Well if you question the idea of problematic anthropogenic global warming today, you look like a radical, or worse...a conspiracy theorist. The conversation on the gross politicisation of the climate issue, and the true controversies relating to it, have been muted by the media to the point where even the 'independent' intellectual classes are afraid of being seen to questioning it. So, the alarmists have won. It's going to be all about reducing CO2 emissions from here on in, greater truths be damned be what they may.
But that is not what worries me. Steadily coming away from our diet of CO2 can be painless enough. What worries me is CO2 mitigation being used as an excuse for governments to do other things. And indeed, in New Zealand it's being used as an excuse for government to do nearly whatever it wants.
To start, I will point out that the best way to mitigate CO2 output is to create some form of broad taxation, so people and business can find the best way to cut back on CO2 emissions within their own situation. This strategy is efficient and naturally gives us the highest CO2 reduction for the least cost, as people make the best types of mitigation investments that apply to them.
Right now, the most efficient way for New Zealand to reduce net emissions (generally) is to pay poorer countries to plant trees for them, to offset New Zealand's output. That's good for both New Zealand and the poorer countries, and leaves you with a greener earth as a bonus. Tree planting does the exact same thing as shifting from petrol to electric cars, only it's far cheaper so you can do more of it if you wish, and rapidly meet your emissions targets. This is what would happen if we simply used an international taxation mechanism, such as the existing emissions-trading scheme.
However, using a simple taxation system comes with a single giant "problem". Once the tax system is installed you can no longer use CO2 mitigation as a tool (I mean, excuse) to force other 'desired' changes, because with appropriate taxation mechanisms the CO2 problem essentially takes care of itself.
And this is where it gets interesting. New Zealand has bizarrely declared that it will not work with other nations to mitigate CO2. So we won't be outsourcing tree planting. This move makes no sense whatsoever, unless reducing CO2 emissions is really about achieving goals that have nothing to do with CO2 emissions as such.
New Zealand has very recently created the new role of "Climate Change Minister". The climate minster will be given the power to approve or disapprove any given prospective development based on his or her SUBJECTIVE interpretation of the merit of the proposed development, in terms of mitigating CO2.
Make no mistake this is serious. The legal infrastructure is being installed to give any government of the day the power to directly control the developmental form of the New Zealand economy. And it can do so because the CO2 game does not begin and end with straight taxation, like it should.
The effect, in practice? Ideology and low-level thinking will drive decision making.
For a pertinent example: I have developed a commonsense idea for efficient (and CO2-friendly) property development, showing how we can build 'botanic suburbs' for people who want them (see here)...
Okay. So what if the climate minster (who will be taking orders from their party...or god knows who) doesn't like my idea because it's sprawl, and he or she believes that all sprawl is bad sprawl, and so believes we should be building our cities up, only, and not out?...
Well they can (and will) throw out the plans for my proposition, and throw out all my CO2-reducing calculations relating to it, and simply state with all the authority they need: "We do not believe that Andrew Atkin's botanic developments will appropriately assist in our CO2-mitigation objectives". End of conversation - no accountability to facts required.
-Note: The result in the case of government quietly outlawing sprawl (no matter its form) will be never-ending housing unaffordability because going up instead of out (alone) is extremely expensive. Appreciate also that it enforces boxed-in living, minimal greenery, concentrated noise, and no backyard except for the rich.
My example is only one. We are indeed in for a great economic transformation as our political class keeps telling us, though it will be a transformation by government dictate. It will happen because our current government has turned a questionable purpose, CO2 mitigation, into a dangerous power grab.
Note also there was a major uproar when this change toward an all-powerful climate minister was announced in New Zealand. Lucky for the Labour party, the covid-19 show became a distraction allowing them to win another term, regardless. They can now install their agenda - we voted for it (apparently).
We're entering very interesting times. And now, we can add another dynamic to the CO2 mechanism as a mega-driver for top-down social change - Covid-19. The pandemic (as it's called) has become a second great tool enabling our government to do pretty much whatever it wants. You can bet that Jacinda and her mob won't let this good crises go to waste, as well.
