Two years ago I took part in the World Peace Summit: Climate Change – What To Do? in Wellington, at the Westpac St James Theatre. I blogged about it at the time (before and after), and promised to link to the video of my talk when it was available. Of course, I then completely forgot to check, and so when I stumbled upon myself on Youtube earlier today, I thought I’d finally keep my promise. Given that I was talking in 2008, I think my comments stand up quite well (I’m rather pleased with my remarks about warmer winters being snowier winters), though my technological optimism is now tempered by pessimism both about the state of the climate system and our ability to come up with policies to reduce emissions. If you follow the “more from” links on the Youtube page, you can also watch David Wratt, Pene Lefale, Rod Oram, Andrew West, and Rachel Brown’s presentations.
Tag: Rod Oram
Oram on ETS debacle: Business Council for Sustainable Development ordered to shut up by big emitters; Nick Smith guilty of “breathtaking hypocrisy”
Fonterra and other big emitters have used their clout to silence the Business Council for Sustainable Development from commenting on National’s proposed changes to the emissions trading scheme, Rod Oram reveals in his Sunday Star Times column today.
…on November 5 Barry Harris, Fonterra’s head of milk supply and sustainability, delivered a withering speech to the council’s meeting. There were 31 other representatives of corporate members in attendance. Harris sharply criticised the council for what he considered its failure to represent the interests of members like Fonterra that “had a lot of skin in the game”.
The council’s insight into how opposed much of the public and some of business is to the ETS changes has clearly rattled some of its less sustainable members. According to some attendees, council chairman Bob Field, chairman of Toyota New Zealand, ordered council staff to stop making public statements on the ETS.
Perhaps Fonterra and Toyota believe that business can only be sustainable if it is protected from the costs of its polluting ways. The huge subsidies, of course, are their’s by right. Meanwhile, it remains to be seen if some of the less hypocritical members of the BCSD will make their voices heard.
In a coruscating column, Oram calls Nick Smith’s headlong rush in to bad legislation “breathtaking hypocrisy”, and quotes extensively from Smith’s comments a year ago when Labour’s ETS was being debated in Parliament.
Oram’s take on the current situation is right on the money:
National is making a dreadful mistake if it believes it can railroad through incompetent, damaging legislation hugely favouring heavy emitters.
At the next election, it will be easy for Labour and Greens to win support from the substantial number of voters who want an ETS that might actually cut emissions. Such an ETS would save the next government some $2 billion a year in subsidies to the heavy emitters, money voters would like spent instead on them and investment in new, clean technologies.
The whole column is worth a read. It’s Oram at his well-informed, combative best.
National’s nine ways to stuff up: Oram on climate policy in NZ
Rod Oram’s column in yesterday’s Sunday Star Times so perfectly captures my own feelings on the government’s proposed watering down of the emissions trading scheme that I asked Rod if he would allow me to post it here as a guest blog. I’m glad to say he agreed…
To understand how the government is destroying the Emissions Trading Scheme, it’s important to remind ourselves why we need an ETS in the first place.
Governments representing a majority of people on the planet believe climate change is happening. So they’re taking steps to reduce their nation’s emissions of greenhouse gases. Some have entered into international commitments to do so. Many more will do so in coming years.
In 1997, New Zealand committed to cut its emissions during 2008-12 to its 1990 levels. However, they are currently 24% above. So the National-led government has upped the ante with two new targets: a 10-20% reduction below 1990 levels by 2020 and a 50% reduction by 2050.
To achieve them, we need to invest heavily in new energy and carbon efficient technology for electricity generation and transport and processes in industry and agriculture. And we need to maximise the potential for our forests to act as profitable carbon sinks.
To do that we need to:
Continue reading “National’s nine ways to stuff up: Oram on climate policy in NZ”
Turkeys looking like dodos
The Greenhouse Policy Coalition, who protested loudly about the “rush