'Major announcement' from Toyota this afternoon

[johnydep]

Originally Posted by Loud_Noises

The reason electricity prices are so high in Australia is purely due to out and out greed. The power companies are on record as saying that the reason the costs are so high is to recoup investment put into the electrical infrastructure of the country. Driving around the countryside reveals no such investment has happened, at least nowhere near to the levels they are claiming. I see cracked insulators on the bigger transmission towers on a daily basis, a lot of the actual power lines are rusting and the substations I go past on a regular basis look like something out of Chernobyl.

The carbon tax didn't help, but its effects were nowhere near as bad as many claim. A lot of the so-called gold plating of the electricity grid was done well before the carbon tax was even a wet dream in Ruddys round little bonce.

One of the joys of a captive market...

Greed?

Can you show the numbers, the facts?



March 21, 2012 - From July 1, prices will rise further when the carbon tax is introduced - and with rises in network charges and additional fees for renewable energy. http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/news/s...-1226305741810

[Trump]

You want numbers:

NSW Govco companies $1.54 billion year ending 30 June 2013:

http://www.smh.com.au/business/profi...104-2wx5i.html

AGL after tax profit of close to $600 million for the year ending 30 June 2013:

http://finance.ninemsn.com.au/newsbu...-profit-growth

ERM with ridiculous profit growth:

http://www.fool.com.au/2013/08/29/er...profits-by-44/

Energy independence is the only way to cure the disease of rampant energy costs. The technologies exist to enable each and every household to sever all ties to the various power and energy grids and become self sufficient for in home energy needs.

[XR Martin]

I always find it strange people try and compare costs here to Europe.

How far does our electricity have to travel from the source to the user, compared to Cyprus or Belgium?

[gtfpv]

Well how else is anyone supposed to make a quick buck in Australia these days besides health , legal services or essential services . Do people think prices will come down? , when it's the only way to make money in Australia now .

[johnydep]

Originally Posted by XR6 Martin

I always find it strange people try and compare costs here to Europe.

How far does our electricity have to travel from the source to the user, compared to Cyprus or Belgium?

Why were we once one of the cheapest?

[johnydep]

Originally Posted by Loud_Noises

You want numbers:

NSW Govco companies $1.54 billion year ending 30 June 2013:

http://www.smh.com.au/business/profi...104-2wx5i.html

AGL after tax profit of close to $600 million for the year ending 30 June 2013:

http://finance.ninemsn.com.au/newsbu...-profit-growth

ERM with ridiculous profit growth:

http://www.fool.com.au/2013/08/29/er...profits-by-44/

Energy independence is the only way to cure the disease of rampant energy costs. The technologies exist to enable each and every household to sever all ties to the various power and energy grids and become self sufficient for in home energy needs.

That means nothing. Tell me the percentage of profit on their investment. What percentage of the profit is put aside for future expansion?

Energy independence? Who is going to pay for this? My in-laws have no other income than the pension. Maybe the government can give everyone power independence. they can just print more dollars and hand it to us just like Germany after WW1

[tranquilized]

Originally Posted by johnydep

Funny how Germany is going back to fossil fuel, to make their industry more competitive. And the US, which never signed onto European carbon solutions, is now becoming one of the most competitive manufacturing markets in the developed world.

About Germany going back to fossil fuels - this is true, but you have it wrong as to what they're going back from and why.

Germany are phasing out nuclear power due to what happened in Japan. They are going from nuclear to coal. (which I think is pretty dumb) They wanted to go to natural gas, but its too expensive.

Meanwhile, nearly 50% of Germany's electricity comes from renewable resources - 50%!! And this will continue to rise.

So to suggest Germany are moving away from renewables to coal to make their industry more competitive is completely wrong, nothing more than a little bit more ill informed anti-carbon pricing propaganda.

[johnydep]

Originally Posted by tranquilized

About Germany going back to fossil fuels - this is true, but you have it wrong as to what they're going back from and why.

Germany are phasing out nuclear power due to what happened in Japan. They are going from nuclear to coal. (which I think is pretty dumb) They wanted to go to natural gas, but its too expensive.

Meanwhile, nearly 50% of Germany's electricity comes from renewable resources - 50%!! And this will continue to rise.

So to suggest Germany are moving away from renewables to coal to make their industry more competitive is completely wrong, nothing more than a little bit more ill informed anti-carbon pricing propaganda.

What...nothing to do with cost?

The German government has proposed a new fee that will affect companies generating their own electricity. Critics say the fees will drive companies away from renewables altogether. http://www.dw.de/germany-to-charge-f...ity/a-17418073

Germany Plans to Raze Towns for Brown Coal and Cheap Energy http://news.nationalgeographic.com/n...or-brown-coal/

German Green Energy Policy Drives Ally into Russia’s Embrace http://atlanticsentinel.com/2014/02/...ssias-embrace/

[XR Martin]

Germany's renewable energy is at only 25%, and plan to hit 35% by the end of the decade.

On the other hand in France over 75% of its electricity is from Nuclear

[Road_Warrior]

Originally Posted by tranquilized

Meanwhile, nearly 50% of Germany's electricity comes from renewable resources - 50%!! And this will continue to rise.

But Germany also has/had a highly supportive and logical government policy for solar power. Something we lack.

[Flat Top]

please guys compare to USA /thailanddplease??The actual cost figures i have seen are 30-40% difference for a small user industrial.

I can tell you add to the electricity costs the add ons to our inputs that suppliers have added and we end up with an actual carbon tax cost increase of 3.7%on our total costs. overall for us .
I think people forget to add on their purchase costs increases and just factor in their energy costs only.
we cant recover this , because the competition from imports prohibits price pass ons? (this may ease as the latest exchange rates pass through -if they do?)

trev

[jpblue1000]

Originally Posted by johnydep

Greed?

Originally Posted by johnydep

Can you show the numbers, the facts?
image
March 21, 2012 - From July 1, prices will rise further when the carbon tax is introduced - and with rises in network charges and additional fees for renewable energy. http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/news/south-australia/power-prices-to-be-highest-in-the-world/story-e6frea83-1226305741810

This graph has caused an undue stir in the community and it has been proven to be inacurate.
the Bureau of Resources & Energy Economics' written response in terms of purchasing power parity (PPP)– using what can actually be bought with local money in different countries, thus ironing out the distortions created by exchange rate fluctuations.

Using the PPP measure, the agency finds that residential power prices in Australia averaged 12.66 US cents per kilowatt hour in 2010 and 14.2c in 2011, well below the 34-nation OECD average of 20c.
The PPP method eradicates the vagaries of exchange rate fluctuations which was not taken into account in the findings published by the EUAA and graph you highlighted. With the exchange rate as volatile as it has been over the last few years any direct comparison using the exchange rate as a multiplier will be inaccurate. PPP is a more complex calculation perhaps why the (EUAA) Electricity users association of Australia did not use it!
All this rhetoric that a tax caused the decline of Australian manufacturing is lazy and ill-informed. Our struggling manufacturers have been hit with the perfect storm of prolonged high exchange rate, much cheaper competition, old inefficient plant, low protections, work force relations, foreign ownership, a non parochial consumer and probably many more reasons. Most of these have a bigger impact on the reason for failure than a tax alone.

JP

[johnydep]

Originally Posted by jpblue1000

This graph has caused an undue stir in the community and it has been proven to be inacurate.
the Bureau of Resources & Energy Economics' written response in terms of purchasing power parity (PPP)– using what can actually be bought with local money in different countries, thus ironing out the distortions created by exchange rate fluctuations.

Using the PPP measure, the agency finds that residential power prices in Australia averaged 12.66 US cents per kilowatt hour in 2010 and 14.2c in 2011, well below the 34-nation OECD average of 20c.
The PPP method eradicates the vagaries of exchange rate fluctuations which was not taken into account in the findings published by the EUAA and graph you highlighted. With the exchange rate as volatile as it has been over the last few years any direct comparison using the exchange rate as a multiplier will be inaccurate. PPP is a more complex calculation perhaps why the (EUAA) Electricity users association of Australia did not use it!
All this rhetoric that a tax caused the decline of Australian manufacturing is lazy and ill-informed. Our struggling manufacturers have been hit with the perfect storm of prolonged high exchange rate, much cheaper competition, old inefficient plant, low protections, work force relations, foreign ownership, a non parochial consumer and probably many more reasons. Most of these have a bigger impact on the reason for failure than a tax alone.

