NZ aims for global alliance on ag emissions

Remember when non-smoking regulations first came in?

Half a room would be reserved for smokers and the other half for non-smokers.

It was a nonsense because even if smokers stuck to their side of the room their smoke didn’t.

Trying to tackle carbon emissions in some countries but not others is similarly stupid. If there’s a problem with emissions it’s a global one and reduction policies and remedies must take a global approach.

John Key recognises this and is using his time in New York to promote a Global Alliance on agricultural emissions.

“To feed the world’s growing population, we must find ways to produce more food without growing emissions,” says Mr Key.

“It will be agriculture that will have to meet the expected dramatic increase in global food demand over the coming decades, but this presents the world with the twin challenge of ensuring food security while reducing emissions.

“To meet this challenge, there is an urgent need for more international research and investment into new technologies and practices to help reduce agriculture-related emissions, and for greater co-ordination of existing efforts.

“New Zealand considers a Global Alliance on agricultural greenhouse gas mitigation research could meet this need and welcomes partners in this initiative.

Former Environment Minister Simon Upton has been appointed as a special envoy to work with other countries on this concept.

Agriculture Minister David Carter says New Zealand is well placed to make a significant contribution to the alliance.

“Our unique profile for a developed country, with almost half of all emissions coming from agriculture, has given us a firm foothold in understanding pastoral livestock emissions.

“Through a Global Alliance, we can find solutions faster, make better use of the money that is being spent around the world and encourage other countries and companies to do more,” says Mr Carter.

Associate Minister for Climate Change Issues Tim Groser said that food security is paramount and must not be compromised.

7 Responses to NZ aims for global alliance on ag emissions

  1. Paul Tremewan says:

    I certainly remember the stupidity of the non-smoking and smoking sections in public places. We likened it to being akin to having a non-urinating and a urinating section in a swimming pool….!


  2. Andrei says:

    There is only one way to reduce human caused “emissions”
    and that is to reduce people – how did this nonsense get a foothold, we are in full scale retreat from all those things that have improved the quality of human existence beyond the comprehension of our ancestors.

    I guess people who have never known real discomfort and insecurity fail to comprehend that our technology is the source of it all and if they destroy it life will go back to being brutish and short.


  3. Red Rosa says:

    Surely this is not the Fart Tax revisited?

    Federated Farmers will be rioting in the streets. Lambton Quay will look like Castle St.

    No, I suspect yet again farmers will sidestep any cost and the good old taxpayer will stump up, as with the ETS. Go Feds!


  4. homepaddock says:

    Andrei – research might help increase food production.

    Rosa, there’s a difference between taxing a by-product of food production for which there’s no known solution and research to find a solution.


  5. murrayg1 says:

    Andrei is spot-on. There is no way you can feed the people on the planet now, and we have every indicator going backwards – desertification,aquifer depletion, erosion, salinity,PH,water quality and water competition.
    On top of that, we are at full-noise energy-wise. Three billion more ain’t going to happen, and it is false to use that as a reason to procrastinate over actually doing something about reducing carbon output.
    If by some miracle you achieved it – and it would be a temporary fling – they would just breed more, and you’re in the same percentages but with worse arithmetic.
    Reaserch does diddly-squat, apart from buying time.


  6. Andrei says:

    Andrei – research might help increase food production.

    It might – then again it might not, and since the target of this research is to “reduce emissions” rather than increasing food production for a given area of land the “might not” seems the more probable outcome.

    In reality “carbon emissions” are an inevitable output from all living processes, including those of plants. Plants do however bind carbon in the process of photosynthesis so their net output while living is negative.

    The whole thing about punishing agriculture for emissions is just a crock – a way for big government to get its sticky fingers into an essential human activity.

    We are close to creating a tax on breathing here.


  7. murrayg1 says:

    No, more likely the air will be privatised, bottled and sold. Oxygen supplements will be available to the poor, upon application.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: