denying the existence of massive meteorites and putting all of humanity at risk. It would be stated that on the basis of evidence the existence of massive meteorites was overwhelming and we in Australia are not going to sit back and do nothing. He could create a new cause de jure to be demonstrated for and rallied around. Mr Rudd could be a world leader and go to forums in certain Danish towns stating that he was leading the world in burying Australia. He would affirm that if Australia could be successfully buried that other nations too could bury their economy and people, using Australia as a working example.
 
Other nations who actually had space programs would ask why we were “leading” on an issue when we did not actually have a space program and you needed a space program if you were going to stop a meteorite in space. Domestically Australians would ask whether the tax the government was collecting would have any effect in stopping massive meteorites. Mr Rudd would trot out the silver bullet line, “so you suggest we sit back and do nothing while the world is at threat to massive and catastrophic meteorites”
 
Ultimately strong political players would get free permits to stay above ground and pensioners would get compensation to purchase permits in the short term to stay above ground.  The traders of the permits would invest their windfall gains from trading in the Catastrophic Meteorite Reduction Scheme (CMRS) to move out of Australia and take the risk of living above ground, Southern France on the Mediterranean being a preferred destination.
 
MEDIA INQURIES
David Allender
07 4625 1500
0428 196 340
Actions: E-mail | Permalink

Post Comment

Name (required)

Email (required)

Website

Enter the code shown above:

Comments

# Flan
Wednesday, August 26, 2009 10:44 PM
A political satire worthy of Swift.
I needed a good laugh today!
# barnaby
Wednesday, August 26, 2009 11:37 PM
de jour
# robert s
Friday, August 28, 2009 5:48 AM
i like this one
# Bernie
Friday, August 28, 2009 10:19 AM
Just beautiful. Puts the whole insane climate change nonsense into perfect perspective.
# Keith Gold Coast
Friday, August 28, 2009 4:04 PM
Please be careful about jesting about a MMT and a CRMS. It only give these crackpots ideas. I used to jest that they should place a flatulence tax on cattle.
# shannon
Friday, August 28, 2009 9:40 PM
Thanks Barnaby for a good laugh.!!
Im waiting for the next "great idea" from the Labor party...Im sure there is going to be at least another 2 new taxes somewhere..to come.!!
# Lawrence H
Monday, August 31, 2009 10:47 AM
How do we make the change then? Or are we all going to die! When science becomes religion and blasphemy is the recourse of the zealots how do we vote them out to stop the catstrophy KRUDD will deploy on us all. our little tiny economy. I have an idea. lets stop exhaling so we reduce the CO2. That'll work.
# Alan
Monday, August 31, 2009 11:15 AM
Having reached my 60's, without ever having experienced the slightest temptation to vote for the Nationals, you worry me a little Mr Joyce. We know that Mr Rudd is not ignorant of what he is doing in taxing carbon: his ambitions are clear and he will see us all impoverished to achieve them. But what spell has been cast over Mr Turnbull and some of his Liberal mates? Surely they can see that King Kevin the First is stark naked on this one? Keep up the good work and I just might vote with my country cousins next time!
# Bill
Thursday, September 03, 2009 5:59 AM
The British tried an ETS 10 years ago both by themselves and with the EU. The result, no significant reduction in CO2 emissions, so they rejected the idea. What's different with what the British did 10 years ago and what Rudd is proposing today. Hasn't the ETS experiment already been done?

Since then, the British are effectively lowering their carbon emissions by by moving away from using coal to generate electricity in favour of using LNG. We have heaps of LNG in Australia but seem to be selling it for a quick profit instead of using it to generated electricity and even power our cars. Why?

I see where Inhabitat, the world's largest solar thermal electric project, located in the Mojave Desert, USA, will eventually generate 900 Megawatts. I also noted that the US has a renewable energy target, like us of 20%, the only difference being that they are trying to achieve theirs by 2010.

If a project like Inhabitat produced electricity at say 17 cents per kilowatt hour and coal could do it at say 7 cents, these are the figures I keep hearing, wouldn't the price for the solar thermal come down with time as the plant was paid off and the coal figure would continually rise because of the cost of coal, transporting coal and any pollution tax.

This development of carbon capture to reduce pollution from coal fired power plants should be carefully monitored as the fossil fuel industry is using it to endorse the future use of coal to create electricity. What is their time line? I have not heard of any practical working examples. We do not have the time to work on technologies that promise a pie in the sky when already we have working green energies that are proven and whose cost will come down in the future.

Home | Issues | Blog | Newsroom | Achievements | Policies | About Barnaby | Out and About | Links | Feedback
Accessibility | Privacy Policy & Disclaimer | Site by Datasearch Web Design | Login

© Senator Barnaby Joyce 2011 | Authorised by Barnaby Joyce - 68 The Terrace, St. George Qld 4487