Thread: Recalculating the impact of the carbon tax

Originally Posted by The Lepper

Can you explain why they are opposed to increasing their profit margin even further?

It depends on the investment recovery time and total initial investment. If it is very expensive to make the changes needed to reduce emissions, most companies won't bother - either because they don't have sufficient capital to do so or because it will take too long to recover the investment and start to profit from the effort. If it is inexpensive, most companies would have made those changes already, because the increased business that can be expected by advertising as being "green" would be worth the investment.

Originally Posted by hiimjered

It depends on the investment recovery time and total initial investment. If it is very expensive to make the changes needed to reduce emissions, most companies won't bother - either because they don't have sufficient capital to do so or because it will take too long to recover the investment and start to profit from the effort. If it is inexpensive, most companies would have made those changes already, because the increased business that can be expected by advertising as being "green" would be worth the investment.

Good post. Likely the only time we will see real change is when the power plants run their useful course and need to be replaced.

Originally Posted by The Lepper

You still don't get it....Economists know that they will filter the tax down to the consumers but what you fail to understand is the tax gives them incentive to change their ways as they can save money by by doing so. Thus making them richer while also lessening their pollution.

I think the average Australian also knows that the big polluters will PASS the carbon tax expense that they incur diractly to the consumer through energy bills while at the same time receiving millions of dollars in support from the government.

How then does the carbon tax give them incentive to change their ways, if anything they should come out on top,

a. Direct cost passed onto consumer through energy bills
b. Government gives them millions of dollars in assistance.

c. Bottom line a healthy profit margin at the end of the year.

Why change anything?

Is this your wishful thinking or have you got something up yourrrrr a aaaa sleeve?

Evidence or citations please!

Originally Posted by The Lepper

Good post. Likely the only time we will see real change is when the power plants run their useful course and need to be replaced.

Engineered equiqpment usually has a life span of about 30 years.

I bet when the time comes to upgrade the generators its the tax payer that will foot the bill not the corporation.

Originally Posted by dumbanddumber

I think the average Australian also knows that the big polluters will PASS the carbon tax expense that they incur diractly to the consumer through energy bills while at the same time receiving millions of dollars in support from the government.

How then does the carbon tax give them incentive to change their ways, if anything they should come out on top,

a. Direct cost passed onto consumer through energy bills
b. Government gives them millions of dollars in assistance.

c. Bottom line a healthy profit margin at the end of the year.

Why change anything?

Is this your wishful thinking or have you got something up yourrrrr a aaaa sleeve?

Evidence or citations please!

If you still don't know how the carbon tax gives incentive for them to lessen emissions then I don't think you will ever grasp how the tax is meant to work. Just go read your greenhouse conspiracy thread and the other thread on the carbon tax. Read slowly, read links and try to comprehend what you are being told. I'm not repeating myself anymore.

Also, there will be eventually be a cap on emissions as well (which you should know) which means it is extremely beneficial for them to reduce the amount of emissions required to reach their quota as they can then sell leftover credits or produce more goods than their competitors who had to buy the others leftover credits to do the same thing.

Oops I just repeated myself

Originally Posted by dumbanddumber

Engineered equiqpment usually has a life span of about 30 years.

I bet when the time comes to upgrade the generators its the tax payer that will foot the bill not the corporation.

"I bet" is not a valid argument.