Category: Climate politics

Weekend compendium

LovelockJames Lovelock is the man who invented earth system science – or to give it the name he got from William Golding (the Lord Of The Flies man), Gaia. Very influential, in other words, and one of the gloomiest prognosticators of mankind’s future in a world where Gaia bites back through climate change. Rolling Stone has an excellent long profile of Lovelock, which includes this gem about some temporary employment during the 1980s:

He supported himself in part as a consultant for MI5, England’s top counterintelligence agency, where he developed a method to monitor the movements of KGB spies in London by using an ECD [electron capture detector, a device invented by JL] to track their vehicles.

Elsewhere:

  • The UN Environment Programme’s fourth Global Environment Outlook Report (GEO-4) makes gloomy reading. The Press puts it on the front page with the headline Man’s ‘very survival at risk’. [Herald, BBC, Telegraph [UK], full report PDF]. Our ecological overdraft is going to make Gaia unhappy…
  • She’s not helping out with CO2 like she used to either. The amount of our CO2 emissions mopped up by natural emissions is declining – which threatens to speed up warming as carbon cycle feedbacks kick in, a new study [PDF] finds. [BBC, Herald, Times [UK], CSIRO, Rabett Run, Stoat]

[This post will be updated/extended when I stop feeling gloomy…]

It’s a moral issue too…

Climate change is without doubt a moral issue as well as a scientific, economic and political minefield. I don’t often argue the moral imperative, preferring to concentrate on more technical issues, so it was refreshing to read a compelling article by Klaus Bosselmann, Professor of Law and Director of the New Zealand Centre for Environmental Law at the University of Auckland, in the Herald today.

The international climate change regime is totally inadequate, delaying the tough decisions to some indefinite future. There is a huge gap between the jurisprudence of international environmental law and so-called “sovereign” states enviously pursuing their national interests. The gap can only be closed through a worldwide moral discourse with strong leadership. This is precisely where New Zealand as a small player can make a difference. International moral leadership will be rewarded, in political and economic terms. There may be a bill to be paid in the short term, but big dollars can be earned by moving fast towards carbon neutrality and letting the world know about it. In sum, sound morality makes sound politics.

If you read nothing else today, read this.

Fast follow-up

Wp-Content Uploads 2007 10 Nzifollow My critique of the NZI’s “fast follower” report – described as “spirited” by Nevil Gibson in the NBR – has received a swift response from the NZI. We’re Right Behind You was written by NZI chief executive David Skilling and researcher Danielle Boven. Danielle interviewed me about climate issues earlier this year, and has taken the trouble to prepare an extended response to my criticisms. It’s too long to post as a comment, so Danielle becomes HT’s second guest blogger (IPCC lead author Jim Renwick was the first). I have not edited her words, but do offer some comment at the end. Note: Danielle refers in several places to papers 1 & 2. The first paper is the one published this week, the second a forthcoming one which will consider other aspects of climate policy. Over to Danielle….

Continue reading “Fast follow-up”

To boldly follow…?

NzifollowThe New Zealand Institute, the politically neutral think tank born of the “Knowledge Wave” conference, has been making waves of a different kind today with its new, and rather idiosyncratic take on how NZ should approach emissions reductions. The report, part of a series on climate change, is called “We’re Right Behind You” [PDF], and advocates a “fast follower” approach to emissions reductions – which apparently means reneging on our Kyoto commitments. The report recommends that:

…it seems appropriate and realistic for New Zealand to undertake to reduce its net emissions to their 1990 levels by 2020 rather than by 2012. We recommend that New Zealand should seek to avoid the obligation to purchase carbon credits associated with the decision to delay achieving its Kyoto committment by 2012.

This effectively means withdrawing from Kyoto, and as you might expect this “considered analysis” has been welcomed by the big emitters. I was interviewed by one of the authors of the report back in June, before HT was published, and in a swift email exchange this morning I promised to read the report thoroughly before rushing to any judgement (unlike some). So, my timely (but not rushed) view of this contribution to the policy debate?

Continue reading “To boldly follow…?”

Big emitters bite back

Wp-Content Uploads 2007 09 Nzets1-4NZ’s big greenhouse gas emitters have begun a push back against the government’s Emissions Trading Scheme (ETS) and energy strategy. Last week an industry group including the Greenhouse Policy Coalition, Federated Farmers, the Major Electricity Users Group, Business Roundtable, the Chambers Of Commerce, and others wrote to Helen Clark warning that, as Colin Espiner in The Press reported, “the Government’s proposed Energy Trading Scheme (ETS) is being rushed through Parliament without adequate consultation with industry. It says the Government is refusing to release any economic analysis to back its claims the new system will have a negligible impact on economic growth.” Fran O’Sullivan in the Herald provided more context, with news of the first meeting of the government’s Climate Change Leadership Forum, but it’s clear that a coordinated effort to derail the ETS is under way.

Continue reading “Big emitters bite back”