Goff: agriculture in NZ ETS in 2013 not 2015

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.

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!

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.

Who bears the biggest and smallest carbon price under the NZETS?

Who bears the biggest and smallest carbon price under the New Zealand Emissions Trading Scheme?

Geoff Bertram and Simon Terry in their book The Carbon Challenge New Zealands Emissions Trading Scheme, point out that the effect of the delayed entry dates for different sectors of the economy (agriculture) into the NZ ETS combined with 100% plus free gifting of NZ emission units to emitters, will be an unfair carbon price between sectors.

This chart shows who is and is not bearing their share of the carbon price imposed by the NZETS. The left hand end of each line represents the sectors share of New Zealands greenhouse gas emissions. The right hand end of each line represents the share of the carbon price each sector will bear under the NZ ETS in the period 2008 to 2012. This type of chart is a 'Bump' chart. It has been popularised by the blog Junk Charts.



Here is the R-programming language script for the chart.

ag<-c(48.4,3.2)
li<-c(14.8,1.2)
mv<-c(14.5,29)
ct<-c(4.2,9)
hh<-c(4.1,23.3)
yy<-c(2008,2009)
png(file="etsprice.png",pointsize = 14,width=650,height=550)
plot(yy,ag,type='n',axes=F,xlim=c(2008,2009.4),ylim=c(0,48),main="",xlab="", ylab="Percent of total")
axis(side=1, las=0,at=c(2008.3,2009), labels=c("share of greenhouse gases", "share of carbon price in NZETS"))
axis(side=2)
box(lwd=2)
lines(yy,ag,lwd=2,col="red")
text(2009.1,3.2,"Agriculture",adj=0,col=1)
lines(yy,li,lwd=2,col="red1")
text(2009.1,1,"Large industry",adj=0,col=1)
lines(yy,mv,lwd=2,col="blue")
text(2009.1,29,"Private vehicles",adj=0,col=1)
lines(yy,ct,lwd=2,col="blue1")
text(2009.1,9,"Transport",adj=0,col=1)
lines(yy,hh,lwd=2,col="violetred")
text(2009.1,23.3,"Households",adj=0,col=1)
mtext(side=3,line=-2.8,cex=1.3,"Sectoral shares of NZ greenhouse gases \nvs share of carbon price under NZETS")
dev.off()

What is New Zealand's fair share of GHG emissions?

I was playing with this widget on the World Bank's website.
I have graphed New Zealand's carbon dioxide emissions per capita⁽¹⁾ against per capita for World, the European Union, China and sub-Saharan Africa.

New Zealand very much has a developed country consumption pattern.

CO2 emissions (metric tons per capita)

Data from World Bank

(1) CO₂ only and not all greenhouse gases expressed as CO₂ equivalent. So methane and nitrous oxide are not included.

Human-Made Climate Change: A Moral, Political and Legal Issue

Dr James Hansen is giving a lecture in Wellington. The details Monday 16 May 2011, 5.45pm -7.30pm, Rutherford House, Lecture Theatre 1, 23 Lambton Quay, Wellington, No RSVP required - all welcome.

Here is Hansen talking recently about phasing out coal powered thermal power stations.



Here is the full detail of Hansen's public talk in Wellington.

Human-Made Climate Change: A Moral, Political and Legal Issue

Dr James Hansen is Director of the NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies in New York and Adjunct Professor at Columbia University's Earth Institute. He is the author of Storms of my Grandchildren (2010), and is probably best known for being one of the first scientists to bring global warming to the world's attention, when he delivered Congressional testimony on climate change in the 1980s.

Trained in physics and astronomy in Dr James Van Allen's space science program at the University of Iowa, Dr Hansen has been an active researcher in planetary atmospheres and climate science for nearly 40 years, with the last 30 years focused on climate research, publishing more than 100 scholarly articles on the latter topic.

Elected to the U.S. National Academy of Sciences in 1995, Dr Hansen has received numerous awards, including the WWF Conservation Medal from the Duke of Edinburgh, the American Geophysical Union?s Roger Revelle Medal, and the Heinz Environment Award.

In addition to numerous testimonies given to the United States Senate and House of Representatives, Dr Hansen twice made presentations to President George W. Bush Administration's cabinet level Climate and Energy Task Force, chaired by Vice President Dick Cheney.

While Dr Hansen's work has evolved from space science to climate science, it has constantly sought to make the results of that work widely available to the public. Time Magazine designated Dr. Hansen as one of the world's 100 most influential people in 2006, a tribute to his continuing efforts to serve the public through his scientific work.

Dr Hansen's Wellington lecture will focus on human-made climate change as a moral, political and legal issue. To quote:

'Human-made climate change is a moral issue. It pits the rich and the powerful against the young and the unborn, against the defenseless and against nature. Climate change is a political issue. But politics fails when there is a revolving door between government and the fossil fuel-industrial complex. Climate change is a legal issue. The judiciary provides the possibility of holding our governments accountable for their duty to protect the public interest.'

The Mayor of Wellington, Celia Wade-Brown will be present to welcome and introduce Dr Hansen.

History of Modern Climate Science

This video condenses the history of modern climate science into 1 minute and 40 seconds.



* 1824 - Joseph Fourier discovered the greenhouse effect.
* 1859 - John Tyndall discovered that H₂O and CO₂ absorb infrared confirming the Fourier greenhouse effect.
* 1896 - Svante Arrhenius proposed human CO₂ emissions would prevent earth from entering next ice age (challenged 1906).
* 1950’s - Guy Callendar found H₂O and CO₂ did not overlap all spectra bands, therefore warming from CO₂ expected (countered the 1906 objections against Arrhenius).
* 1955 - Hans Suess identified the isotopic signature of industrial based CO₂ emissions.
* 1956 - Gilbert Plass calculated adding CO₂ would significantly change radiation balance.
* 1957 - Roger Revelle and Suess suggested oceans would absorb less CO₂ causing more global warming than predicted.
* 1958/60’s - Charles David Keeling proved CO₂ was increasing in the atmosphere.
* 1970’s/1980’s Syukuro Manabe and James Hansen began modeling climate projections.
* 1990s - instrumental temperature records from NCAR, GISS, Hadley, CRU, UAH, MSU, all confirm models of warming global climate. So do trends in glacier melt and retreat, sea level rise and latitudinal shift.