Greenpeace have mastered the art of cool marketing, or marketing the need for cooling, or for loosening up a little, as Rhys Darby demonstrates… Sign on? You know it makes sense… 😉
Tag: Greenpeace
TV3 needs to take stock
TV3 news hit one of its lows last night. Reporter and presenter Samantha Hayes was in Aitutaki in the Cook Islands for the visit of Greenpeace’s ship the Esmeralda on its Pacific climate impact tour, with Sign On ambassador Keisha Castle Hughes on board [Greenpeace release]. I was watching the news item with interest when I thought I heard the reporter saying “while the science is far from settled…â€. Since my hearing is not reliable I checked on the TV3 news website. I had heard aright. Here is the full sentence: “While the science is far from settled, Greenpeace is convinced that Aitutaki is on the front line of climate change.â€
Don’t look back in anger
With the Bonn meeting over and a huge amount of negotiating still to do, Hot Topic’s woman at the table, Cindy Baxter, gives her impression of the state of play — and she’s not a happy bunny…
I’m getting angry now.
I’ve just spent nearly two weeks in Bonn watching the train wreck of the climate negotiations as delegations stuck in their corners, most especially the officials from the industrialised world.
At one point, in a developing country move led by the Alliance of Small Island States (AOSIS), there was some great draft text for the Kyoto Protocol parties — calling for developed countries to cut emissions by an aggregate of at least 45% by 2020 which might (might) keep the carbon loading in the atmosphere below 350 ppm. Might I say because even that’s not for sure at all. The text was supported by almost every member of the 130-strong developing country “G77” + China, with the notable exception of a few OPEC countries. It simply “noted” that this was what had to be done – and that figures like this need to be on the table.
But in the end even this note went west, with the NZ delegation joining the fight against it, and the result was agreement to discuss the developed country aggregate target next time, in June. Erm, that’s what they were supposed to do this time. So much for our concern in this part of the world for our pacific neighbours.
The only real numbers in the entire meeting were the calculations on the current aggregate 2020 target, based on submissions or announcements made by the developed world to date. Greenpeace crunched the figures and it wasn’t pretty. 4% to 14% by 2020 at 1990 levels. That’s it. Pathetic. New Zealand, of course, didn’t have any targets at all to contribute to the table, but you can rest assured it would fall in the lower half.
New Zealand kept bleating about its problems — I had a conversation with one NZ delegate who was terribly pleased with himself about the adoption of a 450 ppm carbon loading limit. What, I asked, would NZ do to keep us to this? Certainly removing any reference to a strong aggregate target would be counterproductive to that. He went into a rant about how the whole world has to act together. The old “you first” charade. Never mind that the western world is historical responsibility for causing this problem in the first place.
What has to happen to move it forward? Clearly massive ice shelf break ups in the Antarctic won’t do it. We need real leadership and it ain’t gonna come from our lot, any time soon. These officials, who’ll all be back in Bonn in 6 weeks time, need very clear direction from their bosses, from the world’s leaders.
Obama wants an end to our dependence on fossil fuels. That sort of statement is a good start — although the weirdness of the US system means that he can’t introduce his own legislation and has to rely on a difficult congress to make it happen. As Alden Meyer of the Union of Concerned scientists told journalists one day at a press conference “let’s call the US target a moving target. And it’s moving in the right direction.”
Leaders have to step up and direct these officials to move — and move faster. We can’t glue the Wilkins ice shelf back on. We can’t make it rain in Australia, or anywhere else for that matter. But we can change the politics. These guys need to feel the heat. Otherwise we all will.
[Oasis]
Stop! In the name of ACT
The uncertainty created by the shelving of the current emissions trading scheme legislation is already having a significant impact on the New Zealand economy. Carbon News reports that one of the world’s leading players in the carbon market had planned to announce today that it was to open an NZ operation, but that as a result of the National/ACT deal, those plans have been put on hold. NZ’s international reputation in carbon markets is “taking a battering” according to TZ1 boss Mark Franklin, and the market for NZ emissions units (NZUs) is now “effectively dead”, CN reports.
The forestry sector is also feeling the impact of Key’s decision to cave in to Hide, with Roger Dickie of the Kyoto Forestry Association telling Morning Report yesterday that a major forestry project worth hundreds of millions of dollars has been cancelled as a result of the ETS decision (stream, mp3). Also worth a listen: Rod Oram on Nine To Noon today, assessing the new cabinet (stream, mp3). Nick Smith, the incoming minister with responisbility the environment and climate change portfolios apparently still believes (according to Oram) that a modified ETS can be up and running by 2010, but the “special” select committee process is going to make that very hard to achieve – especially if consideration of a carbon tax is included in the final terms of reference. Brian Fallow in the Herald believes an ETS is “most likely“, but in the meantime the uncertainty created by the new government is doing no-one except the big “do nothing” emitters any favours.
To avoid further damage to our international credibility, National should immediately issue revised terms of reference and a tight timetable for their “special” select committee: taking out all references to considering the science of climate change and the possibility of a carbon tax, and explicitly limit the committee to considering amendments to the ETS framework. To do less (or nothing) will do further damage to business in NZ and our international reputation.
Canary in a coalmine
From Greenpeace, timed to coincide with the launch of the new James Bond movie, we have Coalfinger (wot, no Shirley Bassey?). Full of smutty innuendo (geddit?). That’s Brian Blessed voicing the baddie – a wonderful over the top performance.
Meanwhile, big coal’s biggest critic James Hansen expresses disappointment with the targets set by Australia’s Garnaut Report:
That plan appears to have been written by the coal industry, and, if adopted globally, practically guarantees destruction of most life on the planet. I would be more critical[1. If that’s possible!], except that much of the problem is probably due to our failure to make the climate story clear enough.
Ouch.