NationStates Jolt Archive

Prime Minister Helen Clark unveiled an ambitious plan Thursday to halve transport greenhouse gas emissions by 2040 and generate 90 percent of New Zealand's electricity supply from non-carbon renewable resources by 2025.

Releasing the national "Energy Strategy to 2050," Clark said New Zealand "is uniquely positioned to achieve greater sustainability in the energy sector ... a huge strategic advantage to us."

Transport emissions will be cut by using biofuels, buying more diesel and hybrid vehicles and being one of the first nations to widely use electric-powered vehicles, the strategy said.

[...] Unless New Zealand changes its energy policies, energy-related greenhouse gas emissions are projected to rise by 39 percent by 2030 — with 40 percent of the increase coming from transport emissions, the strategy warns.

[...] In February, Clark set the ambitious goal of New Zealand becoming the world's first greenhouse gas-neutral state, pledged big emission cuts by the government and set compulsory targets for biofuel use as initial steps.

She likened the threat of climate change to a nuclear holocaust during the Cold War, and said New Zealand must lead the way to combat it.

Energy Minister David Parker said that wind and geothermal generation are the keys to helping New Zealand switch future electricity production away from fossil fuels used in coal and gas electricity plants.

Already 65 percent of the nation's electricity is generated from renewable resources, mainly hydroelectric plants, and he said there should be no need to build more fossil fuel generation for at least a decade.

Parker said power companies already are responding to the government's plans by deferring development of new coal- and gas-powered generation.

Green Party co-leader and government spokeswoman on energy efficiency, Jeanette Fitzsimons, said a new energy efficiency and conservation strategy will see an initial 180,000 houses provided with low-cost insulation, heating upgrades and solar hot water systems.

Businesses also would receive grants to use more efficient machinery and manage greenhouse gas emissions.

[...] "Energy efficiency is by far the most effective way of reducing climate change gas emissions and making fuel supplies more secure," Fitzsimons said.


(link (http://www.iht.com/articles/ap/2007/10/11/asia/AS-GEN-New-Zealand-Energy.php))

Good on you, NZ!

Seems New Zealand has tried to show the rest of the world the way to follow since it became the first country to give women the right to vote back in 1893. Once again, if you can pull this off, bravo!

This country becomes more awesome the more I hear about it.

I hate to point out the blatantly obvious, but it's easy to do this kind of thing when you're sitting on a faultline (Tends to allow for easy access to geothermal energy) and have plenty of mountains to help you utilising the potential energy of water. Nevermind sitting right in the middle of an ocean (Wind). It's rather like being willing to quit using your car to get to work because hell - your workplace is next door, anyway.

Also,

She likened the threat of climate change to a nuclear holocaust during the Cold WarThat's fucking retarded.

I hate to point out the blatantly obvious, but it's easy to do this kind of thing when you're sitting on a faultline (Tends to allow for easy access to geothermal energy) and have plenty of mountains to help you utilising the potential energy of water. Nevermind sitting right in the middle of an ocean (Wind). It's rather like being willing to quit using your car to get to work because hell - your workplace is next door, anyway.

And your point is?

That NZ is showing fuck-all to the rest of the world, since it's merely taking advantage of the resources it has easily available in the first place, a luxury only a rather small number of countries has. As such, it's not even remotely impressive, and it sure as hell isn't showing anyone the way to follow, since the NZ case is, for the aforementioned reasons, not applicable to, erm, most of the rest of the world, the wishful thinking of the OP, untainted by reality as it is, nonwithstanding.

There. Spelled it out for you.

That NZ is showing fuck-all to the rest of the world, since it's merely taking advantage of the resources it has easily available in the first place, a luxury only a rather small number of countries has. As such, it's not even remotely impressive, and it sure as hell isn't showing anyone the way to follow, since the NZ case is, for the aforementioned reasons, not applicable to, erm, most of the rest of the world, the wishful thinking of the OP, untainted by reality as it is, nonwithstanding.

There. Spelled it out for you.

