I'm so sorry you're not able to enjoy the FT article....its a real doozy....shame because it does highlight some important structural issues with the UK plan I"m must also apologise if I "appear" to consider targets as meaningless.....let me clarify for you Targets are very good! to guide outcomes in the right direction as long as they are viable, sustainable and not counter productive.
The FT highlights some of the misconceptions and failings of the much hyped UK plan. There's a nice section in there on pricing distortions penalising some consumers over others leading to counterproductive behaviour.
Anyway.....so from what i can tell your are a BIG advocate of punishing the "polluting fossil fuel industry" or lets use a more gentler phrase "to draw more direct funding" ......I'm assuming you mean additional taxes, royalties excise. 42c/L no enough? royalties not enough? electricity consumption tax perhaps?
"This would not be some unfair impost on that industry, but merely bringing to an end a decade-long malpractice" I liiike that ..."not some unfair" and "merely"... but a trifle..hey?.... you are starting to convince me PP!! so convincing...really. Pricing fossil fuel energy out of the picture is a very effective way to achieve those targets......not sure how the end consumer will feel about the new pricing of fuel, electricity, however you make it sound so good! sooo easy! (BTW FT doesn't seem to share that enthusiasm).
I'm going to deal with this rather wifty-wafty statement in its constituents bits.... there's just too many jusiy nuggets in here-
"Yes, the UK and Australia are different in terms of their natural resources wealth"....BINGO! let me clarify amplify ....Australia has Lots UK has almost next zero compared to Australia. "However, again, this has no bearing on the sustainability or otherwise of fossil fuels."....not sure what to call this?.... nonsensical?....a country which is blessed with virtually limitless materials that several countries want very much and pay lots of money for, has no bearing in any economic modelling? it should be simply discounted? has no bearing?......okay? Nations are switching away from fossil fuels not because they don't have any".....Hmmm.... but again let me amplify - the UK really doesn't have any. "but because they are literally killing their people". ......By that account China, India, Russia, Brazil are the BIGGEST MURDERS of their combined 3B+ population, you might wan to let them know.....SCARY.....did you know Brazil also cuts down lots of trees.... maybe we should all pay for Brazil not cut down their trees?? I'm sure I read that somewhere?.....
"Let's hope they never seek compensation from those nations that kept exporting fossil fuels once their damaging effects were understood! ahahahaa now that's really scary.......on par with scary Greta and her "boiling oceans"....
oh penny packer... its so good to chew the fat with you.... keep it coming.....
