You're quite right, and of course. The case in Victoria this last week where
one chap installed such a system, where he was pumping energy in the system
using a supplied meter doing so, gaining credits, was changed to a meter
which couldn't do this.
Done on purpose? Of course.
As a matter of interest: Electricity meters get less accurate as time goes
by.
Water meters do also, as so gas meters. But, when they show less than
energy, product or whatever consumed, they changed them.
Guess which meters weren't?
I got a credit of some two hundred dollars in 1985 for a over reading
electricity meter.
So why aren't they changing these meters?
Because more modern ones work against the supplier, except for the
"specially " tailored ones of course.
10 percent is quite an inaccuracy.
But as David Hare Scott would say " show me the cheque you cashed for this
amount twenty years ago..."
Sorry, I might have kept it, but its gone missing.
Meanwhile I'll be the witness on that....
As far as carbon credits go.
Youre right. Paying peter to allow Paul to keep on polluting isnt in the
planets interest.


"Anne Chambers" wrote in message
...
Jonno wrote:

snip
There are plenty of real pollution problems to worry about. It's hard to
imagine that Australia's contribution to carbon dioxide in the world's
atmosphere is one of the more pressing ones. And it's also hard to
believe
that a new tax on everything is the only way to blow that pesky hair
away.
ETS is now being debated in Federal Parliament - is it too late for
reality to prevail?.

I'm quite confused about the ETS - I had a 1KW solar installation put on
my roof in April, mainly to try to lower my ever-increasing electricity
bill but also because of niggling worries about my carbon footprint (the
jargon trips all-too-easily off my tongue); got the government's $8,000
rebate (thanks Kevin) and then, out of the blue, got another $800+ for
carbon credits or somesuch. I'm not quite in my dotage, so I reckon if
the installer had told me about that, I would have remembered. My
qualifications are in History, not Science - which speaks a language I
don't - but it seems to me that if I cut my carbon footprint down and, by
doing so, through carbon credits enable someone else to continue ad hoc,
all I am doing is maintaining the status quo. I'd also like to know what
profit the purchaser of my carbon credits made by selling them on to a
power station or whatever. It seems that once again, fat profits are
being made by the middleman - and if you can prove me wrong, I'll be
happy.

--
Anne Chambers
South Australia
totally out of her depth

anne dot chambers at bigpond dot com