Seems you missed the point. By actually giving a shit about the environment, the NZ government is showing that it can be done without ruining the country and challenging other governments to give a shit about the environment too. They might not be able to do anything as easily as NZ, but that's no reason not to try.

... Are you implying that no other government in the world tries to cut down CO2 emissions (We'll disregard considerably larger problems in the past, concerning considerably nastier emissions, waste products & consumer products), and that NZ is totally the first country to do so?

Allow me to laugh for a second.

*Laughs*

There, done.

Are you suggesting that all governments in the world are trying to cut down CO2 emmissions?

If not, then there are clearly countries than need convincing that it can and should be done.

Seems New Zealand has tried to show the rest of the world the way to follow[...]Emphasis(es/ii?) mine.

Suggests a) NZ is the first, b) NZ is the only and c) This is obviously what I'm referring to (Or rather, denying).

You clearly don't like to read the commentary on posted linked articles, or why exactly did you miss this bit...?

Nevermind that as mentioned before, it's probably a bit difficult to convince countries in less fortunate geographic positions than NZ to follow in NZ's footsteps when they simply can't. But that's probably going to go right over your head. Again.

Tell that to our (UK) government. Their policy on the envrionment the best example of 1) spin and 2) lip service that I know, unless allowing and supporting the building of new coal-fired power plants suddenly defies the laws of chemistry. While, of course, EDF and e.on like to boast about the new wind farms that they're building.

Setting targets is all well and good, but unless you have a real plan to meet them, what the hell is the point?

Emphasis(es/ii?) mine.

Suggests a) NZ is the first, b) NZ is the only and c) This is obviously what I'm referring to (Or rather, denying).
Seems New Zealand has tried to show the rest of the world the way to follow since it became the first country to give women the right to vote back in 1893.
Context is a wonderful thing. Or did you miss the rest of that sentence?

Nevermind that as mentioned before, it's probably a bit difficult to convince countries in less fortunate geographic positions than NZ to follow in NZ's footsteps when they simply can't. But that's probably going to go right over your head. Again.

Oh no, I understand that other countries can't take the exact same steps as NZ. What you don't seem to understand is that this fact is irrelevant.

Seems New Zealand has tried to show the rest of the world the way to follow since it became the first country to give women the right to vote back in 1893. Once again, if you can pull this off, bravo!


Transport emissions will be cut by using biofuels, buying more diesel and hybrid vehicles and being one of the first nations to widely use electric-powered vehicles, the strategy said.

Doesn't look too impressive overall.

Diesel? Great way to improve environment... not! (try living 24 hours in Milan and you'll discover what PM10 and PM2.5 mean)

One of the first nations to widely use electric vehicles? Electrical vehicles already run in all the world... ever heard of trams, trains, trolleybuses, battery-operated buses...

Meh. I think that the most environment-friendly country on Earth is France. More than 75% of its electricity is generated by nuclear fission - hence, no CO2.

Seems you missed the point. By actually giving a shit about the environment, the NZ government is showing that it can be done without ruining the country and challenging other governments to give a shit about the environment too. They might not be able to do anything as easily as NZ, but that's no reason not to try.

I'd have to disagree with you. DA has raised a valid point. NZ is merely taking advantage of its resources that other countries don't have. It's a lot easier for them to do so, and downright impossible for others to follow, as you implied that they should.

It would be like asking Saudi Arabia to turn into an agricultural powerhouse.

I'd have to disagree with you. DA has raised a valid point. NZ is merely taking advantage of its resources that other countries don't have. It's a lot easier for them to do so, and downright impossible for others to follow, as you implied that they should.

It would be like asking Saudi Arabia to turn into an agricultural powerhouse.

It's impossible for them to follow the exact steps that NZ took, it is not impossible for them to take other steps towards being environmentally friendly.

It's impossible for them to follow the exact steps that NZ took, it is not impossible for them to take other steps towards being environmentally friendly.

And many of them were already taking such steps before NZ. Congratulate them on their new proposals but to say they are leading the way is a bit strange