What has been the greatest source of greenhouse gas emissions in NZ these past six years? The CO2 expelled in hot air from the Greens & their travels to and from Wellington, and around the world? Has the Green Party contributed next to nothing in terms of reducing NZ's contribution to global emissions, yet added significantly to poverty & poor local environmental outcomes (like sewerage going into our harbors) by wasting resources on irrelevant projects, with small pay-offs to NZ? Here's some evidence - it comes in the form of this pie-chart of our emissions profile:
Click to view
NZ's emissions are nearly three quarters from farming & travel. Electricity generation adds a tiny 3.5%. Farming is our largest export, along with overseas tourists, many of whom arrive on long-haul flights. Yesterday, Air NZ announced it "will add 30,000 seats to its Tokyo route .. The move is part of an increase in capacity to key destinations in Asia, adding more than 55,000 seats across Singapore, Tokyo & Taipei between Nov 2024 & March 2025". So the vast emissions associated with such flights are greatly rising. It's impossible to see a future for NZ with farming & tourism shrinking. Are the Greens against this increase in tourism? No, they're embracing it. Air NZ has a "sustainability advisory panel". Who's on it? A guy called James Shaw, "a former NZ Minister for Climate Change & Green Party Co-leader, & Associate Minister for Environment". Where was he when Air NZ made this announcement? On one of its' long-haul flights?
What's more, there's a backlash going on at present against fully electric cars. That technology is out of our hands, in any case. Other than these two primary sources of NZ emissions, agriculture and transport, which are both set to continue regardless of who's in power - there is not a whole lot more to talk about in terms of NZ's influence on global warming. Given so, what is the Green Party's plan? To talk endlessly about how to cut NZ's electricity-generation emissions? From 3.5% down to 2.5%? That's immaterial. When you look at it this way, what has the NZ Green Party ever achieved, apart from being career loafer politicians? As for the Green's other claimed aim - reducing poverty - its contribution in recent years has been to divert vast funds away from the poor to help fund the current budgetary allocation of $1,083,409,000 to "reduce greenhouse gas emissions". That is the single biggest item of "environment protection" spending in NZ. The Greens have starved those in desperate immediate need, smack-bang in the midst of a cost-of-living crisis, by choking them of scarce national resources to pursue an objective that is out of our hands.
Swarbricks' Greens should've never focused on the global-warming issue. The party should instead have put its influence solely toward improving domestic environmental concerns that directly matter to us and which we can directly influence - like sewerage flowing into our harbors. Prioritizing global climate change over our own poorest & our own local issues is unconscionable. And when it comes to raising awareness of climate change, we don't need Swarbrick to do that job - the world already has Greta Thunberg, who does it better.
What's more, there's a backlash going on at present against fully electric cars. That technology is out of our hands, in any case. Other than these two primary sources of NZ emissions, agriculture and transport, which are both set to continue regardless of who's in power - there is not a whole lot more to talk about in terms of NZ's influence on global warming. Given so, what is the Green Party's plan? To talk endlessly about how to cut NZ's electricity-generation emissions? From 3.5% down to 2.5%? That's immaterial. When you look at it this way, what has the NZ Green Party ever achieved, apart from being career loafer politicians? As for the Green's other claimed aim - reducing poverty - its contribution in recent years has been to divert vast funds away from the poor to help fund the current budgetary allocation of $1,083,409,000 to "reduce greenhouse gas emissions". That is the single biggest item of "environment protection" spending in NZ. The Greens have starved those in desperate immediate need, smack-bang in the midst of a cost-of-living crisis, by choking them of scarce national resources to pursue an objective that is out of our hands.
Swarbricks' Greens should've never focused on the global-warming issue. The party should instead have put its influence solely toward improving domestic environmental concerns that directly matter to us and which we can directly influence - like sewerage flowing into our harbors. Prioritizing global climate change over our own poorest & our own local issues is unconscionable. And when it comes to raising awareness of climate change, we don't need Swarbrick to do that job - the world already has Greta Thunberg, who does it better.
Sources:
https://berl.co.nz/economic-insights/budget-2024-poses-mixed-bag-environmental-initiatives
https://pce.parliament.nz/media/tzqjimzt/estimate-of-environmental-expenditure-2023-24.pdf
https://worldofaviation.com/2024/06/air-new-zealand-to-increase-capacity-to-japan-by-30000-seats-to-boost-inbound-tourism/
https://berl.co.nz/economic-insights/budget-2024-poses-mixed-bag-environmental-initiatives
https://pce.parliament.nz/media/tzqjimzt/estimate-of-environmental-expenditure-2023-24.pdf
https://worldofaviation.com/2024/06/air-new-zealand-to-increase-capacity-to-japan-by-30000-seats-to-boost-inbound-tourism/
4 comments:
Since when have the Greens been pro-environment? Their voters are spoilt rich kids and overpaid public servants, who are used to being given everything on a plate, without having to think that other people need to work to support them. They are the Prince Harry's of the world who fly around for their overseas holidays while lecturing the rest of the world about reducing omissions. It's telling that at the last local body elections, the local authority with the highest average income was Wellington, which is a Green stronghold.
Exceptional Post . Thank you. I suggest some clarity on long haul air flights and transport on the ocean are actually not considered calculated emissions because they are in international space and not determinable by individul nations
And Greta doesn't cost us anything - well, leastwise directly.
Oh Professor, we just can’t have such rational, logical, sensible thinking being promulgated in this country. Think of the hurt feelings you have caused within the enlightened classes. If you carry on this way some people might begin to think the whole ‘climate crisis’ is just another full-bore scam.
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.