Posts Tagged ‘Environment’

NZ Govt Signs up for New Emissions Controls Costing Thousands for Each Citizen

02/02/2025

By Peter Williams
It took everyone by surprise. I only got wind of this when I saw the Taxpayers’ Union media release (I’ve copied it to the end of this email) at lunchtime today. My heart sank.

I appreciate that reasonable minds can differ on the urgency of climate change – but I think you’ll agree that sacrificing New Zealand’s economy for no material effect in emissions is the ultimate own goal.

In short the Government has just locked in the Ardern/Shaw anti-farming legacy, and signed New Zealand up for a brand new (2035) commitment that will see thousands of dollars for every man, woman, and child sent overseas for climate credits.

First some background.

You will recall that back in 2021, former Climate Change Minister James Shaw and then Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern flew to Glasgow and signed New Zealand up to a climate change/emissions target of a net reduction in emissions of 50 percent (compared to 2005) by 2030.

At the time, no meaningful economic analysis, public consultation, or debate occurred. In fact, the Ministry of Business Innovation and Employment voiced their concerns saying we are concerned that insufficient analysis has been undertaken to understand the fiscal and social impacts of a 45 percent reduction target, let alone the 50 percent that Ardern and Shaw secretly agreed…

The politicians just took this decision because, in their gut, they just felt it was the right thing to do. 

And what caused particular angst, was that the targets NZ signed up to include agricultural emissions (i.e. methane, or cow farts). Short of culling cows (and tanking New Zealand’s largest export industry), those emissions are impossible to avoid.

No other developed country faces the same problem. Because of our small population and disproportionate reliance on agriculture, New Zealand’s emissions makeup is more akin to a developing country, which, under the UN Paris Agreement, doesn’t have to cut emissions in the same way as we have signed up to.

Even if we could cut agricultural emissions, it would be pointless in terms of improving global warming: New Zealand’s agricultural sector is the most emissions-efficient in the world. Any calories/meat/milk-powder New Zealand doesn’t produce will be done elsewhere, and likely result in an overall increase in emissions.

These were the points made by the ‘groundswell’ farming protests, Federated Farmers, and even the National Party when they were in opposition!

To put the 50 percent net reduction target into perspective, half of New Zealand’s emissions relate to agriculture!

So that leaves non-agricultural emissions.

Thanks to Covid, in 2020 New Zealand shut down most of the economy to lockdown for months. Despite the Covid shutdown, official data shows that emissions declined by only three percent that year!

So the idea New Zealand can or will get to a 50 percent reduction by 2030 is absolutely fanciful. To hit the 2030 target emissions would have to fall by five percent per year!

How much is the 2030 target going to cost households?

There are lots of variables that go into forecasting where New Zealand’s emissions are going to be in five year’s time (e.g. the strength of the economy, how many trees are planted, whether we get wet winters and hydro lakes get rain etc).

But what Ardern/Shaw signed us up for means that missing the target (and there is absolutely no doubt we will miss it) determines how much New Zealand is going to have to cough up and pay for international emission units.

Last year Treasury worked out what New Zealand is on the hook for. Are you sitting down?

Up to $24 billion is the latest official estimate for the 2030 deadline.

To put that into perspective, $24 billion is more than the current cost of NZ Super. $12,000 per household!

And that’s not even counting the cost of lost economic growth, higher energy costs, and lost exports.

I know these numbers are unbelievable, and it’s been something the Taxpayers’ Union has been struggling to put into perspective and to communicate how on Earth to raise the alarm about the seriousness of what New Zealand faces. It’s a dozen Dunedin Hospitals. Or 34 times larger than the total new spending allowance Nicola Willis has set for this year’s Government budget.

Because the payment isn’t due until 2030, it’s just outside the Treasury’s “forecast horizon” so doesn’t yet appear on any of the Government’s fiscals. 

I don’t think it’s an exaggeration to say that it’s Ardern and Shaw’s ticking time fiscal time bomb.

Late last night, Climate Change Minister Simon Watts announced that he is committing New Zealand to even harder targets for 2035!

Simon Watts is set to sign NZ up for a second eye-watering bill for 2035.

