Visit the full NBR website

NZ, Australia part company as NZ abandons Kyoto Protocol

(BusinessDesk) New Zealand is abandoning its pursuit of a second Commitment Period under the Kyoto Protocol governing global action on climate change, plumping instead for a competing initiative that involves the major emitters seen as crucial to any new global deal: the US and China.

The move, announced by International Climate Change Negotiations Minister Tim Groser, came just hours after Australia - previously slow to the party on the first Kyoto commitment period - pledged to support the Kyoto 2 process.

The reversal in trans-Tasman positions comes as Australia seeks to implement an emissions trading scheme from 2015 which could, in theory, mesh with New Zealand's, and in the same week as Wellington pushed through controversial legislation watering down the local ETS indefinitely.

Groser said "New Zealand "will be aligning its climate change efforts with developed and developing economies which collectively are responsible for 85 percent of global emissions", including the US, Japan, China, India, Canada, Brazil and Russia.

The decision caused immediate dismay among environmental lobbyists, with Greenpeace saying New Zealand was turning its back on Kyoto "to join an infamous club of the world's dirtiest economies and most belligerent climate wreckers" by deciding to take its next commitment under the United Nations Framework Commitment on climate change.

The decision follows Barack Obama's re-election US president this week. Obama lifted activists' hopes by referring to tackling climate change in his acceptance speech, which came days after Hurricane Sandy devastated swathes of the heavily populated north-eastern US seaboard, igniting US public debate about climate change action.

However, the US has never signed up to the Kyoto Protocol and is pursuing climate change initiatives under the UN Framework Convention.

Groser indicated the government would continue to adhere to the international obligations it has signed up to under the First Commitment Period of the Kyoto Protocol, which runs from 2008 to the end of this year. New Zealand expects to report a small surplus of 23.1 million tonnes of carbon, but faces a massive increase in carbon liabilities later this decade when plantation forestry is due for harvest.

It was also New Zealand's "intention to apply the broad Kyoto Framework of rules to out next commitment," said Groser. Such an approach is understood to be essential if New Zealand is to keep access to various special rules it has fought hard to win in Kyoto negotiations, including the right to count carbon sequestered in timber against carbon reduction targets.

The move puts New Zealand on a different path from two of the only other parts of the world with ETS-style carbon schemes. The European Union and Australia are committed to the second commitment period negotiations under the Kyoto Protocol.

Groser acknowledged the difference, saying "Australia currently has a different set of domestic policies in place, at least until 2015, when the fixed priced regime is intended to be replaced by an ETS."

New Zealand would continue to work closely with Australia.

The government remained on track to formally commit to cut New Zealand's future emissions to between 10 per cent and 20 percent below 1990 emissions levels, "once we know exactly what the final rules will be on some crucial technical issues."


More by Pattrick Smellie

Comments and questions

Well done Groser. Kyoto was batsh*t crazy

Keep focused on growing boys. Soon we ll be just like japan and the uk on these little islands of ours. Dirty, overcrowded and dangerous. Dont be scared of change fellas. Burying your heads in the sand wont help as the sea comes in. The ice is melting quicker than your dripping tap act.

Talking of drips . . .

Two main problems facing New Zealand is the farming industry which dominates most of our country, farmers have ripped out thousands of acres of trees to clear ways for large irrigators and replaced them with cows, What if for every cow a farmer had he had to plant a tree as well to help offset the carbon balance,
The second problem is the power companies, ordinary New Zealanders cant afford to heat their houses with electricity alone, a lot of homes are not insulated and do not have double glazing and unlike the main cities the wages do not allow people the luxury of not needing a log fire.
The government tried to offer discounts on insulation for a lot of homes but even with the discounts where do they think the average wage person will get the money to afford the rest and there were a lot of contractors marking up prices and making a killing with the deals.
People sitting in offices should get out once in a while and see what happens in the real parts of the country where all the produce and goods you see nicely packaged in your shops come from.
More and more home grown businesses in NZ are suffering because the end user demands more profit and if the guy producing it wont cut his price then they source overseas, one day the big bubble is going to burst and then what ?

To make it worse, the rest of the population have to cut down their emissions to make up for the greenhouse gas emissions from the farming sector. Even though more than half of the electricity produced comes from hydro power, ETS resulted in the price of electricity to hike up by 3%, with no decrease in usage (what did that achieve?). No only, that, it drove people to log fire heating, resulting in actual increase in emissions. NZ also don't have a problem exporting coal to China.. but hey, as long as the carbon is generated outside NZ, who cares right ?

