I'm a greeny and think that the ETS is a crock of faeces

[MisterD]

Only problem is the modern business model doesn't work that way because the small number of players mean everyone is basically doing exactly the same thing.

Which is why I used the word "theoretically".

What we need is an environment that supports innovation, entrepreneurialism and vision, and for us to use our legendary Kiwi ingenuity to develop technological advances that can produce energy and products in a low carbon manner. What we have is a "business as usual" model.

There's lots of good work going on in ag research in this area...except that the greenies are throwing their hands up about the fact that it may require genetic engineering. Ya can't have it both f-ing ways...

Questions I'd like to see Key and Smith answer:
1) What investment exposure do you have to carbon credits / carbon trading companies?
2) What campaign donations have you received from companies involved in carbon trading?

Key obviously has a background in currency trading and had lots of contacts in that "world"...

[davereid]

I was unaware that 20 year old trees stopped converting 'bad air' to 'good air'

I never quite worked out how a forest is supposed to be a carbon sink. Unless you cut it down and make houses out of it anyway !

The tree grows, using photosynthesis and carbon dioxide as its raw materials.
Then it stops growing, dies and crashes to the forest floor, where it releases all of its carbon dioxide.

That sort of makes it about as useful in the carbon sequestering business as my pet rock, which over it's life-cycle captures the same amount of carbon as my dead-and-rotted tree.

Except I would still have my rock, and I would have no carbon credits.

[bogan]

I never quite worked out how a forest is supposed to be a carbon sink. Unless you cut it down and make houses out of it anyway !

The tree grows, using photosynthesis and carbon dioxide as its raw materials.
Then it stops growing, dies and crashes to the forest floor, where it releases all of its carbon dioxide.

That sort of makes it about as useful in the carbon sequestering business as my pet rock, which over it's life-cycle captures the same amount of carbon as my dead-and-rotted tree.

Except I would still have my rock, and I would have no carbon credits.

it doesn't release carbon dioxide as it dies, as the co2 get converted to sugar and other compounds during photosynthesis.

[sinned]

fucking aye!

does the ETS directly affect farmers, ie does a tree earn them x$ and a cow cost them y$

I found some shit about planting trees on thier site

which is weird, cos I was unaware that 20 year old trees stopped converting 'bad air' to 'good air'

If the 20 year old tree is fully grown it has absorbed all the carbon it is going to. Burn it, cut it up etc it releases the carbon.

I never quite worked out how a forest is supposed to be a carbon sink. Unless you cut it down and make houses out of it anyway !

The tree grows, using photosynthesis and carbon dioxide as its raw materials.
Then it stops growing, dies and crashes to the forest floor, where it releases all of its carbon dioxide.

That sort of makes it about as useful in the carbon sequestering business as my pet rock, which over it's life-cycle captures the same amount of carbon as my dead-and-rotted tree.

Except I would still have my rock, and I would have no carbon credits.

And therein lies why national park native forests don't count - they are in a state of growth and decay that balances out; unless you burn them down then the carbon is released.

If you have a better option than the ETS let Nick know.

[davereid]

it doesn't release carbon dioxide as it dies, as the co2 get converted to sugar and other compounds during photosynthesis.

Hmm...I have a still at home.

I deliberately rot sugars (carbohydrates).

I get carbon dioxide, and alcohol as my result.

[bogan]

If the 20 year old tree is fully grown it has absorbed all the carbon it is going to. Burn it, cut it up etc it releases the carbon.

That makes sense, would have thought the period was longer than 20 years though. Still, having that carbon tied up in trees is better than not having the trees as it would then be in the air.

[phill-k]

We have a little bit of land up north, have planted about 150 trees so far the first 17.89 trees take care of our footprint, happy to "sell" anyone who gives a "shit" any number of tree credits - 1 tree equals 16.47 (gst receipt available) plus an on going 5.38 per annum, if you buy 3 you can feel free to do what you want and we will guarantee that you will be protected from any of the effects of climate warming. Please note the above figures assume you don't ride more than437km a week and your bike is less than 987cc. Please fee free to pm if you want a tree or three, 3 monthly photos will be forwarded of your tree by email.

[slofox]

Hmm...I have a still at home.

I deliberately rot sugars (carbohydrates).

I get carbon dioxide, and alcohol as my result.

I got one of dem as well.