JP

Last night on the Drum (ABC) they gave the percentage increase since the RET and CT, quite shocking how high it has shot up. The ABC are usually good with their facts.

Electricity costs are a huge part of manufacturing cost, especially for Aluminium smelters. With that and the price of the alluminium ingots going down and the dollar going up manufacturing was in for a hard time.

However, the Aussie dollar has been dropping. So that is and will be one less burden.

Sadly, electricity costs have kept going up and does not look to stop anytime soon.

[cheap]

RET, as in Wind and Solar, has been a disaster for the average Joe consumer.

These forms of electricity cost significantly more $/KW than coal/gas/hydro and what the RET does it forces electricity companies to buy the expensive electricity that comes from wind/solar.

The energies companies simply pass on these higher costs to the consumer.

The CO2 tax on the over hand, makes what used to be cheap coal based energy more expensive.

You can argue the toss all you like, these are the facts.

[jpblue1000]

aren’t electricity costs governed by the Australian Energy regulator. They regulate the industry and control price rises based on supplier and transmitter costs which need reviewing and agreeing including agreed profit. It's not a 'free market' mechanism. The substantial price rises of late would be negotiated with the regulator based on producers and transmitters need and the substantial spending on maintenance replacement and repair the network has undergone.

As with everything in Australia our infrastructure to population is huge due to our vast distances between population centres. Roads, rail, power transmission, goods and produce travels large distances which costs.
Power transmission losses (due to distance and sub-par infrastructure)accounts for 10-15 percent of the cost of our energy.

JP

[johnydep]

Originally Posted by jpblue1000

aren’t electricity costs governed by the Australian Energy regulator. They regulate the industry and control price rises based on supplier and transmitter costs which need reviewing and agreeing including agreed profit. It's not a 'free market' mechanism. The substantial price rises of late would be negotiated with the regulator based on producers and transmitters need and the substantial spending on maintenance replacement and repair the network has undergone.

As with everything in Australia our infrastructure to population is huge due to our vast distances between population centres. Roads, rail, power transmission, goods and produce travels large distances which costs.
Power transmission losses (due to distance and sub-par infrastructure)accounts for 10-15 percent of the cost of our energy.

JP

Makes sense, except for population and distance. Once the infrastructure has been down for a while, the costs are recovered and prices should start to drop. Besides, there are other countries that need to transfer power along great distance and still maintain a competitive cost structure.

You mention the "perfect storm", this also makes sense, though other countries have also been hit by one. Like Germany, they're making changes to alleviate the cost pressure on the industry and consumer - changing taxes, opening old but cheap coal fired generators.

[jpblue1000]

Originally Posted by johnydep

Makes sense, except for population and distance. Once the infrastructure has been down for a while, the costs are recovered and prices should start to drop. Besides, there are other countries that need to transfer power along great distance and still maintain a competitive cost structure.

Originally Posted by johnydep

You mention the "perfect storm", this also makes sense, though other countries have also been hit by one. Like Germany, they're making changes to alleviate the cost pressure on the industry and consumer - changing taxes, opening old but cheap coal fired generators.

Our infrastructure maintenance and repair has costs us $32 per week according to the DRUM vs the RET at $7 per week. the maintenance and new infrastructure or replacing old infrastructure that is dangerous (fire causing) is where the cost is. It will be amortised over time but the recent cost hikes are a result of these costs.

Germany has not had it so hard. their manufacturing facilities are a lot more modern than ours more efficient and have not lacked the upgrading and maintenance many of ours has. Generalising a bit but We use 50's and 60's tech they use today tech. they are closer to their target markets and have worked hard on IR, yet they have some of the most stringent environmental protections and yet are doing reasonable.

Germany is also not moving to coal from Nuclear because of cost. It is a reaction against nuclear. And according to the royal academy of engineers and many others Nuclear is actually cheaper than coal, further reinforcing Germanys move being one of fear rather than cost to save jobs.

cost comparison of energy production
https://www.raeng.org.uk/news/public...Commentary.pdf page 3

[cheap]

The infrastructure is already there, installed, paid for by the electricity companies years ago, most of the cost is in general maintenance. Sure there is population growth but it isn't that much. As for power losses, another red herring, we've always had power losses.