Beehive announcement

Once signed-up, it means New Zealand will have to pay a second time for a target that Christopher Luxon / the National Party have previously said is totally achievable!

It’s bad enough that New Zealand is hopelessly off track when it comes to meeting the existing 2030 target, and the $24 billion bill left by Ardern and Shaw, but to do it all over again is nothing short of economic sabotage.

Why haven’t the media covered this?

The media are in dire straits. Newsrooms are a fraction of the size they used to be, and those who are left are probably so young they either don’t understand the economics or are so committed to extreme views of ‘climate change mitigation at any cost’ that they just don’t care.

And, I’m sorry to be so blunt, but the only reason Simon Watts’ office would wait until 8:30pm on a Thursday night is so that the morning radio shows are already planned and there won’t be ‘breaking news’ style coverage.

It speaks volumes that Watts waited until after Parliament rose for the week, and with Parliament in recess next week, by the time political journos get back to work, the news will have moved on.

As far as I can see, with the exception of the Taxpayers’ Union, Federated Farmers, and other watchdog and industry groups, this announcement has been totally missed!

If there is any chance for the economy to get back on track, we must ensure Christopher Luxon, Winston Peters, and David Seymour, overrule Simon Watts and set a realistic target. 

Will you join me in emailing the Coalition’s Party Leaders?

While the USA has pulled out, and other countries hedge their bets, why is Luxon’s Government doubling down? 

Last week, the US pulled out of the Paris Agreement, and with the UK’s ‘net zero’ intentions in question (their Labour Government is ‘going for growth’ too!),  it makes no sense for the New Zealand government to sign up for a second round of ‘ambitious’, sorry, ‘impossible’ targets if they are serious about growing the economy.

Simon Watts has got this one wrong. Introducing more ambitious targets to smash the economy harpoons Christopher Luxon’s attempts to ‘Go for Growth’. Take 30 seconds to tell the Government that.

But something needs to be done about climate change, right?

New Zealand is already one of the most emissions-efficient countries in the world. More than 80 percent of our electricity comes from renewable sources. Our farmers are the most emissions-efficient at what they do. We already have an emissions trading scheme that covers more greenhouse gas emissions than any other country in the world. Of course, we need to keep up the momentum, but it’s not right to say we’re not already ‘doing our bit’.

Paying the rest of the world billions of dollars serves to make New Zealand poor – it doesn’t serve to solve global warming when the US, China, and Russia are not part of the same agreement/commitment.

Christopher Luxon gets this – well he did when he was Opposition Leader anyway.

The $24 billion dollar cheque could buy 12 Dunedin Hospitals. It could build 16 Transmission Gully Motorways. It could build 40,000 new school classrooms. It could even be used to fund more in-country climate initiatives!

Simon Watts just turned the $24 billion liability into a potential $48 billion liability. It’s economic sabotage on a grand scale. We need to stop him.

In a country cancelling infrastructure, health, and education investment due to the fiscal crisis can we really afford to burn billions on an unobtainable climate target?

Make no mistake, I want Christopher Luxon and his Government to succeed and deliver for New Zealand. I know the Taxpayers’ Union are committed to sensible climate change mitigation policy. But if last night’s decision stands, Mr Luxon (and the country) is destined to fail. We can’t let that happen.
Email the Prime Minsiter and Party Leaders

This is the media release the Taxpayers’ Union sent out reacting to Watts’ late night announcement:

MEDIA RELEASE
SIMON WATTS JUST HARPOONED THE PRIME MINISTER’S ‘GOING FOR GROWTH’ PLAN

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

At 8pm last night – timed, presumably, to avoid pick up on the morning news shows – Climate Change Minister Simon Watts released New Zealand’s 2035 Nationally Determined Contribution to combatting climate change under the Paris Agreement.

The target, which locks unavoidable agricultural emissions into New Zealand’s international targets, are even more ‘ambitious’ than the 2030 targets made when Jacinda Ardern/James Shaw flew to Glasgow. They will cost future taxpayers literally tens of billions of dollars in penalties.

Taxpayers’ Union Executive Director, Jordan Williams, said “Ardern’s 50% emissions reduction by 2030 target was ludicrous. Treasury estimates that in just five years taxpayers will be on the hook for up to $24 billion – that’s $12,000 per New Zealand household. The Government has now signed us up for another bill for five years later.”

“To not only lock this cost in, but go even harder for 2035 is economic sabotage. Watts and his Cabinet colleagues are not going to be around in a decade to have to pay the bill, but are doubling down on Paris at the very time our trading partners are pulling back.”

“Half of New Zealand’s emissions are agricultural. To achieve the 51-55% reduction Simon Watts has put NZ on the hook for would mean we either must shut down parts of our agricultural sector, or just about everything else. To say this is fantasy does Mickey Mouse a disservice.”

“The only way New Zealand avoids paying tens of billions in international carbon credits is if every square inch of Otago and Southland is planted in pine.  But even the Government’s own experts advise that pathway is not credible.”

“So this decision will see New Zealanders having to stump up billions more to buy international credits in a decade’s time.”

“The Taxpayers’ Union has long supported sensible emissions reductions using our world leading Emissions Trading Scheme. But such a scheme can only operate with realistic targets and collective international action. Sacrificing our economic prosperity at the altar of good intentions when other countries are pulling back is nothing short of economic sabotage.”

“Minister Todd McClay was on radio this morning talking about how the Government want to ‘power up’ agricultural exports. He’s sure in for a shock.”

“Meanwhile, Simon Watts has just harpooned the Prime Minister’s ‘Going for Growth’ plan. Mr Luxon, Mr Peters, and Mr Seymour need to step in and overrule this decision.”

ENDS

It’s All About Connecting

05/01/2019

Our mission at Mountain Spirit is about “facilitating connection to one’s self, each other and the natural world.” Yesterday, here in New Zealand,  I Children at Mountain Spirit, enjoying chicken energysnapped this shot of my son and couple of our guests cradling one of our chickens in the nearby hammock. The hammock happens to be next to the “chicken tractor” (movable chicken house) so at the moment so makes for fun relaxing hangout with chickens all underfoot.  The guests loved the chickens and were were visiting with them every spare moment. Connecting with nature is vital for children, whether it’s going for a walk in the woods, on a mountain ridge, taking them sailing or just spending time helping them collect the chickens’ eggs.  A good book about children and nature, mentioned quite a few times in this blog is Last Child in the Woods, by R. Louv, but there are also newer titles in print as well.

Protesting Gold Mines in Peru Pays Off

30/11/2011

Successful Gold Mining Protestor

Copper and gold mine project in Peru suspended in face of protests
LIMA, PERU, AND BOGOTA, COLOMBIA — Faced with increasingly violent local opposition, the developers of the giant Conga gold and copper mine in northern Peru suspended the project late Tuesday night, saying they were bowing to a demand from the government of President Ollanta Humala.

Much of the northern district of Cajamarca has been paralyzed the last six days by general strikes called by Conga opponents that closed businesses and schools. Residents were concerned that the massive gold and copper mine could pollute the region’s water supply, a charge the mine’s operators, led by Colorado-based Newmont Mining, strenuously denied.

The situation became more violent Tuesday, as protesters burned an office at the site of the proposed mine and clashes between protesters and police in the area left 17 injured and two arrested. Thousands of demonstrators massed in the central square of Cajamarca, the region’s largest city.

As proposed, Conga would be a giant open pit gold mine similar to the Yanacocha mine 20 miles to the north, which is also operated by Newmont. But it would include a copper mine and smelter.

Newmont has proposed investing $4 billion in the new project, which could produce between 580,000 and 680,000 ounces of gold a year. The government had projected it would receive royalties and taxes totaling $800 million annually once the mine was fully operational after 2014, income the left-leaning Humala government was counting on to finance social and infrastructure project. Read the rest of this story..

