- Nick Smith

Chris Huhne, the Energy and Climate Change Secretary, said the “knife-edge” talks in Mexico are in danger of becoming a “car crash” if countries cannot compromise.

continues Huhne

Next year ministers will not bother to come, they will send senior civil servants, then they will not bother to come they will send junior civil servants. What we will end up with is a conference which is a zombie conference where there is nobody at a senior enough level to make decisions.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/environment/climatechange/8193712/David-Cameron-called-upon-to-stop-climate-change-talks-becoming-a-zombie-conference.html

If Chris Huhne is off this planet, then where is Nick Smith? Another universe?

I’m not.

The only signing Smith and Groser need to do is the Hotel Register.

10:48 AM Friday Dec 10, 2010 – NZH

Climate talks in Mexico won’t reach an agreement but significant progress is being made on core issues, Climate Change Minister Nick Smith says.

New issues around fresh water and fossil fuel subsidies, the latter dialogue led by International Climate Change Negotiations Minister Tim Groser, are also now part of the mix at the United Nations talks in Cancun.

The goal of the talks is a new 190-nation deal to replace the 1997 Kyoto Protocol, which obliges almost 40 developed nations to cut greenhouse gas emissions by at least 5.2 per cent below 1990 levels by 2008-2012.

Last year’s talks in Copenhagen made little progress. The major dispute is that developed countries want emerging economies to also commit to emissions cuts, while developing countries, led by China, insist the developed world must first deliver results.

“There will not be a final agreement but there will be significant progress around many of the core issues,” Dr Smith said this morning.

He was hopeful that a binding treaty could follow on from the talks. New Zealand will sign up to emission reduction commitments but only if other developed countries make similar pledges and if forestry rules are acceptable.

“The talks are in a very constructive mode and recovering from the train wreck of Copenhagen. We are making good progress on some of the issues that are important to New Zealand particularly around the issue of forestry.

“Those rules are just so important for New Zealand and recognising the carbon that is stored in wood products makes a very significant difference and provides some real opportunities for New Zealand.”

The Government wants to be able to lock up emissions where wood is harvested but used in products such as for buildings or furniture – rather than have it count as being consumed and its emissions released on felling. It is seeking rules to allow forests planted pre-1990 to be harvested and re-planted in other parts of the country.

New Zealand also supports a Brazil proposal for a “reference level” on forestry for trees planted before 1990. The issue, Dr Smith said, was in New Zealand trees were planted sporadically over the years In some years many trees are ready to be harvested but whole decades go by when there is little felling. That impacted massively on how New Zealand’s emissions added up.

“The age profile of those pre-1990 trees that are already in the ground has periods where New Zealand’s emissions are up 30 per cent on existing rules and others where it is down 30 per cent on existing emissions simply because of the age spread of those pre-1990 trees.”

The Brazil proposal would acknowledge that pattern and plot them into the future.

“We’re going to call that the reference level and your emissions will be recorded (in the new agreement) by the degree that they vary from that reference level.

“You can then judge New Zealand on genuine emissions reduction and not these large variations that flow from the different age class of our pre-1990 forests.”

Green Party co-leader Russel Norman yesterday said withholding commitments to specific emissions reduction target without changes to forestry rules was a “shockingly irresponsible act”.

“The Government seems to be saying it will only commit to emissions reductions if forestry accounting rules make it possible to cheat.”

Dr Norman said New Zealand would be able to increase emissions by getting weak forestry rules.

Dr Smith said it was Dr Norman who was being “reckless and irresponsible”.

“There is no way in which New Zealand can make a commitment to reduce emissions by 10 or 20 per cent or whatever number you choose when rules over how you deal with those forests can completely swamp by as much as 30 per cent where those rules are finally agreed.”

- NZPA

I restrained myself from pointing out to the MAF contact that from the outside, all we can see is MAF officers on travel junkets (Banff, Canada – nice) with no accountability. I’ll give it some time, but questions are begging.

Re the CH4 plots.

The Ministry for the Environment has the audacity to display the CO2 and CH4 plots on their website. The important thing is not the strong intra-annual methane cycles (Mauna Loa shows the same for CO2), but that CH4 has plateaued (it’s not a problem) and CO2 is not correlated to temperature (it’s not a problem either).

http://www.mfe.govt.nz/environmental-reporting/atmosphere/greenhouse-gases/atmospheric-levels.html

From CO2 Science:-

“we feel confident in suggesting that if the recent pause in CH4 increase is indeed temporary, it will likely be followed by a decrease in CH4 concentration, since that would be the next logical step in the observed progression from significant, to much smaller to no yearly CH4 increase.”