The REAL cost is from RET (Renewable Energy Target)

20% of all of Australia's energy from renewables by 2020.

Just think this through, no new cheap coal powered stations being build (being closed instead), we've got bucklies (thanks to our friends of the earth) in having new hydro stations built. And just in case anyone does try to build another harmful CO2 power plant there is the CO2 tax to stop that.Which leaves Solar and Wind as the only two forms of energy available to meet RET as a replacement to our nearly 100% cheap coal derived power.

Solar and Wind farms do not just happen, massive start up costs for these new business, and they do not produce power anywhere near the $/kw price of a coal/gas/nuclear/hydro powered station does.

So the consumer gets it both way (a) having to pay for the huge start up construction of these new farms and (b) then having to pay excessively for the electrical power they produce.

Does anyone seriously think that the power generators would not have already investigated the financials for generating limitless "free" energy from solar/wind? If the number's had worked it would be the greatest profit of all time. But, the numbers do not stack up, solar and wind are not competitive.

Enter the former genius government meddling with the free markets and the average Joe consumer wonders why their prices are sky high.

[johnydep]

Originally Posted by jpblue1000

Germany is also not moving to coal from Nuclear because of cost. It is a reaction against nuclear. And according to the royal academy of engineers and many others Nuclear is actually cheaper than coal, further reinforcing Germanys move being one of fear rather than cost to save jobs.

cost comparison of energy production
https://www.raeng.org.uk/news/public...Commentary.pdf page 3

GERMANY - Brown coal is making an unexpected return. The development has environmentalists worried. Germany is often seen as a model, thanks to its strong push for renewable energy. Politicians here have committed to 80 percent renewable power by 2050, and strong public support and generous subsidies have seen solar and wind power grow dramatically in the past decade. Roughly a quarter of Germany's electricity today comes from renewable sources; in the United States, just 12 percent does. (See related interactive map.

With this commitment to the "Energiewende," or energy revolution, it's a mystery to many why villages like Atterwasch are still at risk. "The new mine is planned for 2030 to 2070—a time when coal power plants shouldn't even exist anymore," said Huschga. "It's not right to take away people's security and future for plans that shouldn't be."

A Revolution in Trouble

Unfortunately for Atterwasch and similar towns, experts say Germany's energy revolution is in danger—and more coal could indeed be on its way. In 2012, newly opened coal-fired power plants added 2,743 megawatts to the country's grid. Germany is the world's largest producer of brown coal, and 2013 was the biggest year for lignite-fired energy production in the country since 1990, with 162 billion kilowatt-hours produced, or about 26 percent of Germany's total electricity.

Some blame the return of coal on the imminent end of Germany's nuclear power industry. In 2002, politicians decided to shut down Germany's nuclear plants by 2022. Chancellor Angela Merkel backed away from the move when she was elected in 2005, citing climate change and economic concerns. But in 2011, in the wake of the disaster at Japan's Fukushima Daiichi plant, the German government reversed course and put the nuclear plants back on the chopping block.

Environmentalists are especially worried about the growing reliance on lignite, the lowest grade of coal with the highest carbon dioxide emissions per kilowatt-hour produced. Brown coal also is cheap coal, increasing its appeal at a time when high energy costs are roiling Germany.

Yet those in Atterwasch, and environmentalists elsewhere, blame not nuclear's pending demise but brown coal's political clout in the region and around Germany. Because of the way Europe's energy market works, brown coal remains much cheaper here than natural gas, an alternative that produces lower carbon dioxide emissions. While nuclear energy indeed has declined in Germany 10 percent since 2011, natural gas power is down 23 percent. Coal power is up 9 percent, and electricity production overall is up 3 percent. http://news.nationalgeographic.com/n...or-brown-coal/

[jpblue1000]

Originally Posted by cheap

The infrastructure is already there, installed, paid for by the electricity companies years ago, most of the cost is in general maintenance. Sure there is population growth but it isn't that much. As for power losses, another red herring, we've always had power losses.

