The Greens conference at the weekend may have been mostly done behind closed doors, but snippets came out, including James Shaw calling Simon Bridges a “climate change denier”.
We all know Bridges is no denier, but his attitude towards climate change is somewhat more benign than that of the Green party.
Nevertheless, the Greens have announced a few things that will pave the way to reducing global warming… and it seems that, in New Zealand, we think that we can reduce the increase in global temperatures all by ourselves. Our Zero Carbon Bill requires New Zealand to go for the Paris Accord target of 1.5 degrees of warming, instead of the 2 degrees that most countries have adopted.
Nobody seems to have told Jacinda or James Shaw that our adopting the harsher Paris target will make absolutely no difference to global emissions, but the effect it will have on our economy could be devastating.
So while it has been announced that the government vehicle fleet will be all-electric by 2026 and the infamous 1 billion trees will be planted by 2028, we all know that this will make little or no difference to global emissions. It is paying lip service really.
“Climate change is an urgent issue requiring an urgent response, to ensure a stable climate for future generations of New Zealanders,” Shaw said.
“Our Government is committed to a just and rapid transition to a low emissions economy, because it’s vital that we play our part looking after our planet.”
But if it is all so urgent, why wait until 2026 to replace the government fleet of vehicles? Why not save the planet and do it now? And why can’t we get Shane’s nephs off the couch to plant all those trees sooner?
(Please note the sarcasm level is high here… just in case you thought I was serious.)
Work was “well under way” on fixing the Emissions Trading Scheme and establishing an independent Climate Change Commission,” Shaw said.
It was also working to reduce the price of electric cars.
The Government also wanted to be moving towards a goal of 100 per cent renewable electricity by 2035.
By 2050, it wanted socially inclusive and compact cities, clean and clever energy generation and smart, sustainable farming practices using low emissions technologies.
Stuff
All good stuff, James, but you are going to have to build several more dams for all this new electricity to be generated.
Oh, wait… isn’t it usually the Greens who object to new dams being built?
Speaking of those ‘smart, sustainable farming practices’, it is agriculture that is really going to be feeling the brunt of the Zero Carbon Bill, and agriculture is, of course, the backbone of our economy.
While all industries are expected to meet their emissions targets, agriculture has only 11 years to meet the first of its targets, unlike most other industry sectors that have until 2050. This robs agriculture of the time it will need to make technological advances, such as the production of genetically modified grasses that will reduce methane emissions from farm animals.
Don’t mention GM to the Greens either, as they are ideologically opposed to even thinking about the subject, even though it is the way forward to reducing methane emissions for agriculture.
That leads me to think that James Shaw’s idea of ‘smart, sustainable farming practices’ really only includes the growing of kale and mung beans, as anything else would be considered ecologically damaging one way or another.
Make no mistake though. A country like New Zealand, which is so reliant on agriculture for so much of its gross domestic product, is going to be badly affected by the assault on farmers, even though the effect on global emissions of each of these measures will be negligible.
If even the UK, which produces about 4% of global emissions, can do little to reduce temperatures on its own, we know for sure that we have no chance. Leading by example is not going to make China or India fall into line, no matter how much Jacinda wants it to be so.
That is not stopping this government, driven by ideology and not much else, from forcing farmers to adopt extreme emissions reductions which will not only not save the planet but will probably drive many of them off the land.
Be careful what you wish for, James Shaw. Agriculture provides a significant amount of tax revenue, which will never be replaced by the sale of mung beans. What are you going to do when that runs dry?