“So what has been responsible for the recent dramatic slowdown — and possible ultimate cessation — of the post-Little Ice Age upward trend in the air’s CH4 concentration? We believe that some significant portion of the welcome development can be attributed to the cumulative effect of a number of indirect impacts of the concomitant increase in the air’s CO2 concentration, as described in several of our Subject Index Summaries”

See Subject Index Summaries links on source page.

“Other phenomena are undoubtedly helping to reduce the air’s methane concentration as well; and it will be exciting to see, in the days and years ahead, if their combined influence will actually lead to a sustained downward trend in the concentration of this important greenhouse gas. Such a result would be like having one’s cake and eating it too; for it would enable the planet to reap the great biological benefits that come from atmospheric CO2 enrichment without creating a significant net increase in the atmosphere’s greenhouse effect.”

http://www.co2science.org/subject/m/summaries/methaneatmos.php

Clearly, methane is now not a problem and the govt should not allocate anymore funding to research it or to sponsor travel to exotic locations for MAF officers.

But if they’re just researching animal nutrition – fine, just stop the travel junkets.

The same can be said for CO2.

I’m putting similar comments at Pastural Farming http://www.farmcarbon.co.nz/

But haven’t provoked a response yet – maybe over the weekend, but it’s a quiet site (worth a look though)..

Is this due to the effects of warmth or sunlight? I am not sure.

We clearly have an issue to deal with here, because NZ seems to have manufactured a problem (CH4) that no one else is even considering a this stage.

http://business.scoop.co.nz/2010/12/09/nick-smith-nzs-national-statement-to-cop-16/

“That is why in Copenhagen we launched the Global Research Alliance on Agricultural Greenhouse Gases and why we welcome the 29 countries who have joined us.”

Except MAF (Alliance Secretariat) won’t divulge the research allocations and spending so far – “a matter for domestic processes at the moment” apparently, so we don’t know where the $45m pledged at COP15 is going.

And now that CH4 levels have plateaued, methane emissions are no longer an issue worth considering.

Baring Head CH4

http://indymedia.org.au/files/Baring_Head_records_atmospheric_methane.png

NZ Ministry for the Environment (NIWA – Baring Head CO2 CH4)

http://www.mfe.govt.nz/environmental-reporting/atmosphere/greenhouse-gases/atmospheric-levels.html

Global tropospheric methane

http://www.co2science.org/subject/m/summaries/methaneatmos.php

Carbon dioxide levels are no longer in lockstep with temperature so CO2 isn’t a problem either.

So there’s no need to extend the Kyoto Protocol Nick Smith.
—————————————————————————————————————————–
And I’m posting it everywhere I can – every commentable post at NZ Herald, Pastural Farming and here for starters.

I’ll put it up where ever else there’s the chance it will get read, so any tips as to a topical blog post or news article Andy? Anyone?

What we don’t see is a definition of “wealthy country”

If indebtedness and the ability to repay is taken into account, the list of wealthy nations would look entirely different to what’s generally accepted – USA would be at the bottom.

Those billions also make “Exxon gave $10m to the sceptics” look pathetically moronic.

If the UN and WWF can be cut out of the loop – fine, otherwise:-

NO REDD, NO REDD, NO REDD………..

That is why we have refocused our Overseas Development Aid programme on the Pacific and are investing in a number of climate change-related projects such as cyclone-resistant buildings in the Cook Islands, upgraded jetties in Vanuatu and solar power support for Tonga.”

“refocused” ?

As long as it’s just the normal Overseas Development Aid budget – no problem.

They can even call it “climate change-related” for all I care.

Just keep the UN out of the loop and fulfill NZ’s Pacific obligations.

http://nigguraths.wordpress.com/2010/12/09/nepstad-redd-architect/

We should remember that Nepstad, cited in the article, was the scientist at the heart of the Amazongate affair, the dubious science that underpins the WWFs claims to the Amazon.

WWF have stitched up about $60 billion in carbon credits by promising not to cut down the Amazon, so they are very keen indeed to see the REDD scheme go ahead.

Booker’s article on this is here:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/columnists/christopherbooker/7488629/WWF-hopes-to-find-60-billion-growing-on-trees.html

Our “leaders” are stitching up one of the biggest scams on the planet, at our expense.