Comments on: Shaking the money tree http://hot-topic.co.nz/shaking-the-money-tree/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=shaking-the-money-tree Global warming and the future of New Zealand Thu, 09 Sep 2010 11:31:47 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=abc By: AndrewH http://hot-topic.co.nz/shaking-the-money-tree/comment-page-1/#comment-5237 AndrewH Thu, 16 Apr 2009 08:17:33 +0000 http://hot-topic.co.nz/shaking-the-money-tree/#comment-5237 R2 My statement makes no assumptions about cuts in NZ being made before cuts in other countries. Necessary cuts are necessary cuts for all. Besides who says that looking good is not having an impact ;-) R2
My statement makes no assumptions about cuts in NZ being made before cuts in other countries. Necessary cuts are necessary cuts for all.

Besides who says that looking good is not having an impact ;-)

Rate this comment: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

]]> By: StephenR http://hot-topic.co.nz/shaking-the-money-tree/comment-page-1/#comment-5236 StephenR Thu, 16 Apr 2009 06:59:39 +0000 http://hot-topic.co.nz/shaking-the-money-tree/#comment-5236 From what I can see, that stuff WAS true, but also made an awful lot of assumptions about the future. Added to the fact that the ETS is going to be heavily tinkered with, it's probably not really even worth remembering. What you don't explain is how, if companies make bigger than necessary cuts, government makes money? From what I can see, that stuff WAS true, but also made an awful lot of assumptions about the future. Added to the fact that the ETS is going to be heavily tinkered with, it’s probably not really even worth remembering.

What you don’t explain is how, if companies make bigger than necessary cuts, government makes money?

Rate this comment: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

]]> By: R2D2 http://hot-topic.co.nz/shaking-the-money-tree/comment-page-1/#comment-5235 R2D2 Thu, 16 Apr 2009 04:38:41 +0000 http://hot-topic.co.nz/shaking-the-money-tree/#comment-5235 AndrewH: SO NZ is to do more than its share again? We cant make an impact other than to look good. StephenR: You should actually read at least one sentence in the ETS before making statements on websites. Government wont make money at first, but will once allocations are phased out from 2018 No allocations have been made yet, allocations will be made at 90% of 2005 for trade exposed industries and agriculture. Transport fuel will not receive allocations (except for short term special allocation for fishing industry) Electricity generation wont receive allocations, but will pass costs on, so it may not cost them (but they have the largest increase in emissions). After 2030, the government will be allocated units under post Kyoto agreements (if they get signed fingers crossed they wont), but will auction those units to industry keeping all the profit. Only if by necessary you mean 100% is your statement true (kill all the cows and sheep in the world?) AndrewH: SO NZ is to do more than its share again? We cant make an impact other than to look good.

StephenR: You should actually read at least one sentence in the ETS before making statements on websites.

Government wont make money at first, but will once allocations are phased out from 2018
No allocations have been made yet, allocations will be made at 90% of 2005 for trade exposed industries and agriculture.
Transport fuel will not receive allocations (except for short term special allocation for fishing industry)
Electricity generation wont receive allocations, but will pass costs on, so it may not cost them (but they have the largest increase in emissions).

After 2030, the government will be allocated units under post Kyoto agreements (if they get signed fingers crossed they wont), but will auction those units to industry keeping all the profit.

Only if by necessary you mean 100% is your statement true (kill all the cows and sheep in the world?)

Rate this comment: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

]]> By: StephenR http://hot-topic.co.nz/shaking-the-money-tree/comment-page-1/#comment-5233 StephenR Thu, 16 Apr 2009 01:04:03 +0000 http://hot-topic.co.nz/shaking-the-money-tree/#comment-5233 <i>If business makes the necessary cuts on there own accord, what excuses does government have for the ETS, oh thats right 21Billion dollars</i> If they make cuts of their own accord, then the government obviously doesn't get any money, does it. Money only comes from those who haven't made the ('necessary') cuts. If business makes the necessary cuts on there own accord, what excuses does government have for the ETS, oh thats right 21Billion dollars

If they make cuts of their own accord, then the government obviously doesn’t get any money, does it. Money only comes from those who haven’t made the (‘necessary’) cuts.

Rate this comment: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

]]> By: AndrewH http://hot-topic.co.nz/shaking-the-money-tree/comment-page-1/#comment-5230 AndrewH Thu, 16 Apr 2009 00:40:48 +0000 http://hot-topic.co.nz/shaking-the-money-tree/#comment-5230 If business makes the necessary cuts of their own accord, they will make evn greater and more necessary cuts when there are incentives to do so. If business makes the necessary cuts of their own accord, they will make evn greater and more necessary cuts when there are incentives to do so.

Rate this comment: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

]]> By: R2D2 http://hot-topic.co.nz/shaking-the-money-tree/comment-page-1/#comment-5226 R2D2 Wed, 15 Apr 2009 19:27:15 +0000 http://hot-topic.co.nz/shaking-the-money-tree/#comment-5226 If business makes the necessary cuts on there own accord, what excuses does government have for the ETS, oh thats right 21Billion dollars If business makes the necessary cuts on there own accord, what excuses does government have for the ETS, oh thats right 21Billion dollars

Rate this comment: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

]]> By: Gareth http://hot-topic.co.nz/shaking-the-money-tree/comment-page-1/#comment-5224 Gareth Wed, 15 Apr 2009 11:14:20 +0000 http://hot-topic.co.nz/shaking-the-money-tree/#comment-5224 Yup, that's one of the reasons I linked to your piece. One wonders at what point the accounting standards were changed, especially when you look at Business NZ's response today... Yup, that’s one of the reasons I linked to your piece. One wonders at what point the accounting standards were changed, especially when you look at Business NZ’s response today…

Rate this comment: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

]]> By: IdiotSavant http://hot-topic.co.nz/shaking-the-money-tree/comment-page-1/#comment-5223 IdiotSavant Wed, 15 Apr 2009 11:04:40 +0000 http://hot-topic.co.nz/shaking-the-money-tree/#comment-5223 <I>but here’s an interesting point that should make some of our farming advocates squirm: a chunk of the reduction in agricultural emissions — 4.1 mT, worth $100 million — comes from accounting for the use of nitrification inhibitors and emissions from urine and dung. So much for agriculture not being able to do anything to reduce emissions…</I> Actually, only 0.3 MT is due to nitrification inhibitors (which I should note aren't recognised by the IPCC yet, so shouldn't be deducted from our total). The rest is due to halving an important constant in the calculation of nitrous oxide emissions. This hasn't been accepted by the IPCC either, and according to my sources there is likely to be some trouble over it. but here’s an interesting point that should make some of our farming advocates squirm: a chunk of the reduction in agricultural emissions — 4.1 mT, worth $100 million — comes from accounting for the use of nitrification inhibitors and emissions from urine and dung. So much for agriculture not being able to do anything to reduce emissions…

Actually, only 0.3 MT is due to nitrification inhibitors (which I should note aren’t recognised by the IPCC yet, so shouldn’t be deducted from our total). The rest is due to halving an important constant in the calculation of nitrous oxide emissions. This hasn’t been accepted by the IPCC either, and according to my sources there is likely to be some trouble over it.

Rate this comment: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

]]>