New Zealand

This thread is for discussion of New Zealand aspects of global warming.

Tags
Comments rss
Comments rss
Trackback
Trackback

100 Responses to “New Zealand”

« Older Comments
  1. Mike Jowsey says:
    August 30, 2011 at 6:22 pm

    Andy – you’ll love this! It’s belly-rolling-laugh-a-minute stuff. Don’t forget to read the comments.

    http://lincolnnewsmessenger.com/detail/174564.html

    “Connecting the dots – melting ice and earthquakes

    “Considering the two recent unusually large earthquakes: first in New Zealand and then in Japan, it would be helpful at this point to look at the story behind the story that has not been explored by our major media. It may not be apparent to everyone.”

    Reply
  2. Al says:
    September 2, 2011 at 3:40 pm

    I was outraged to see today that the NZ government has allocated $25million to research ways to mitigate methane production by ruminants. A lot of this money will be spent overseas.

    It would be better for our economy if they spent it on proving methane doesn’t matter, with more likelihood of success.

    See: http://platoflipbooks.co.nz/LivestockResearchGroup/August%202011/LivestockResearchGroup-AugustNewsletter2011/

    Reply
  3. A Message To The Crony Capitalists at PURE ADVANTAGE | TrueblueNZ says:
    September 21, 2011 at 6:34 pm

    [...] discussion on “Pure Advantage” at the bottom of this thread. Eco World Content From Across The Internet. Featured on EcoPressed Living Green: Chicago [...]

    Reply
  4. Richard C (NZ) says:
    October 9, 2011 at 12:26 pm

    Three marine energy projects announced

    The projects are a wave energy device at Stewart Island, a cable linking to another device at Wellington’s Moa Point and turbines at Parnell Baths in Auckland.

    Meanwhile, funding has been withdrawn for a separate tidal stream generator at Kaipara Harbour after the company involved, Crest Energy, failed to meet timelines.

    http://www.radionz.co.nz/news/political/87753/three-marine-energy-projects-announced

    Reply
  5. Richard C (NZ) says:
    October 29, 2011 at 3:35 pm

    ‘Occupy’ protesters to target Auckland banks

    Published: 4:24PM Friday October 28, 2011 Source: ONE News

    Occupy Auckland’ protesters will march on Auckland banks this weekend as part of a global day of action calling for a ‘Robin Hood’ tax.

    [...]

    The group is calling for a Financial Transaction Tax, which is says would end unemployment, stop climate change and eradicate global poverty.

    >>>>>>>>

    http://tvnz.co.nz/national-news/occupy-protesters-target-auckland-banks-4487715

    Must be magic money.

    Reply
  6. Andy says:
    November 3, 2011 at 11:52 am

    Nats hope we focus on rugby – not global warming
    Richard Boock

    http://www.stuff.co.nz/auckland/blogs/an-auckland-minute/5896001/Nats-hope-we-focus-on-rugby-not-global-warning

    Yet another load of strawmen arguments and misunderstanding from an NZ journalist

    Added my 2c in comments, awaiting moderation

    Reply
  7. Richard C (NZ) says:
    November 4, 2011 at 5:53 pm

    Is this old news to everyone else (i.e. am I the last to twig) that “Nick” is or could be lead researcher, Associate Professor Nick Wilson?

    Nick hasn’t turned up lately. It might be because he was busy on a review of Government policy and action on climate change and writing this Press Release, see:-

    “Action on climate change policy falls well short”

    http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/PO1111/S00110/action-on-climate-change-policy-falls-well-short.htm

    “climate-damaging emissions” “potentially at catastrophic levels”.is something that Nick would come up with and Mike Palin was his coach for a while.

    Oddly, the study is in the New Zealand Medical Journal: ‘End-of-term review of the New Zealand Government’s response to climate change: A public health perspective’ (by Associate Professor Nick Wilson and colleagues, Wellington) is published this week, available at http://journal.nzma.org.nz/journal/124-1345/4949/.

    But that’s behind a pay-wall.

    Apparently there’s 140 or more senior doctors and other health professionals (OraTaiao) concerned about climate change impacts on health and health services, see:-

    “Doctors say New Zealand fiddles while the world burns”

    http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/PO1111/S00117/doctors-say-new-zealand-fiddles-while-the-world-burns.htm

    As if NZ could do anything to stop the world burning – wherever that’s happening.

    Reply
    • Andy says:
      November 4, 2011 at 7:25 pm

      I hadn’t “twigged” anything about Nick.
      However, I do have a particular bee in my bonnet about those in the medical profession who decide that it is their role in life to become ambassadors for the climate change movement.

      I’m so glad you posted this Richard. Now I have some names that I can address my concerns about fuel poverty (big problem in the UK thanks to Green energy policies), deaths in Africa because of biofuel policies, etc etc

      So far, there is no tangible evidence of human suffering due to AGW. Nothing. Period. Read Roger Pielke Jnr’s “The Climate Fix” for his dissection of the lies in the WHO reports.

      Reply
  8. Richard C (NZ) says:
    December 10, 2011 at 1:09 pm

    Dredged up this article from 2006 by Cindy Baxter who is posting at [Cold] Topic from Durban:-

    Cindy Baxter: Climate of doubt

    3:08 PM Friday May 5, 2006

    The British Government’s chief scientist, Sir David King, has warned that climate change is the most serious threat facing the planet..

    In the face of overwhelming evidence that the human race is causing the climate to change, there has been a resurgence of activity of climate science scepticism.

    On Monday, the new Climate Science Coalition was launched in New Zealand. The coalition includes a member of a conservative think tank, scientists linked with the climate sceptic movement, and a former national co-ordinator of the National Party’s Blue Greens.

    Three weeks ago, a letter signed by 60 scientists, including members of the NZ Climate Science Coalition, wrote to the newly elected conservative Canadian Government, pushing for it to abandon the Kyoto Protocol. The letter was followed by another, from scientists, calling on Canada to stick with Kyoto.

    These efforts are the latest in a campaign run by vested interests to discredit climate science and to stop the Kyoto Protocol from going forward.

    But their arguments have little to do with science, and everything to do with politics and business.

    [...]

    * Cindy Baxter is the Greenpeace campaign manager and co-author of the website Exxonsecrets.org

    http://www.nzherald.co.nz/opinion/news/article.cfm?c_id=466&objectid=10380264

    I note that there were no following comments in pre-Climategate 2006 (I know I wasn’t putting my oar in then). I’m sure there would be today considering that she manages to vilify:-

    NZ Climate Science Coalition
    Frank Luntz
    Neo-conservative think tanks
    “the climate sceptic industry”
    ExxonMobil
    George C. Marshall Institute
    Global Climate Coalition
    Dr Sallie Baliunas
    Vincent Gray
    Bob Carter
    Australian Institute of Public Affairs
    Willie Soon
    American Petroleum Institute
    Chris de Freitas
    The Media (see below)

    Sainthood (by implication) is bestowed on:-

    Sir David King

    “has warned that climate change is the most serious threat facing the planet”

    Michael Mann

    “major climate scientist”

    The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change

    “identified by 17 national academies of sciences as the pre-eminent authority on climate science”

    Lord May

    “There is no danger this lobby will influence the scientists. But they don’t need to. It is the influence on the media that is so poisonous.”

    Reply
  9. John in NZ says:
    February 9, 2012 at 1:01 pm

    Not sure where to put this .

    The New Zealand Carbon Credit market seems to be in freefall.

    According to http://www.stuff.co.nz/business/6081834/Carbon-credits-pricing-crashes-and-burns

    “The price of New Zealand units (NZUs) has crashed from $22 in May to about $11 last week, stifling interest in developing carbon offsetting initiatives here, according to carbon market participants.

    The price crash has been so steep that by one calculation, if the price trend continued for another 100 days, the value of NZU credits would be zero.

    The reasons for the crash appear to be the unfettered ability of New Zealand emitters to import credits of dubious quality from overseas, coupled with the recent dumping of international credits by cash-strapped European industrial and utilities companies selling down their stockpiles of carbon to realise cash as the debt crisis worsens, participants in the fledgling carbon trading market say. ”

    BUT THIS WAS ON 5th DECEMBER.

    Prices have fallen since then. According to http://www.carbonmarketsolutions.com/

    an “indicative price” is $13.25 for 30000 NZUs.

    I assume this means for 30 tonnes. Does this mean the price is $4.42 per 10 tonne?

    Reply
  10. Richard C (NZ) says:
    February 22, 2012 at 7:53 am

    University of Auckland has had its head in the clouds

    Published: 6:15AM Wednesday February 22, 2012 Source: ONE News

    The University of Auckland has had its head in the clouds, and its conclusion is they are getting lower.

    The university looked at ten years of data from Nasa’s terra telescope to discover the average cloud height decresed by 1% over the past decade.

    The telescope showed fewer clouds were occuring at higher altitudes.

