Hi flats first of all I must say that the defamatory thread...

Hi flats first of all I must say that the defamatory thread header certainly has no credibility and if I was part of the Galaxy management I would be complaining as Galaxy as far as I am aware are a credible mainstream pollster.

On the assertion regarding reduced revenues for the energy providers due to reduced consumption the answer lies in the fact that once they have certainty and they invest for the longer term in renewables or less polluting means of energy production, over time the cost should reduce due to scale and technology and consumption will increase. Costs will be greater at the beginning and diminish over time. If the energy source is non polluting then the psychological barrier for environmentally concerned consumers will be diminished and may increase consumption.

Current costs for the energy providers are already inflated because of the stop gap measures they are required to use due to uncertainty as to when and what will be introduced in terms of emissions control. All the energy providers know the world is heading towards emissions reducing technologies and expect change. What they want is the certainty of what the rate will be and the timelines so they can plan for the long term in that regard. Energy transmission is a long term planning process and short term fixes are inefficient and will ultimately lead to greater cost as is already occurring.