-Andrew Atkin
Great article by the New Zealand Initiative.
ReplyDeletehttps://www.nzinitiative.org.nz/reports-and-media/opinion/the-climate-change-commission-should-do-what-works/
A good statement from the ACT party:
ReplyDeleteACT Alone opposed the Zero Carbon Act. When it was debated in Parliament David Seymour said it was “pernicious, because it introduces a level of central control over economic decision-making that this country has not seen since 1984.”
“The powers that are put in the hands of Cabinet and of a Minister, under this bill, take us back to a place that New Zealand has not been for 35 years,” Seymour continued, “and that is when we were under the Economic Stabilisation Act, where a Minister or Cabinet could actually make economic decisions about not just what the general rules of the game are but how much and at what price people could trade in different sectors.”
And so, it has come to pass. Yesterday’s release of a draft annual report makes the Polish Shipyard version of New Zealand look like a free market paradise. The report recommends that Government ban petrol cars, gas heating and gas cookers. Ban coal from industry, reduce the number of farm animals by 15 per cent, and make people live in higher density housing (but also build it from wood because cement production is very energy intensive).
For every stick there will also be a carrot, with the Commission urging the Government not only to ban some things but engineer new habits. For example the Commission recommends that the Government take steps to “increase the circularity of resources in Aotearoa.” The bonanza for make work schemes is only just beginning.
Perhaps worst of all, the various interventions won’t actually reduce emissions. So long as there are a certain number of credits for emissions each year, people will emit them one way or another. The Government banning one technology or subsidising another simply frees up credits for emissions in another way. It’s nuts.
Just to be clear about that last point. None of this actually reduces emissions. The Zero Carbon Act is simply a huge bureaucratisation of New Zealanders reaching their emission reduction targets under the Emissions Trading Scheme cap.
The National Party voted for this legislation, along with the Greens, Labour and New Zealand First. Business New Zealand is saying (to paraphrase) that they don’t think it’s a bad idea and look forward to working on it. Practically the whole country is blithely accepting a descent into central planning. An exaggeration? The Commission is quite clear when it says some industries will have to close, people will work in others.
What’s more, it imports economic isolationism from overseas. If other countries enjoy cheaper carbon credits, can New Zealanders buy them? No. (ACT’s amendments to the legislation back in November 2019 would have allowed this but every other party voted against these amendments). Allowing international credits would have been a safety valve against New Zealanders paying more to emit carbon than our foreign competitors, but the Zero Carbon Act is not about efficiency, it is about vanity.
The public (you) now have until March 14 to make submissions on the draft plan, and the Commission will take two weeks to consider your views before issuing a final report. After that, the law requires the Government to take action within eight months to either follow its recommendations of come up with its own equivalent plan.
There’s got to be a better way. Actually, it’s already in place. If the Government wants to reduce the net amount of CO2 and equivalent greenhouse gases emitted by New Zealanders, it need only say. It could set a number and leave the rest to individual choices. The only rules would be, if you emit you must buy a permit, and if you do something that absorbs CO2 equivalents, then you can get a credit.
Continued from ACT...
ReplyDeleteThat’s what the Emissions Trading Scheme already does. New Zealanders could reduce overall emissions based entirely on individual decisions. It would be a free enterprise approach instead of state control. Some people might choose to keep cooking with gas inside (it’s not clear if barbecues are banned or if restaurants will have to cook with electricity). Others might buy a large vehicle for a large family or for out on the farm. Of course, they’d have to pay more for emissions permits, but they would be free to choose.
That is the sensible alternative. Accept that the developed world had decided to decarbonise and will expect, through trade and other mechanisms, that New Zealand do the same. Then set about achieving it without paying more than the rest of the world (by being able to buy the same international credits) or enlarging one of the greatest problems we already have, dictatorship by bureaucracy (by using the market mechanism of price).
We believe that this will be one of the most important political battles of the year. ACT’s position has not changed since 2019. We recognised the central control, bureaucracy and waste for what it was back then. We always know where true north lies while other parties spin hopelessly. It appears ACT will have to fight this battle alone. We hope you are up for this challenge.