Danyl of the Dim-Post argues that Phil Goff’s plan to fund a research and development tax credit by bringing the agricultural sector into the NZ ETS in 2013 instead of 2015 is smart wedge politics.
In our office yesterday, non-flying Tom was saying the Labour tactic reflects a societal inflection point; extreme climate events such as the Pakistan and Queensland floods and the Russian heat-wave are accepted as symptoms of AGW - except by Don Nicholson and the Tea Party. Labour can leverage off this each time there is another extreme climate event. Every ballistic emotive response from Federated Farmers paints them as the NZ Tea Party; and John Key and National will suffer guilt by association.
However, it is quite another issue whether the NZ ETS, as tweaked to include agriculture from 2013 with free allocation of units ending in 2025, is an effective policy to reduce GHG emissions. Matthew Hooton has been having great fun playing with other Dim-Post commenters on this.
Economist Geoff Bertram would probably say that the design of the NZETS is still stuffed, as it has no Cap on emissions and no auctions of units.
Even with agriculture starting in 2013 and being given slightly less free units (90% of 2005 emissions vs 90% of 2015 average output ), the basic NZETS design is still: 1) over-allocate compensation units to fishing and forestry, 2) over-allocate units on output-base to emissions-intensive trade-exposed industry and agriculture 3) allow unlimited importing of cheap Chinese Kyoto units 4) have no auctions of units and therefore no crown revenue.
So the very small extra carbon price placed on agriculture from 2013 will be likely to end up with net sellers of NZ units and not with Government. And there fore there would be no crown revenue to fund and R & D credits.
I wonder if Goff and co have really thought this through. It may be good 'politics' but it sure isn't good climate change mitigation policy.
A blog written to explain that the New Zealand Emissions Trading Scheme will not effectively reduce greenhouse gas emissions.
21 May 2011
The future of coal
Last Tuesday (17 May) I attended the Institute of Policy Study's Future of Coal symposium. For those who want to know what was said, Claire Browning gives a very good summary at the Pundit blog. Audio of the presentations, including Hansen and Elder can be listened to at the Science Media Centre The Science Media Centre has also summarised the presentations. Environment Commissioner Jan Wright's speech is on her website.
Elder's presentation, coming after Hansen, was a case of the ridiculous following the sublime. After his over view of climate change, Hansen spoke of the disconnect between the scientific understanding and the political rhetoric of governments and businesses. Elder's pro-lignite, pro-mining, "Solid Energy is sustainable" speech demonstrated Hansen's point perfectly. The disturbing thing about this is that Elder's narrative is no doubt accepted by the National Government and the business sector.
I rescued myself from depression about this when it occurred to me that Don Elder has a strong resemblance to John Clarke in his satirical dialogues with Bryan Dawe - particularly the The Front Fell Off interview.
Bryan Dawe. Dr Don Elder, thank for you being here to talk about coal, lignite and climate change.
John Clarke. You're welcome Bryan. I think its really important that New Zealand has a good open discussion about our future. I am very open minded about this. So I came here, against advice that it would be 300 to one with a lot of unthinking NIMBY proponents. Its all too often that a debate is started, such as last year's debate about further mining under Schedule 4 of the Crown Minerals Act to grow the economy. And that debate just becomes dominated with unthinking slogans such as "No mining in National Parks"..
Bryan Dawe. But Dr Elder, the Government did in fact propose to remove protection from thousands of hectares within Paparoa National Park that is on top of a coal seam!
John Clarke. We were just trying to start a discussion! The response was unthinking slogans like "No mining in National Parks" and "Keep the coal in the hole". To me that is the same level as "Leave the Asians in Asia". It was meant to be a discussion.
Bryan Dawe. But Dr Elder, isn't Jeanette Fitzsimons correct when she observes that seeking non-notified consents for your lignite briquette plant at Mataura shuts down any discussion or debate?
John Clarke. Well, she would say that! It's ridiculous! We are just trying to get a resource consent. Everyone wants their consent not notified. Everyone gets their lawyers to write to the council. Its just the same as you getting a consent for your garden trellis!
Bryan Dawe. Dr Elder, Dr Jan Wright, the Parliamentary Commissioner for the Environment, points out that you refused to give her information on the carbon content of your lignite process. How does that help with the discussion?
John Clarke. Well, Bryan, that was commercially sensitive information. Dr Wright may have set a competing lignite to fuel plant. She has qualifications in physics and chemistry, you know.
Bryan Dawe. Dr James Hansen, of NASA, has just presented the climate change case for the rapid phase out of coal and non-traditional fossil-fuels such as lignite, tar sands and oil-shale. What is your response to this?
