Chris Hipkins and Christopher Luxon believe recycling and owning electric cars will take Aotearoa to net zero. Environmental historian Catherine Knight advocates economics of sufficiency instead
The structure of the debate was terrible there was no room for thoightful replies as you would be aware before he became pm Chris Hipkins used to often cycle the 30 km into parliament. I dont think you are doing the country any service by painting him on the same page as Luxon. For a start Hipkins is fully aware if the importance of the GDY fund where you know that Luxon opposes that on the spurious grounds of being against corporate welfare.
Thanks Sarah. It was surprising then that Hipkins and the cabinet went out of its way at the end of last year to ignore the Climate Commission on the ETS settings, which crashed the carbon price and wrecked all the auctions this year. Then, Hipkins had his bonfire of the climate policies that downgraded the size of the subsidies for electric vehicles and killed off the biofuels measure. Hard to see Hipkins and Labour as that different to National. Both are in thrall to Ford Ranger Man.
I assume you have read Transpower’s Whakamana i Te Mauri Hiko – Empowering our Energy Future which covers very clearly and in laymen terms what we have to do to teduce our energy emissions. People like Megan Woods and Chris Hipkins inderstand all that
Thanks Sarah. Yep. Which makes it so much more surprising that Woods and Hipkins have done nothing to force the gentailers to invest or resolved the Tiwai situation to give certainty to generators, or reformed the retail electricity market to foster competition, or provided anything like the subsidies for domestic and grid scale solar to make a difference. I actually doubt they're much different to each other. The Green policies are much better, but again, the Greens are just the vestigial tail on Labour, rather than the tail that wags the dog. The Greens have no leverage until they moment they get more votes than Labour.
Knight is bang on. I'd add that the mineral inputs required for the amount of EVs required to replace the majority of combustion vehicles in the world doesn't exist, it's pure fantasy land.
The Chris' are just reflecting what NZers want to hear, "growth is infinite and we can still consume all the things we want". Some strong copium for the masses.
Exactly! There's not even enough lithium in reserve to produce the first generation of EVs, not to mention the other rare earth minerals needed. As someone who comes from Western Australia, my eyes are wide open to the destruction of mining for EVs and other tech. Public transport is so urgently needed to save these incredible places and habitats that are vulnerable to the EV revolution.
There is plenty of Lithium now we are looking for it (20+ million ton deposit discovered in the US just last month) Australia has plenty (of course), needs must there is 180B tons in the oceans, and rare earth metals aren't particularly rare despite their naming convention
You are correct re the extraction consequences none the less
Yeah, I'm sure they'll be looking for and finding lithium in lots of hard to reach places and the reserves will 'grow'. The Andes mountains are technically full of copper for example. What's often misunderstood though is the time it takes to bring any new mining operation online, let alone in hard to reach places like the ocean floor (gosh could you imagine the consequences for that?, gah!) it's decades for approvals and impact assessments. And these mining operations still require fossil fuels to extract those minerals from the earth.
And yeah you're right about rare earths being common, but what's not common is a nations willingness to process them. Is NZ going to put their hand up for rare earth refining to share the environmental toxic load? I suspect not.
Those inputs aren't being used for just EVs (any green tech, advanced electronics, manufacturing equipment, advanced materials... the list goes on) Which is where the math starts to not add up. Not to mention the carbon/environmental cost on top of the decades it'll take to build the infrastructure to extract and refine required minerals.
I'm glad Catherine mentioned the concept of polycrises or meta-crisis. Unless we properly diagnose the predicament we're in, we won't seriously consider why sufficiency is so important. There's so much to gain by moving in this direction. As Richard Heinberg says, unless we grapple with this "our more likely future will consist of decades of social, economic, political, and ecological turmoil punctuated by periods of rescue and recovery." https://www.resilience.org/stories/2023-06-15/polycrisis-unraveling-simplification-or-collapse-coming-soon-to-a-planet-near-you/
Great to read! It is less about climate and more about energy. We have built a society and economy around cheap energy. It’s isn’t as cheap as we thought (climate issues) but it isn’t going to be as plentiful (supply issues). Our globalised supply chains (ships and planes) are going to get very expensive. We are going to have to walk it back.
Also worth adding that 3% growth compounding over 25ish years means we will need to burn as much energy as the last 100 years, a doubling of all consumption. The IPCC models have all kinds of tech assumptions that assume we will have started to decarbonise already (capture etc).
Also worth investigating the life span of our hydro stations 80-120 years according to an mercury dam engineer. Karapiro was built in the 40s... The clock is ticking and we don’t want to be another Libya.
All that said we live in a environmentally wealthy country, with a small population, with smart people. We could all live prosperous lives. If we could share it around a little bit more and work together a bit more it is actually doable.
The deviation between actual and perceived is a stunning example of the mentally lazy confirmation bias that results from a paternatistic political system that must promise 'good times forever' to the bratty children it has in its charge to survive. Failing some hard truth-telling by leaders and acceptance of science by all, chaotic collapse is the most likely source of the required degrowth.
Not advocating, just pointing-out the realities of 'end of (fossil fuel) empire'.
I imagine it would be a bit like living on the Starship Enterprise: you get your bedroom +small living area, all food supplied, all amenities are shared, and everyone has a role to play in sustaining the ship and/or its community.
This is a good way to put it, but how do we take some tangible steps towards it? A good starting point is universal basic services. As well as healthcare and education, ensure everyone has energy, telecommunications and public transport. No questions asked, by right for all.
I highly recommend reading some children's fiction - Bren MacDibble and Zana Fraillon co-authored Raven's Song. Set in the future, humans have resorted to living in strictly defined geographic areas with a set number of individuals per area, to be self-sustainable. Earth, our planet and only home, is referred to as 'the honoured earth'. MacDibble also authored 'The Dog Runner' (a better-written book than Raven's Song, imho) about grass crop failure wiping out mankind's food supply, and focussing on the escape of city children to family in the back country.
Can anyone enlighten me on the carbon emission footprint of the Aerospace industry, and why we would be investing in it ? My only thought is that it is seen as an escape plan for the wealthy when the earth is completely uninhabitable due to over consumption by human beings.
I seem to recall at the end of Don’t Look Up it didn’t end too well for the rich escapees from Earth. Besides even if you are loaded would you really want to end up on a space ship for years with Elon?
Thanks Andrew P, I think it is yet another human folly we cant afford, but will all pay for. I would much prefer we invest in the current problems that are blatantly evident.
The structure of the debate was terrible there was no room for thoightful replies as you would be aware before he became pm Chris Hipkins used to often cycle the 30 km into parliament. I dont think you are doing the country any service by painting him on the same page as Luxon. For a start Hipkins is fully aware if the importance of the GDY fund where you know that Luxon opposes that on the spurious grounds of being against corporate welfare.
Thanks Sarah. It was surprising then that Hipkins and the cabinet went out of its way at the end of last year to ignore the Climate Commission on the ETS settings, which crashed the carbon price and wrecked all the auctions this year. Then, Hipkins had his bonfire of the climate policies that downgraded the size of the subsidies for electric vehicles and killed off the biofuels measure. Hard to see Hipkins and Labour as that different to National. Both are in thrall to Ford Ranger Man.
I assume you have read Transpower’s Whakamana i Te Mauri Hiko – Empowering our Energy Future which covers very clearly and in laymen terms what we have to do to teduce our energy emissions. People like Megan Woods and Chris Hipkins inderstand all that
Or this roadmap, written by the Aotearoa Circle: https://static1.squarespace.com/static/62439881aa935837b9ad6ac9/t/6255fa4e9113fa3f4be32341/1649801810276/Low%2BCarbon%2BAotearoa%2BEnergy%2BRoadmap%2Bto%2B2030%2B-%2BFinal.pdf
Thanks Sarah. Yep. Which makes it so much more surprising that Woods and Hipkins have done nothing to force the gentailers to invest or resolved the Tiwai situation to give certainty to generators, or reformed the retail electricity market to foster competition, or provided anything like the subsidies for domestic and grid scale solar to make a difference. I actually doubt they're much different to each other. The Green policies are much better, but again, the Greens are just the vestigial tail on Labour, rather than the tail that wags the dog. The Greens have no leverage until they moment they get more votes than Labour.
Such a hopeful thoughts to start my day . Thankyou 😊
GDP measurements including Wellbeing .
Recent threads.. The Remakery documentary ..
Mariyn Waring's TED talk on GDP ..
Feel free to put out to the public .
Have a good day .
Thanks for linking to the paper. I wanted to know the difference between what we think is effective and what is actually effective.
Sometimes I think if we decide we need to wait for all the perfect answers before we act, we'll never start...
That is why we need DATA .. Scientists like Hannah Ritchie 👍Then good answers get good decisions ..
Knight is bang on. I'd add that the mineral inputs required for the amount of EVs required to replace the majority of combustion vehicles in the world doesn't exist, it's pure fantasy land.
The Chris' are just reflecting what NZers want to hear, "growth is infinite and we can still consume all the things we want". Some strong copium for the masses.
Exactly! There's not even enough lithium in reserve to produce the first generation of EVs, not to mention the other rare earth minerals needed. As someone who comes from Western Australia, my eyes are wide open to the destruction of mining for EVs and other tech. Public transport is so urgently needed to save these incredible places and habitats that are vulnerable to the EV revolution.
There is plenty of Lithium now we are looking for it (20+ million ton deposit discovered in the US just last month) Australia has plenty (of course), needs must there is 180B tons in the oceans, and rare earth metals aren't particularly rare despite their naming convention
You are correct re the extraction consequences none the less
Yeah, I'm sure they'll be looking for and finding lithium in lots of hard to reach places and the reserves will 'grow'. The Andes mountains are technically full of copper for example. What's often misunderstood though is the time it takes to bring any new mining operation online, let alone in hard to reach places like the ocean floor (gosh could you imagine the consequences for that?, gah!) it's decades for approvals and impact assessments. And these mining operations still require fossil fuels to extract those minerals from the earth.
And yeah you're right about rare earths being common, but what's not common is a nations willingness to process them. Is NZ going to put their hand up for rare earth refining to share the environmental toxic load? I suspect not.
Depends who is in Govt in NZ...
Those inputs aren't being used for just EVs (any green tech, advanced electronics, manufacturing equipment, advanced materials... the list goes on) Which is where the math starts to not add up. Not to mention the carbon/environmental cost on top of the decades it'll take to build the infrastructure to extract and refine required minerals.
I'm glad Catherine mentioned the concept of polycrises or meta-crisis. Unless we properly diagnose the predicament we're in, we won't seriously consider why sufficiency is so important. There's so much to gain by moving in this direction. As Richard Heinberg says, unless we grapple with this "our more likely future will consist of decades of social, economic, political, and ecological turmoil punctuated by periods of rescue and recovery." https://www.resilience.org/stories/2023-06-15/polycrisis-unraveling-simplification-or-collapse-coming-soon-to-a-planet-near-you/
Great to read! It is less about climate and more about energy. We have built a society and economy around cheap energy. It’s isn’t as cheap as we thought (climate issues) but it isn’t going to be as plentiful (supply issues). Our globalised supply chains (ships and planes) are going to get very expensive. We are going to have to walk it back.
Also worth adding that 3% growth compounding over 25ish years means we will need to burn as much energy as the last 100 years, a doubling of all consumption. The IPCC models have all kinds of tech assumptions that assume we will have started to decarbonise already (capture etc).
Also worth investigating the life span of our hydro stations 80-120 years according to an mercury dam engineer. Karapiro was built in the 40s... The clock is ticking and we don’t want to be another Libya.
All that said we live in a environmentally wealthy country, with a small population, with smart people. We could all live prosperous lives. If we could share it around a little bit more and work together a bit more it is actually doable.
Ah yep I just replied based on the text - just listened to the audio covers exactly some of my points 🤦♂️
Windstone Peters is still minimising & denying climate change
https://www.rnz.co.nz/national/programmes/morningreport/audio/2018909462/winston-peters-spreading-climate-misinformation-at-public-meetings
NZ First is just as rotten to the core as Brian Tamaki's party & other conspiracy parties.
https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/300945108/chemtrails-911-and-vaccine-nanobots-the-digital-trail-of-nz-firsts-couldbe-mps
So Luxon continues to rule out working with Te Pāti Māori
https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/political/489609/christopher-luxon-rules-out-working-with-te-pati-maori-post-election
But continues to leave the door WIDE open for NZ First?
"There is no room for climate deniers or CLIMATE MINIMALISTS in the twenty first century" ?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UiVFVnxFLZs&t=68s
Is Luxon that too two faced?
Luxon rule out NZ First " or else New Zealanders will continue to believe you stand for extremism, you stand for bigotry."
https://player.vimeo.com/video/744839611
Rule out NZ First NOW, because this time we do not have two weeks for you to make up your mind.
https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/nationals-christopher-luxon-rules-out-joining-with-brian-tamaki-led-freedoms-nz-coalition/6W6HTIJFSMT5BSMURZYC6A7XLI/
https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/political/499263/election-2023-experts-call-out-winston-peters-over-climate-change-claims
Bernard, thanks very much for the Catherine Knight article.
BTW Bernard, The Kākā's front web page is not updating with this article on it.
Can you try that again David. Many thanks for the heads up.
No audio or is that just me?
It should be in there at the top.
Yeah its there, just dont get any audio when I hit play, must be something at my end
The deviation between actual and perceived is a stunning example of the mentally lazy confirmation bias that results from a paternatistic political system that must promise 'good times forever' to the bratty children it has in its charge to survive. Failing some hard truth-telling by leaders and acceptance of science by all, chaotic collapse is the most likely source of the required degrowth.
Not advocating, just pointing-out the realities of 'end of (fossil fuel) empire'.
We need adults in the room.
Super educational. Excellent work!! #sellthecar #buythebike #sellthecar #buythebike #sellthecar #buythebike
George Monbiot uses the phrase 'private sufficiency; public luxury', i.e. the inverse of our current situation.
I imagine it would be a bit like living on the Starship Enterprise: you get your bedroom +small living area, all food supplied, all amenities are shared, and everyone has a role to play in sustaining the ship and/or its community.
The only difference is they have almost abundant clean-ish energy and replicators to create anything they desire
Hahaha, if only, right?!!!!
As long as you are not one of the red shirts that never makes it back from the away mission...
I can't read your username without doing so in the voice of Agent Smith from the Matrix!!!
The sound of inevitability...
This is a good way to put it, but how do we take some tangible steps towards it? A good starting point is universal basic services. As well as healthcare and education, ensure everyone has energy, telecommunications and public transport. No questions asked, by right for all.
Yeah. And a home of some description as well.
I highly recommend reading some children's fiction - Bren MacDibble and Zana Fraillon co-authored Raven's Song. Set in the future, humans have resorted to living in strictly defined geographic areas with a set number of individuals per area, to be self-sustainable. Earth, our planet and only home, is referred to as 'the honoured earth'. MacDibble also authored 'The Dog Runner' (a better-written book than Raven's Song, imho) about grass crop failure wiping out mankind's food supply, and focussing on the escape of city children to family in the back country.
Can anyone enlighten me on the carbon emission footprint of the Aerospace industry, and why we would be investing in it ? My only thought is that it is seen as an escape plan for the wealthy when the earth is completely uninhabitable due to over consumption by human beings.
I seem to recall at the end of Don’t Look Up it didn’t end too well for the rich escapees from Earth. Besides even if you are loaded would you really want to end up on a space ship for years with Elon?
Thanks Andrew P, I think it is yet another human folly we cant afford, but will all pay for. I would much prefer we invest in the current problems that are blatantly evident.
In the immortal words of FDOTM to billionaire space rocketeers: 'Once you're there, feel free to keep going'
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/jul/14/what-if-the-worst-people-in-the-world-said-they-all-wanted-to-go-into-space