Originally Posted by cheap

your missing the point. in recent years much of the old infrastructure has been or needed to be replaced to upgrade, protect and the much argued gold plating of the system. this is why our costs soared recently.
I agree with you (turn-up for the books) that the alternate to traditional power generation costs more. Solar, wind and others cost the consumer more than coal. However I believe the traditional methods cost our communities more than is accounted for in the cents per KWh.

I am also not concerned about the cost of electricity. As a result of rising costs I use a lot less of it, and that is exactly what the taxes etc are designed to do.
What I am more concerned about is quality of my air, the legacy I leave and the future, my children and theirs etc.

We used $138 of electricity last quarter including supply charge and maintain a normal life (I even get on the pc enough to annoy you). I chose 100% renewable supply too so its not 'cheap' electricity. Since then I have also installed a solar array which will produce 3 times my usage.

I am happy with a price on carbon even if its a rising price. I see a future and am positive. It would seem while I’m not alone and there are lots of us and growing, many in this thread are threatened and scared of the future!
I’m sorry and hope you find peace.
JP

[jpblue1000]

Originally Posted by johnydep

GERMANY - Brown coal is making an unexpected return. The development has environmentalists worried. Germany is often seen as a model, thanks to its strong push for renewable energy. Politicians here have committed to 80 percent renewable power by 2050, and strong public support and generous subsidies have seen solar and wind power grow dramatically in the past decade. Roughly a quarter of Germany's electricity today comes from renewable sources; in the United States, just 12 percent does. (See related interactive map.

With this commitment to the "Energiewende," or energy revolution, it's a mystery to many why villages like Atterwasch are still at risk. "The new mine is planned for 2030 to 2070—a time when coal power plants shouldn't even exist anymore," said Huschga. "It's not right to take away people's security and future for plans that shouldn't be."

A Revolution in Trouble

Unfortunately for Atterwasch and similar towns, experts say Germany's energy revolution is in danger—and more coal could indeed be on its way. In 2012, newly opened coal-fired power plants added 2,743 megawatts to the country's grid. Germany is the world's largest producer of brown coal, and 2013 was the biggest year for lignite-fired energy production in the country since 1990, with 162 billion kilowatt-hours produced, or about 26 percent of Germany's total electricity.

Some blame the return of coal on the imminent end of Germany's nuclear power industry. In 2002, politicians decided to shut down Germany's nuclear plants by 2022. Chancellor Angela Merkel backed away from the move when she was elected in 2005, citing climate change and economic concerns. But in 2011, in the wake of the disaster at Japan's Fukushima Daiichi plant, the German government reversed course and put the nuclear plants back on the chopping block.

Environmentalists are especially worried about the growing reliance on lignite, the lowest grade of coal with the highest carbon dioxide emissions per kilowatt-hour produced. Brown coal also is cheap coal, increasing its appeal at a time when high energy costs are roiling Germany.

Yet those in Atterwasch, and environmentalists elsewhere, blame not nuclear's pending demise but brown coal's political clout in the region and around Germany. Because of the way Europe's energy market works, brown coal remains much cheaper here than natural gas, an alternative that produces lower carbon dioxide emissions. While nuclear energy indeed has declined in Germany 10 percent since 2011, natural gas power is down 23 percent. Coal power is up 9 percent, and electricity production overall is up 3 percent. http://news.nationalgeographic.com/n...or-brown-coal/

yes that proves my point, they have not pursued a cheaper method for cost purposes but to shut down Nuclear out of fear. Coal and gas are more expensive than nuclear in the cents per KWh argument. They have begun a transition for political and social reasons not economic.
A very complex issue which we cannot fathom via the AFF no doubt

JP

[johnydep]

Originally Posted by jpblue1000

[COLOR=black][FONT=Verdana]We used $138 of electricity last quarter including supply charge and maintain a normal life (I even get on the pc enough to annoy you). I chose 100% renewable supply too so its not 'cheap' electricity. Since then I have also installed a solar array which will produce 3 times my usage.

My parents and my grandmother's electricity bill is in credit, they use less than the solar electricity they use.

I, on the other hand, have a young family and enjoy a lot of electrical items; our electrical bill is ridiculously high. I thought it was just my kids leaving everything on, so we made sure that everything not used is switched off. This made a small difference but not a lot.

I checked with my mates of similar age - all suffer large electricity bills.