John Clarke. Bryan, I am glad you have asked that, as are no doubt half the people here who now agree with me. We need to understand that there are a couple of billion poor people in less developed countries - who have not enjoyed several generations of energy-intensive wealthy lifestyles as we have - who want lignite briquettes but can't afford them. In light of that need, who are we in New Zealand, not to process the lignite into diesel and fertiliser that we can then substitute for imports from China
Bryan Dawe. Dr Elder, won't the development of a large scale lignite industry increase New Ziealand's annual carbon dioxide emissions by 25%, depending on the number of plants? Won't that contribute to global warming.
John Clarke. No Bryan, not at all. We have to think about this globally as Soild Energy does., We make the lignite into fuel and fertiliser in Southland. We stop importing fertiliser made from coal in China. Globally, there are less emissions as we have saved the transport emissions!
Elder's presentation, coming after Hansen, was a case of the ridiculous following the sublime. After his over view of climate change, Hansen spoke of the disconnect between the scientific understanding and the political rhetoric of governments and businesses. Elder's pro-lignite, pro-mining, "Solid Energy is sustainable" speech demonstrated Hansen's point perfectly. The disturbing thing about this is that Elder's narrative is no doubt accepted by the National Government and the business sector.
I rescued myself from depression about this when it occurred to me that Don Elder has a strong resemblance to John Clarke in his satirical dialogues with Bryan Dawe - particularly the The Front Fell Off interview.
Bryan Dawe. Dr Don Elder, thank for you being here to talk about coal, lignite and climate change.
John Clarke. You're welcome Bryan. I think its really important that New Zealand has a good open discussion about our future. I am very open minded about this. So I came here, against advice that it would be 300 to one with a lot of unthinking NIMBY proponents. Its all too often that a debate is started, such as last year's debate about further mining under Schedule 4 of the Crown Minerals Act to grow the economy. And that debate just becomes dominated with unthinking slogans such as "No mining in National Parks"..
Bryan Dawe. But Dr Elder, the Government did in fact propose to remove protection from thousands of hectares within Paparoa National Park that is on top of a coal seam!
John Clarke. We were just trying to start a discussion! The response was unthinking slogans like "No mining in National Parks" and "Keep the coal in the hole". To me that is the same level as "Leave the Asians in Asia". It was meant to be a discussion.
Bryan Dawe. But Dr Elder, isn't Jeanette Fitzsimons correct when she observes that seeking non-notified consents for your lignite briquette plant at Mataura shuts down any discussion or debate?
John Clarke. Well, she would say that! It's ridiculous! We are just trying to get a resource consent. Everyone wants their consent not notified. Everyone gets their lawyers to write to the council. Its just the same as you getting a consent for your garden trellis!
Bryan Dawe. Dr Elder, Dr Jan Wright, the Parliamentary Commissioner for the Environment, points out that you refused to give her information on the carbon content of your lignite process. How does that help with the discussion?
John Clarke. Well, Bryan, that was commercially sensitive information. Dr Wright may have set a competing lignite to fuel plant. She has qualifications in physics and chemistry, you know.
Bryan Dawe. Dr James Hansen, of NASA, has just presented the climate change case for the rapid phase out of coal and non-traditional fossil-fuels such as lignite, tar sands and oil-shale. What is your response to this?
John Clarke. Bryan, I am glad you have asked that, as are no doubt half the people here who now agree with me. We need to understand that there are a couple of billion poor people in less developed countries - who have not enjoyed several generations of energy-intensive wealthy lifestyles as we have - who want lignite briquettes but can't afford them. In light of that need, who are we in New Zealand, not to process the lignite into diesel and fertiliser that we can then substitute for imports from China
Bryan Dawe. Dr Elder, won't the development of a large scale lignite industry increase New Ziealand's annual carbon dioxide emissions by 25%, depending on the number of plants? Won't that contribute to global warming.
John Clarke. No Bryan, not at all. We have to think about this globally as Soild Energy does., We make the lignite into fuel and fertiliser in Southland. We stop importing fertiliser made from coal in China. Globally, there are less emissions as we have saved the transport emissions!
04 May 2011
Make your own NZETS billboard.
The New Zealand Labour Party have set up a website where you can make your own billboard to stop asset sales.
The Dim Post blog has had some fun with some suggestions.
Honestly it seems that stopping privatisation of state-owned assets is Labours only firm policy. What is Labours policy on carbon pricing? I have no idea. I suspect Labour has no idea either.
With that in mind here is my billboard.
The Dim Post blog has had some fun with some suggestions.
Honestly it seems that stopping privatisation of state-owned assets is Labours only firm policy. What is Labours policy on carbon pricing? I have no idea. I suspect Labour has no idea either.
With that in mind here is my billboard.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)