    Researchers believe a significant reduction in cloud height would lead to reducing the surface temperature of the planet and slowing global warming.

    http://tvnz.co.nz/technology-news/university-auckland-has-had-its-head-in-clouds-4736355

    Reply
  11. Andy says:
    March 20, 2012 at 7:12 pm

    WUWT reports on a claim in Nature that NZ could lose 85% of its glaciers by 2100

    http://wattsupwiththat.com/2012/03/19/the-end-for-small-glaciers-or-anthropogenic-circular-reasoning/

    Reply
    • Mike Jowsey says:
      March 21, 2012 at 9:42 am

      “They used the IPCC assumptions to model the IPCC results. “

      Justthinkin says:
      March 19, 2012 at 2:05 pm
      “using a middle-of-the-road IPCC scenario for future emissions of greenhouse gases.”

      Hummmmmm. Looks like David beat me to it!LOL But that extract right there completely destroys any credibility these guys may have had. They used a GIGO model of a GIGO model to come up with another GIGO model??? And they wonder why most people with more than two brain cells and critical thinking skills call them “cultists in the CAGW religion”? Just follow the money.

      tallbloke says:
      March 19, 2012 at 2:58 pm
      New Zealand’s mountain ranges could lose up to 85% of their glaciers by 2100 say the team.
      Was the team using Jim Salinger’s imaginary NZ temperature record?

      lmao

      Reply
      • Andy says:
        March 21, 2012 at 10:02 am

        yes I saw that comment from Tallbloke too. NZ’s reputation travels far and wide.

        PS Mike you were pretty close with your earthquake prediction, as Mexico got hit by a 7.4 today

        Reply
        • Mike Jowsey says:
          March 21, 2012 at 1:49 pm

          Hmm – yes, it falls within the broad scope of what Terral was saying, but he was specifically predicting a 9.0 or greater, probably in NZ.

          March 22, 2012 is the day our researchers expect that Earth axis will shift 5 inches with aquifers around the globe and a 9+ magnitude earthquake event that will likely be included among the top ten in Earth history. This marks the next day on the 188-Day Cycle that is part of a pattern of seismicity extending back to 1965 (Mensur Omberbashich April 11, 2012 to Cornell). Other events on the 188-day cycle took place on February 27, 2010 (Chile 8.8*), September 4, 2010 (Christchurch 7.1*), March 11, 2011 (Japan 9.0*) and September 15, 2011 (Fiji 7.3*). The Earth experienced Earth axis shifts of three inches and four inches respectively with the nearside alignments and earth aquifer shifts connected to the Chile and Japan events. The historical precedent established by this seismic event pattern says the next Earth axis shift will take place in March 22, 2012 and will be five inches or greater.

          Source: http://terral03.com/home/march-22-2012-warning

          I take it with a pinch of salt, especially from a bible-thumper like Terral03. However, it’s of interest. Ken Ring predicts 6+ quakes on 23rd & 26th. We’ll see. Take care ;)

  12. Andy says:
    April 17, 2012 at 8:24 pm

    Another NZ blog on the scene, with some interesting stuff on Windfarms and earthquake risk

    http://nzwindfarms.wordpress.com/

    Reply
  13. Mike Jowsey says:
    April 18, 2012 at 8:23 am

    It has been estimated that the ETS has cost the average family of four around $750 a year since it was introduced in 2010. The government is now planning to double that cost to around $1,500 a year over the next three years.[1] The change won’t take place in a single step, but will be phased in – increasing by a third in 2013, by another third in 2014, with the final third in 2015. At that stage the average household will be paying around $30 a week in the increased costs for power, fuel, and most other goods and services caused by the imposition of a $25 a tonne carbon charge onto our economy.

    And further on…

    It gets worse. The Minister will have power to ban imports, so as to be a quasi-monopoly supplier. Auction prices will be pushed up to $25 from the current market level of about $7 per unit. On top of all this, the obligation on energy companies will be doubled over three years. In summary, the burden on energy companies is to increase from $7 to $50 for two units. Virtually all of this 7-fold increase is a new tax.

    http://www.nzcpr.com/NewsletterArchive.htm

    Reply
  14. Andy says:
    May 2, 2012 at 9:09 am

    No go for climate change in appeals

    http://www.stuff.co.nz/business/industries/6841027/No-go-for-climate-change-in-appeals

    We can’t use “climate change” as a case for objecting to coal mining in (for example) the Denniston case.

    Gosh, do we see some common sense prevailing amongst our jurisdiction?

    Reply
« Older Comments

Leave a Reply