More feedback on the NZ Insitute’s “fast follower” proposal, this time from business commentator Rod Oram in yesterday’s Sunday Star Times. Rod’s take is very similar to mine, though from a different perspective, and so I’m very pleased to welcome Rod as our third guest blogger – and reproduce that SST column in full. It’s a very good read…
Tag: IPCC
Fast follow-up
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….
To boldly follow…?
The 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?
And on Friday night…
Stop press: Canterbury lose semi-final, and – in a move guaranteed to enrage global warming sceptics – Al Gore and the IPCC have been jointly awarded this years Nobel Peace Prize [BBC, New York Times]. In the citation, the Nobel committee said:
By awarding the Nobel Peace Prize for 2007 to the IPCC and Al Gore, the Norwegian Nobel Committee is seeking to contribute to a sharper focus on the processes and decisions that appear to be necessary to protect the world’s future climate, and thereby to reduce the threat to the security of mankind. Action is necessary now, before climate change moves beyond man’s control.
Congratulations to Al and all the NZ scientists involved in the IPCC process – David Wratt, Jim Renwick, Blair Fitzharris and many others.
Full IPCC reports now available
The full text of the Working Group One, Two and Three sections of the IPCC‘s Fourth Report are all now available for free download:
- WG1 – The Physical Science Basis of Climate Change
- WG2 – Climate Change Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability
- WG3 – Mitigation of Climate Change
The final section, the Synthesis Report, is in the final stages of government review, and will be adopted at a meeting in Valencia in mid November. Put together, the three reports amount to a compendium of the state of our knowledge about climate change, and our options for dealing with it. The WG2 chapter on impacts in Australia and New Zealand [PDF] is particularly important reading.