My business electricity bill wen up by a huge margin, I checked our consumption - less than the previous quarter.

When electricity prices go up so high it puts a burden on everything - wages need to go up, production goes up, rent goes up, etc. This then becomes a viscous circle.

Our State minister was on the local ABC radio a while ago, stating that electricity prices had come down blah blah blah. The calls into the station were all of people reading out the increases in their power bills.

[johnydep]

Originally Posted by jpblue1000

yes that proves my point, they have not pursued a cheaper method for cost purposes but to shut down Nuclear out of fear. Coal and gas are more expensive than nuclear in the cents per KWh argument. They have begun a transition for political and social reasons not economic.
A very complex issue which we cannot fathom via the AFF no doubt

JP

Yet those in Atterwasch, and environmentalists elsewhere, blame not nuclear's pending demise but brown coal's political clout in the region and around Germany. Because of the way Europe's energy market works, brown coal remains much cheaper here than natural gas, an alternative that produces lower carbon dioxide emissions. While nuclear energy indeed has declined in Germany 10 percent since 2011, natural gas power is down 23 percent. Coal power is up 9 percent, and electricity production overall is up 3 percent.

[jpblue1000]

Originally Posted by johnydep

Yet those in Atterwasch, and environmentalists elsewhere, blame not nuclear's pending demise but brown coal's political clout in the region and around Germany. Because of the way Europe's energy market works, brown coal remains much cheaper here than natural gas, an alternative that produces lower carbon dioxide emissions. While nuclear energy indeed has declined in Germany 10 percent since 2011, natural gas power is down 23 percent. Coal power is up 9 percent, and electricity production overall is up 3 percent.

I think we must be violently agreeing here? as I dont see your point. Nuclear is on the decline in germany, coal on the rise, coal is cheaper than gas but both are more expensive than nuclear. your original point, which I commented on and produced the link to the report, was germany was not suffering the 'perfect storm' as one of the reasons was they were persuing coal not nuclear. If coal is more expensive than nuclear, but cheaper than gas which is also cheaper than nuclear they went this way for other reasons than cost. Politics and social reasons the 'clout' factor your quite alludes to.
JP

[jpblue1000]

Originally Posted by johnydep

When electricity prices go up so high it puts a burden on everything - wages need to go up, production goes up, rent goes up, etc. This then becomes a viscous circle.

Or people use less of it effectively reducing our C02 output. Seems like a good thing and proof of what I have been saying for years that our energy is too cheap and when prices start to rise to realistic levels we will start using less of it.
As mentioned I believe I live a normal life, butwith just a lot less electricity and fuel and many other consumptions.
I dont push my lifestyle on anyone else other than to mention it is possible, if you want it.

We can ***** and moan as much as we want but thats not going to change the mechanics of what is happening. But I am sure there wont be a major swing in one direction in the short term as I believe there is a pretty even split those for and those against these issues in Australia.

Time will tell!

JP

[cheap]

Where we live, we have the same power poles, occasionally one is replaced but I can honestly say in +15 years I've only seen maybe 3 power poles out of thousands in the suburb being replaced. Occasional tree trimming, but it is not like there is an Energex cherry picker constantly working here (and we have lots of trees too)

Even with Brisbane's recent floods and storm damage - where is this gold plating?

Might be another excuse to hide the real impact of the RET?

[jpblue1000]

Originally Posted by cheap

Where we live, we have the same power poles, occasionally one is replaced but I can honestly say in +15 years I've only seen maybe 3 power poles out of thousands in the suburb being replaced. Occasional tree trimming, but it is not like there is an Energex cherry picker constantly working here (and we have lots of trees too)

Even with Brisbane's recent floods and storm damage - where is this gold plating?

Might be another excuse to hide the real impact of the RET?

If you believe in multi department cross government conspiracy it might hide RET. but thats a long bow to draw.
I was out of the country during Black saturday in Victoria but remember the news in the UK reporting some of the fires started due to poorly maintained power lines.
From what I understand this sort of bad press was the catalyst for major spending by Power suppliers or whoever, leading to a significant cost increase.

'For those who missed it, gold plating is the excessive expenditure by electricity networks on poles and wires to increase their revenue (under the National Electricity Market regulatory framework, the more the power companies spend, the more they get paid – and this spending constitutes the single biggest component of the rise in our power bills).

Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/business/gold-...2tkqShd5P'

JP

[Dmarc]

Originally Posted by Loud_Noises

The reason electricity prices are so high in Australia is purely due to out and out greed. The power companies are on record as saying that the reason the costs are so high is to recoup investment put into the electrical infrastructure of the country. Driving around the countryside reveals no such investment has happened, at least nowhere near to the levels they are claiming. I see cracked insulators on the bigger transmission towers on a daily basis, a lot of the actual power lines are rusting and the substations I go past on a regular basis look like something out of Chernobyl.

The carbon tax didn't help, but its effects were nowhere near as bad as many claim. A lot of the so-called gold plating of the electricity grid was done well before the carbon tax was even a wet dream in Ruddys round little bonce.

One of the joys of a captive market...

I work in the power industry in Vic doing maintenance and construction in substations and can tell you now our system is far from gold plated! I could take you into a sub here and tell you we are now in a 3rd world country and you would believe me. So don't believe any of this bulls@&t about gold plating!

[Trump]

Originally Posted by johnydep

That means nothing. Tell me the percentage of profit on their investment. What percentage of the profit is put aside for future expansion?

Energy independence? Who is going to pay for this? My in-laws have no other income than the pension. Maybe the government can give everyone power independence. they can just print more dollars and hand it to us just like Germany after WW1

If govco was an organisation of the people and by the people, instead of cranking the printing press and handing over wads of cash, they could directly fund the provision of such energy generating units to each and every household. If done right (and in the current climate that is near on impossible), inflation be damned.

Energy independence can transcend petty notions of cost and who will wear it. The ability to generate enough energy for one's needs (including transportation) without financial cost and without the necessity of dependance on a faceless corporate machine, is liberating beyond anything egalitarians from days gone by could have envisaged.

Originally Posted by Dmarc

I work in the power industry in Vic doing maintenance and construction in substations and can tell you now our system is far from gold plated! I could take you into a sub here and tell you we are now in a 3rd world country and you would believe me. So don't believe any of this bulls@&t about gold plating!

I use the term gold plating only because a lot of the usual talking heads in the media machine have swallowed the over investment spiel from the power companies. I know first hand how much "over investment" the companies have done and accounts like yours add to the growing pile of evidence that the opposite has happened.

[jpblue1000]

Originally Posted by Dmarc

I work in the power industry in Vic doing maintenance and construction in substations and can tell you now our system is far from gold plated! I could take you into a sub here and tell you we are now in a 3rd world country and you would believe me. So don't believe any of this bulls@&t about gold plating!

Then can you please explain why the cost of electricity has risen up to 84 percent in 5 years to September 2012 (average across australia 72%)

http://www.abs.gov.au/AUSSTATS/abs@....2#Costofenergy

The cost of electricity, gas and other household fuels has risen in recent years. In the five years to the June quarter in 2012, the ABS Consumer Price Index (CPI) rose by 15% (from 157.5 to 180.4). During the same period, Australia’s retail electricity prices rose by 72%, while the price of gas and other household fuels rose by 45%.

Increases in retail electricity prices varied across the capital cities. Between June 2007 and June 2012, the largest increase in the retail price of electricity was in Melbourne (84%), followed by Sydney (79%). Darwin and Canberra had the smallest increases in retail electricity prices, with 42% and 45% respectively.

Prior to the carbon tax introduction.
the carbon tax put a price of $23 per tonne impost on those producing more than 25,000 tonnes annually. that amounts to a cost of $0.025 per KWh. As an average 1.09Kg's of C02 is produced per KWh in australia
http://www.originenergy.com.au/files/hep_sm10.pdf

which equates to $0.3975 or 39.75 cents per day for the average australian household use of 13.9KWh.
which in itself equates to about a 6% additional cost if energy, as per origins published figures averages at 39 cents per KWh.
39c x 13.9KWh + 84.7c daily supply= $6.27 .39/6.27 = 6.22%
A rise in electricity cost prior to the Carbon tax of 72 percent or a tax adding 6% which came in after. so something caused the significant price rise average of 72%...
what was it if not 'gold plating'

JP