NZ opts for UN Framework not Kyoto 2

New Zealand is committing the the UN’s Convention Framework rather than signing up for stage two of the Kyoto Protocol:

The Government has decided that from 1 January 2013 New Zealand will be aligning its climate change efforts with developed and developing countries which collectively are responsible for 85% of global emissions. This includes the United States, Japan, China, India, Canada, Brazil, Russia and many other major economies, Climate Change Minister Tim Groser says.

In the transition period 2013 to 2020, developed countries have the option of signing up to a Second Commitment Period (CP2) under the Kyoto Protocol or taking their pledges under the Convention Framework. The Government has decided that New Zealand will take its next commitment under the Convention Framework.

“I want to emphasise that NZ stands 100% behind its existing Kyoto Protocol Commitment.  We are on track to achieving our target – indeed we are forecasting a projected surplus of 23.1 million tonnes. Furthermore, we will remain full members of the Kyoto Protocol. There is no question of withdrawing. The issue was always different: where would we take our next commitment – under the Kyoto Protocol or under the Convention with the large majority of economies? We have decided that it is New Zealand’s best interests to do the latter.

“It is our intention to apply the broad Kyoto Framework of rules to our next commitment. This will ensure that at least New Zealand has started a process of carrying forward the structure created under the Kyoto Framework into the broader Convention Framework.  This had been a point of principle of some importance to many developing countries. It would also mean that there would be no changes in domestic policy settings which had been modelled on the Kyoto Protocol rules.” . .

. . . The next decision will be to set a formal target for NZ’s future emissions track through to 2020 to sit alongside our conditional offer to reduce emissions between minus 10% and minus 20% below 1990 levels. “Cabinet has agreed in principle to set that target once we know exactly what the final rules will be on some crucial technical issues, including access to international carbon markets.”

The opposition and others of a dark green persuasion are saying the government has done the as a result of which the sky will fall and the sea will rise.
They’d prefer we stuff  our economy to make token gestures which will have little if any impact on the environment.
Our emissions are so small on a global scale we could kill all our animals and people and the resulting decrease in emissions would barely register.
That could be used as an excuse to do nothing but instead we’re aligning our efforts with those of most of our trading partners – except Australia.
P.S. I note one of those doing as we are is Canada, do I remember correctly that it pulled out of its first Kyoto commitment?

18 Responses to NZ opts for UN Framework not Kyoto 2

  1. robertguyton says:



  2. robertguyton says:

    “This is a day of shame for New Zealand, our reputation as a good international citizen has taken a massive hit. To pull out of Kyoto the same day that Australia committed is humiliating. Australia’s position used to be essential to Government policy when it suited National. But now that Australia is tackling the critical issue of climate change, National is silent. National doesn’t take climate change seriously. It has gutted the emissions trading scheme and has now withdrawn from Kyoto commitments.”

    Mackey’s expanded version sums up the situation accurately.


  3. Viv says:

    Canada’s exploitation of the tar sands has made that country one of the worlds worst polluters. “we could kill all our animals and people and the resulting decrease in emissions would barely register” – for goodness sake, can you not talk about climate change without using such hyperbole! As for the argument that we are so small it doesn’t matter what we do, every group of people on the planet can say that, each individual coal fired power station in India, each individual town in the USA, each individual company clearing Amazonian rain forest, each individual SUV driver….. That is not a decent reason for not trying to take effective action to deal with CO2 emissions from fossil fuel use which are causing climate change and ocean acidification.


  4. homepaddock says:

    Can either or both of you compare/contrast the requirements and affects of signing up to Kyoto 2 and the UN Framework?


  5. inventory2 says:

    Sensible, pragmatic politics by the Government, but that does not go far enough for this blogger who fails to see the need for an ETS at all:

    And the hyperbole expressed by Moana Mackey and Kennedy Graham shows why both are list MP’s, without the support of an electorate.


  6. robertguyton says:

    Ele – I niggle you reasonably light-heartedly about your chosen party’s behaviour on a number of issues, but on this issue, I’m disgusted by your position.

    Inventory2 is link-whoring.


  7. Andrei says:

    I thought New Zealand was supposed to be a secular country.

    So why are we being subservient to this post Christian, pagan ,green religion?


  8. homepaddock says:

    I asked you a question to help me understand the reason for your view. You haven’t answered it.

    I2 is welcome to leave links, as is anyone else if it’s relevant, if I remember correctly you sometimes do.


  9. inventory2 says:

    Faux outrage about link-whoring Robert; from the Clown Prince of link-whoring. There’s a word that describes your do-as-I-say-not-as-I-do attitude; I think it starts with H but it’s slipped my mind…


  10. The UNFCCC is the name of the organisation to the Kyoto Protocol is attached. There is not actual agreement for an alternative to the second commitment period. I’m afraid National really is trying to do noting on climate. Avoiding a legally set target and gutting the ETS to remove the price signal.


  11. robertguyton says:

    Slipped your mind, Inventory2?
    You are suffering the same disease Banks and Key, your heroic Dynamic Duo, increasingly suffer.
    A change of ideology would help, but you’re unable to do that, so like Banks and Key, you are doomed to suffer a slipped mind til the end of your days.

    David Winter again brings clarity and fact to the discussion.


  12. inventory2 says:

    It was the holiday in the islands Robert; had to do something to enlarge my carbon footprint 😛

    But that word has come back to me; hypocrisy


  13. jabba says:

    The only place you can’t call the Gweens hypocrites is in Parliament I2 .. Our bOb is the king in the hypocrisy world. I think he has the hots for John Banks


  14. inventory2 says:

    Ah yes, Moana Mackey: defeated by Anne Tolley in the last three elections. It’s not hard to see why.


  15. bulaman says:

    The hockum that carbon is our enemy is easily debunked.
    Number 1 green house gas (over 96 percent of the GH effect) is H2O.
    Area under irrigation 1955 121 million ha
    Area under irrigation 1983 213 million ha
    Area under irrigation 2003 277 million ha.
    Pumping water into the atmosphere to feed ourselves easily accounts for increase in temp.
    Carbon is our enemy because evil oil has money and redistribution of money is what this is all about!
    If we were honest and said we want to put a charge on mineral carbon to restrict its use and level the field for renewable alternatives then I might listen.
    The trading system we have is doomed and the sooner the $1.22 billion we spend each year finds its way into planting trees (by direct investment ) the better.


  16. Viv says:

    As I understand it, the Kyoto Protocol has penalties for not reaching targets while the UN framework does not. I personally am not concerned which is used, rather the important thing is that CO2 emissions are actually reduced and don’t continue to increase.

    Your comment about killing all animals and people having little effect on the global situation implies that you do not think what New Zealand does to reduce emissions is important and previous posts where you have promoted exploitation of fossil fuels suggests to me that you do not think reducing CO2 emissions matters, please correct me if this is not so.

    It is clear that some commenters on your blog do not accept global warming as reality, I do not have the time to argue with them about that. No one with any understanding of chemistry however can deny the reality of ocean acidification, a proportion of CO2 emissions are dissolved in the ocean and the ocean has become 30% more acidic in the last 200 years and is set to become more so unless urgent, significant changes are made to reduce fossil fuel use. This matters because of the adverse effect it has on all marine life with either skeletons or shells.

    Your “Saturday smiles” supposed joke about Greens not having their eyes open is not funny because it is the right wingers who are ignoring the evidence of the damage ‘business as usual’ is causing to our planet. In the long run it will seriously damage all the world’s economies, I expect that is when you will notice.


  17. Hey Bulaman,

    Not so much – water vapour makes up more like 50% of the GH effect (exact numbers aren’t actually possible to calculate). But humans don’t (directly) change that – when there is lots of water in the atmosphere it rains, on the other hand the net effect of our C)2 emissions will last for thousands of years.

    We do chance the amount of CO2, which can in turn increase the effect of water vapour on our climate. Our additional CO2, which heats the atmosphere, will allow the atmosphere to hold on to more water vapour, which in turn will further heat the atmosphere (this the so called “climate feedback” certain bloggers wish to claim is unknowable, but can be reasonably estimated from historical data).


  18. robertguyton says:

    Come back to you, I2?
    In the same way what Key said about Beckham ‘came back to him’ and he knew he didn’t say batshit?
    His memory and yours clearly cannot be trusted.
    And Banks’ memory is a joke at which the country still laughs.
    And scoffs.
    It’s the defining meme of this John Key/John Banks Government – the inability to recall. I can hardly blame you for claiming to have forgotten a simple thing like a word, your being a devoted apologist for the Government an all. It’s rubbed off on you.


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: