After a meeting Rod Carr, Chairperson of the Climate Change Commission I found that was not the case. That was now few years ago so I cannot quote him word for word. I asked if he thought that life on earth would end if we did not drastically reduce emissions quickly. He said no but the planet would be in a very bad way. The alarmist view about global warming changing to global boiling had not been suggested at the time.
Sadly, according to our new PM, there are two types of people. Firstly, those who care about the planet. Secondly, deniers or even minimalists. There are of course many in between.
I am not an economist. However, I know this country is in a bad way financially. There are two things we can do to make things better. Firstly, reduce wasteful spending. Secondly, increase export earnings. Obviously, the sensible thing would be to do both.
One of the export earnings I am looking at is farm income. The present policy is to take the advice of the unqualified Rod Carr. Carr has business qualifications but no science degree. One of the other Commissioners is a disciple of Al Gore.
I do not have a degree myself but I have bought and read books by real experts. Three of the best are Dr Patrick Moore, former CEO of Greenpeace International, Dr Judith Curry and Dr Steven Koonin, author of “Unsettled”.
Those climate scientists I mentioned and many others agree with Dr Koonin that the science is unsettled. They accept that human emissions cause an increase in global temperature and sea level rise. They also agree that while solar and wind may be part of the solution, nuclear power must be part of the mix to reduce global emissions. Where they differ is that they do not accept the hysterical claim that there is a climate emergency. They argue that climate models cannot accurately predict what the temperature will be decades in the future.
They point out that modest warming has benefits as well as drawbacks. At present of the people who die from extreme weather, many more die from extreme cold than extreme heat. Therefore if the temperature increases by one degree more people will die from extreme heat but fewer people will die from extreme cold. That means fewer people will die from extreme temperatures.
I could go on forever about climate change in general but I must focus on the main point of the Climate Change Commision. The new government is considering whether to replace the Governor of the Reserve Bank and the Police Commissioner although they have excellent qualifications. However, they are happy to continue with the Chairperson of the Climate Change Commission who does not have a science degree. While I do not think it is absolutely necessary for one to have a science degree to know a lot about climate change, Carr’s placement should have the relevant qualifications to support their opinions.
I hope that Carr’s replacement will not be selective in what opinions of COP28 they support. COP28 recommended tripling the use of nuclear power. What would happen if bigger container ships were nuclear powered, would the Greens and Labour say they should not be allowed in our ports?
I can think of some replacements for Rod and also other commissioners. I hope the readers of this article may have other recommendations. I would also be interested if the readers support nuclear power as part of the solution. The role of chairperson and commissioners should ideally be advertised. Hopefully, those applying would not treat climate change as a quasi religion.
Chuck Bird is a self-educated expert on climate change having read books from many qualified climate change scientists.
10 comments:
Chuck - I too was dismayed when I googled the profiles of the climate commission and its Chairman.
Because of the policy power they were being set up to wield, it has to be total ignorance, or a form of control by the Climate Minister, that just nobody chosen has any credible experience, just friends of friends Even the Al Gore connection, only serves to prove how un unscientific and downright dangerous the lack of real scientific experience can be. (the non so blind group) Al Gore has been quoting modeling predictions for 20 years - all have turned out to be false, some unbelievable so.
It seems that to label Climate as a form of 'religion' is much closer to the real truth than those sucked into it wish to admit. Truth is not a religion.
The "Savannah" was the first nuclear powered civilian cargo ship built as a demonstration unit and launched in 1959. As a demonstration ship it was never expected to be commercially viable, and it wasn't. I wonder how the economics would stack up today, and then there are the security issues of extremists wanting to capture it and use it in an act of terrorism.
What I don't know about climate change would fill many books, but a new theory just recently suggested that the lack of ozone in the northern Atlantic is allowing more sunshine to melt ice over the northern polar regions and could be a precursor to a coming north/south magnetic polar shift. Watch this space.
Kevan
Many smart people such as Koonin have unpicked the GW issue and its clear there is a CO2 impact, but even the IPCC report has pulled back substantially from the catastrophic position by removing the RCP8.5 model run. This is the scientific portion of the report not the political portion which demanded it remain or else the game is up.
As such a smart country will aim to be clean but a single focus on CO2 at all cost is frankly stupid and a bad outcome for NZ and is genocidal for the developing world.
Can I propose a reset on New Zealand's climate change response. Start with NZ produces 0.17% of the world's Co2, from this, what can anyone justify spending any money on.
Why not introduce NZ to the next meeting of the alarmists - COP29 as an interested observer, sitting on the fence as befits our minor emission position in the world but showing NZ is interested but non committal to the ridiculous waste of multi billions NZ taxpayers hard earned money .
Great article Chuck 👏
I'm with you and the other commentators on the lack of meaningful scientific consensus that climate change is a crisis.
Too many factors are identified into the phenomenon.
Agree that alarmists have a tax-barrow to push, and that CO2 is a life gas for food production, methane is a short-lived gas and should be exempted from GWP calculations.
NZ has an obsession with its 0.17%, and is far outweighed by Jet flights to the likes of COP28 from our leaders alone.
We don't need 100% renewable, not only is it more expensive but limited by its seasonal fuel supply.
Climate changes cyclically but in my view CO2 change does not precede temperature change.
I like your references and know 2/3 and like what Ian Plimer says too.
Im not agin Nuclear as an option or even better 5% gas and coal top up, or do we want rolling blackouts.
Great article Chuck and thanks to NZCPR for publishing it.
Of course my preference in this instance would be a closing down of the Climate Commission. Man caused climate change is IMHO a myth designed to empower leftists whose ultimate objective is world govt. (via the UN) Just one of many political devices all serving the same purpose.
In lieu, yes let's change the Commissioner to someone capable of lateral thought and logic. Barry Brill and or Bryan Leyland get my vote. Both a bit long in the tooth but still as sharp as tacks mentally. (and far more on to it than Mr Carr has ever been)
NZ needs a brave truth teller like Vivek Ramaswamy (of the USA) to come to the fore in politics, and by his boldness unshackle us from the climate change myth. So many politicians, but all too cowed by a partisan media to speak truth.
The ignorance of those in charge is exemplified by James Shaw. He did not graduate from Wellington as he has claimed and was therefore ineligible to enrol in a Masters at a Bristol Business School for which you would normally need an Honours Degree at an Upper Second or First class level. He obviously talked his way onto the course which was in ' Sustainable Management ' and was totally business based with no science at all. As far as I can see Shaw has no scientific background at all and is unlikely to have read any of the IPCC background papers. Like most politicians he just reads the ' Summary For Governments ' which is written by IPCC politicians and is often at odds with the scientific papers it is summarising !
Seeing as the President of COP 28 just admitted, the science does not support narrative of climate boiling! All watching and attending this event heard him say it from his podium. Although he obviously capitulated after that,it was spoken.
It is time for us to write to those in parliament to review their ideas.I see that Mr Carr chose James of the Green Party to accompany him to that event. For support?? What's that about.
Shane Jones speech regarding this climate hysteria appeared to be of some hope.
Let's inform our government of the real facts.
Post a Comment
Thanks for engaging in the debate!
Because this is a public forum, we will only publish comments that are respectful and do NOT contain links to other sites. We appreciate your cooperation.