Machu Picchu’s Capacity to Withstand Tourism

21/11/2011

Peruviians on a Balcony - In the '90's

I took my first clients to Peru, on our first program ever for Mountain Spirit Institute in 1998. Who would have thought there would be the numbers at Machu Picchu that there are now. Who would have imagined the wholesale tour companies, that have transformed sleepy little islands such as Amantani, could change things so much. Being there in ’98 was sure different that it is today. It was right after the Shining Path and been put down. Back then, one didn’t need guides to do the Inca Trail, and the prices were affordable. So what to do? Hmmm. I love Peru, but I think we’ll have to go more into the bush, back beyond the hordes, shy away from the beaten path, or “Gringo Hiway” as they call it. There is much to see in Peru and like any popular place, go an hour or two off the beaten path, and you’re in “no-man’s land”. Also, see my post on Amantani in this blog.
R. Richards, Editor

One Million Tourists Visit Machu Picchu in 2011
by Andean Air Mail & PERUVIAN TIMES
The ancient Inca citadel of Machu Picchu, uncovered from overgrowth and obscurity 100 years ago by U.S. explorer Hiram Bingham, will have received at least one million tourists by the end of this year, according to Percy Canales, president of the National Chamber of Tourism, Canatur.

The number of visitors represents a 30 percent hike over last year — when 660,000 people visited the site— and is undoubtedly due in part to the mass promotional campaign surrounding the centennial.  Of the total, 70 percent will have been foreign travelers and the remainder Peruvians, particularly school groups.  The larger number of foreigners were visitors from the United States, Spain and Japan.

Canales said that the number of tourists was expected to increase read the rest of this story..

We Need Your Help, Spread the Word!

08/09/2011

Mountain Spirit Institute’s Blog – Reader’s Appeal to Google News

If you like what you’ve been reading on Mountain Spirit’s blog since 2008, please help us spread the news by suggested they list us on their search site. Here’s how you can help.

Help our Non-Profit org, Suggest: blog.mtnspirit.org - Thanks!

Since we at Mountain Spirit Institute started our blog, 64,000 people have stopped by to read our posts and see our videos. By helping us build a broader base, we’ll not only get more readership and exposure, but possible needed revenue  from advertising like-minded organizations on our site, as well as exposure to potential donors.

Started in 1998, Mountain Spirit’s mission is to facilitate one’s connection to the natural world, each other and a deeper connection to one’s self, through a wide variety of programs in the U.S. and abroad, ranging from wilderness programs to workshops.

Peru: Social Conflicts & Environment Linked

03/08/2011

Peru's Enviro Minsiter Sr. Giesecke

Environment Minister says tackling social conflicts is “urgent”.
From Andean AirMail & Peruvian Times

Peru’s Environment Minister Ricardo Giesecke said Monday that tackling social conflicts in the country will be an “urgent” task in his portfolio, state news agency Andina reported. Social conflicts sky-rocketed during the Alan Garcia’s administration.

When Garcia took office in 2006, Peru’s ombudsman – the Defensoria del Pueblo – reported about 80 social conflicts in the country. Towards the end of his term, which wrapped up last Thursday, there were over 200 social conflicts, of which an overwhelming number are related to socio-environmental issues in the extractive industries.
In addition to delaying projects and investments, the conflicts have cost numerous lives and cost millions of dollars in collateral damage Read the rest of this story…

Don’t Buy It

17/06/2011

Selling Success Thru Consuming

A recent full page ad on the inside front cover of New Zealand Alpine Club‘s The Climber* Magazine shows a truly burly shot of climber Alex Honnold in Borneo, doing a dyno move on what looks like a long potential fall on a big wall. Granted the sequence is impressive, (let’s be clear, I can’t do that), but the ad states, “ALEX IS DRY, His Meru Goretex Paclite Jacket allows him to focus on the next move.”

OK, ok, stop the music. Does this make we want to rush right out and buy a Meru Paclite Jacket? Not. But if  the Meru Paclite jacket allows him to focus on that dyno, maybe it will allow ME to focus on my next move too, just like the ad in the picture.  My criticism is albeit a cliche, nevertheless, I don’t buy it.

Kiwis are known for being a self-depreciating, humble bunch. They seem to buy used whenever possible, plus it blends into the backcountry better. Have you ever heard the saying, “Don’t go climbing with someone who has new gear?”  This doesn’t mean to avoid climbing and teaching new to the sport, but more it means watching out for a poser.