Rotting the sugars doesn't release ALL of the carbon though. The alcomohol still cacrries some - two atoms per molecule.. By drinking that alcomohol all up, you are STORING THE CARBON IN YOUR BODY and acting as a living carbon sink. Ergo, they oughta be paying us to drink more booze...or at least giving us carbon credits...

Tell THAT to Snick Miff

[rainman]

We're kind of heading from democracy to feudalism, only this time our lords and masters are global multinationals.

Sadly, too true.

What we need is an environment that supports innovation, entrepreneurialism and vision, and for us to use our legendary Kiwi ingenuity to develop technological advances that can produce energy and products in a low carbon manner.

Government cannot give you this. (They could help, but this lot won't). The only option is to "do it yerself mate" as the Mitre 10 kids say.

go search NASA website and burried deep within (enough to hide it but not enough to say it was hidden) all the planets are warming up at the same increased rate as Earth... hmmm but they can't tax you on that because how did we effect Mars???

Linky please or I call bullshit um I mean denier mythology.

That sort of makes it about as useful in the carbon sequestering business as my pet rock, which over it's life-cycle captures the same amount of carbon as my dead-and-rotted tree.

Do you have a permit for that long-term thinking?

That makes sense, would have thought the period was longer than 20 years though. Still, having that carbon tied up in trees is better than not having the trees as it would then be in the air.

Over 20 years, sure, the storage effect is all good. Long-term, the problem won't be solved with more trees - and I'm a greenie and like trees (and also think this ETS is crap) - the problem will be solved with less "civilisation". Unfortunate, but true.

Ergo, they oughta be paying us to drink more booze...or at least giving us carbon credits...

A philosophy that I would vote for!

[Woodman]

Someone needs to start blowing the big polluters up. Waste of time doing it legally. The ets is a crock of shit.

[ukusa]

emissions trading scam. another example of where average Joe Public is hugely against it (ah la Bradfords smacking bill, 85% against from memory), but the govt push the fucking thing through anyway...wankers. Problem is, there's no one else worth voting for.
Personally, I've yet to meet a person who thinks it's a good idea!

[Winston001]

I am unashamedly a greeny.....

Any emissions trading scheme is based on the idea that if I pollute, all I need to do is purchase credits from someone who doesn't pollute and put my prices up to cover my increased costs.

Yep but I can't see why it won't work. Money is a powerful persuader - just consider the threads on here about the cost of gear, bikes, workshops etc. Some posters seem to be having apoplexy at times particularly on the ACC topic. And what are they on about....???

MONEY.

So we cannot pretend that putting prices up won't matter. If a ream of paper from a low-carbon supplier is cheaper than from a high-carbon supplier, guess which one will sell best? Heck good old wool and cotton might make a comeback against the oil fabrics - nylon, polyprop etc.

The rational business decision is to reduce the carbon consumption so you don't need to buy credits.

[Jonathan]

Yep but I can't see why it won't work. Money is a powerful persuader - just consider the threads on here about the cost of gear, bikes, workshops etc. Some posters seem to be having apoplexy at times particularly on the ACC topic. And what are they on about....???

MONEY.

So we cannot pretend that putting prices up won't matter. If a ream of paper from a low-carbon supplier is cheaper than from a high-carbon supplier, guess which one will sell best? Heck good old wool and cotton might make a comeback against the oil fabrics - nylon, polyprop etc.

The rational business decision is to reduce the carbon consumption so you don't need to buy credits.

I am with you on this one. Businesses are amoral, money is the only language they speak. ETS is simple - you get money for activities that reduce carbon; you save money by reducing activities that emit carbon. What can be wrong with that?

It may not solve the issue of climate change, but it is a step in the right direction.

[Usarka]

I am unashamedly a greeny (I love riding in this beautiful country too much to be anything else), but I think the shiny new ETS scheme Our Masters have decided to bless us with is not a good thing for the environment or the ordinary people of NZ.

You ride a machine running on fossil fuels for fun? You're about as green as an arse biscuit thats fallen behind the damp sink along with the zit puss and pube bleach.

[oldrider]

These MMP governments just keep raising our taxes by calling them all sorts of imaginative names but soon the last straw will be reached!
History tells us that sooner or later the peasants revolt!.............cant be too far away from breaking point with this lot, surely! Viva la revolution! Nick for a start!