The Kiwi quietude is making me, in my conditioned Americanism,  feel downright goofy. I feel I may be tooting my own horn without even knowing . Mind you, I consider myself on the humble side, but New Zealanders make me look like Donald Trump.   I wonder however, how many climbers reading that magazine are taken by the ad. I would suspect a few more of my fellow Yankees stateside might be taken in. What do you think? Comment below.

Don’t buy it – buy used. Even though I’m able to buy on pro-purchase programs, I just bought a pair of Karhu BC skis on Craigslist, and it feels good. Did I even need them in the first place, yes. Maybe a step further, and a pair from the Salvation Army here in Queenstown for $40 would have sufficed. We can always improve.

Buying this Book? Share it.

Nope, I wouldn’t buy a used rope, or even cams,  but buying  most other stuff used just helps the planet, and you look better in a used jacket anyway. It’s another dirtbag move for the planet. Madison Avenue and the big corps who now own The North Face, (and now Karhu) don’t like guys like us. We’re terrible consumers – Have you joined the crowd?

According to a new book by Rachel Botsman and Roo Rogers, What’s Mine is Yours, The rise of Collaborative Consumption, the trend is huge – to buy less, buy used and share. I’ll write more about this book after I finish it. So far it’s fascinating.

*This is no way meant to be a slam on The Climber advertising policies, in fact the author encourages readers to support the magazine by supporting its advertisers, appropriately. A tricky one, eh?

By the way, nice move Alex.

Conscious Eating

19/07/2010

Food Matters

Food Matters – A Guide to Conscious Eating

In this book, Mark Bittman explores the links among global warming and other environmental challenges, obesity and the so-called lifestyle diseases, and the overproduction and overconsumption of meat, simple carbohydrates, and junk food. It offers a plan for responsible eating that’s as good for the planet as it is for your weight and your health.

Sustainable Eating

With over 75 recipes and meal plans, this book will help you became accustomed to a style of eating that will cut back on your greenhouse gas production and teach you how to become less reliant on animal products and nutritionally worthless food.

To find out more, go to Food Matters.

Send Chevron a Message

21/05/2010

Chevron's Logo?

Please sign this petition to Chevron’s CEO, Mr. Watson asking that Chevron finally do the right thing in Ecuador. (En español aquí)

Dear Mr. Watson:

As the new CEO of Chevron, climate change and the environmental and human rights impacts of Chevron’s operations are the two issues that will define your tenure at the helm of one of the world’s largest oil companies. Chevron has fallen behind other businesses and many political leaders already taking a leadership position on climate change. Furthermore, your company is drawing increasing criticism for failing to rectify its massive human rights and environmental disaster in Ecuador. Taking the following steps will demonstrate a true commitment to environmental responsibility and respect for human rights – which will only strengthen your company’s future.

We the undersigned call on Chevron CEO John Watson to:

* Clean up Chevron’s toxic legacy in Ecuador, compensate affected communities for health and environmental impacts, and provide affected people real access to health care and potable water.
* Develop a global environment and human rights policy that will prevent similar tragedies in the future.
* Adopt aggressive strategies to provide clean energy to a carbon-constrained world.

Bottled Water: The Real Story

04/01/2010

The Real Story

Too many bottles, The new faux pas

I recently received a flyer in the mail from Food and Water Watch, with the title: “America’s water should belong to each of us, not the companies that bottle and sell it. Not the corporations that want to privatize is. Take the pledge to protect your right to clean safe drinking water. Here’s what I’ve learned.

American consumers drink more bottled water every year, in part because they think it is somehow safer or better than tap water. They collectively spend hundreds or thousands of dollars more per gallon for water in a plastic bottle than they would for the H20 flowing from their taps.

Rather than buying into this myth of purity in a bottle, consumers should drink from the tap. Bottled water generally is no cleaner, or safer, or healthier than tap water. In fact, the federal government requires far more rigorous and frequent safety testing and monitoring of municipal drinking water. Read more

Bottled Water: Illusions of Purity : Not safer than tap water
Bottled water manufacturers are good at implying things. With glossy ads and labels depicting quiet mountain streams, a consumer is led to believe what they’re drinking is healthier than what comes from the tap. But chances are it’s not. In fact, municipal water is more tightly regulated than bottled water. (more…)