Where would he plant these trees? All his land is full of cows.

he could plant his trees around the boundaries of his farm, there has to be a balance in nature or we wont have a plannet to worry about, already there are larger residues detected in the underground water from farming effluent, NZ use to be the clean green country but not any more,

Carbon credits are not allocated for this type of planting : another good reason to stay right away from the Kyoto mess.

Well done, about bl%#^dy time. The end to a ridiculous scheme.

Firstly there has to be a Kyoto 2 to sign. Since Copenhagen there have been alot of talkfests but there has been absolutely no sign of any agreement getting any where the table.
So if there is no agreement to sign, it is all "smoke and mirrors"
Having said that , well done to Groser and the Government for taking the stand they have.

Delighted to see Kyoto go the way of the dodo. Its was all and still is a big delusional scam for troughers and idiots looking for a cause. The only downside to this latest development is we still have the greatest evil organisation being the crooked and hypocritical UN involved. Aaargh !

Some common sense at last - Good on you, ACT. The dripping tap is starting to work.

It is not true that there is only the NZ ETS and the EU ETS. There are many more. California has its first auction of allowances next week for its ETS starting next year. China has pilot ETS in 7 provinces,one of which has a population greater than Germany. South Africa, Korea, India,Chile, Brasil are all moving to an ETS or a carbon tax. These are just a few of the schemes around the world under development to put a price on carbon to reduce emissions. Australia has made phenomenal progress with its carbon tax including creation of jobs and a reduction in the consumer price index for goods that were predicted to rise. Australia will link with the EU ETS three years after it brings the Australian ETS on line. This is a remarkable achievement. Yesterday, senior Australian government officials made it absolutely clear that they could not link with the New Zealand ETS because it has no cap an it has structural deficiencies that would disrupt the Australian scheme. Major trading partners for New Zealand are moving to either an ETS or a carbon tax and that changes the trading environment. Australia has cottoned on to how important that is for their exports. I sincerely hope that the New Zealand government knows what it is doing. Is this an informed decision?

"Is this an informed decision?"
Of course it is and dosn't go far enough. The country is broke and NZ can hardly absorb a bunch of delusional eco religious nutbars trying to rort every layer of our society. Its all about the money. Climate changes...get over it.

Thank goodness the Govt has seen the light at last and has the guts to abandon this rediculous scam.
Let's hope they stick to their decision.
Keep Chief Wizard Smith away from JK!

Thank you so much Groser! I love your work!!!!

Groser may have done a long overdue good deed on this matter, but is sorely bereft of an effective answer to the recent $25 carbon scvandal that has been brewing. All Groser did was put a bunch of officials on the case to find out what was going on and were companies profiting excessively as accused and lo as expected of any government official determined to paper over the cracks, they came back and said the info was commercially sensitive. In other words the companies told the government to take a hike. Fairfax News has an interesting commentary on the subject and I hope NBR can get closer to the truth.

Carbon prices collapsed because the scientific case for AGW or DACC collapsed, it being based entirely on models which made basic errors in the physics. We now all can see that the Emperor has no clothes.
That's a good thing.

Clean Green NZ. Yeah Right!! More like Greenwash.

Why dont you get off your moral high house? Do you drive a car? Do you use electricity? Do you eat lamb/beef? Do you breathe? All these emit greenhouse gas.

Put the money where your mouth is. Stop breathing and drop dead. You'll save 328.5kg of CO2 a year (not including the methane in yr fart of course)

What is the use of banning smoking ciggarettes, but continuing to emit green house gasses

GHGs hurt nobody. Smoking is a drain on the publicly funded health system.

We live in the time of the merchant. Producers and craftsmen go and re train for your new lower wage jobs. The Merchants make all the margins now and ETS just gets in their way. The entire National Govt consists of merchants, what other result would you expect than to abandon anything that might affect profit.

Good on you Tim Groser. We only ever signed up to Kyoto in the first place because Helen C. was already planning her job at the U.N.. So she travelled wherever she needed to in orer to ensure that position. While the tax payers paid. but that is what Kyoto was all about for N.Z. One power tripper buying a position of priviledge with possibly no accountability. What's a little old signature mean anyway. If you are sure this is so great look at what the carbon credits a selling for now-as compared to last year. Lots of people wising up, huh ?
FYI-it is not generally farmers ripping out thousands of hectares of trees to develop dairy farms. Usually it is corporate owners seeing an opportunity to make money-for shareholders, to access Fonterra and, as an added benefit,, provide jobs for Kiwis who have a work ethic. Now-such people are becoming a scarcity. Sad. We know a young couple who have worked hard and are now worth over $1m. Mid twenties, no family money, just guts and fortitude, stickability and positive attitudes The big corps are supplying opportunities for other young Kiwis to do the same. It's a pity about the p.c. education and the "it is my right" etc., etc.. How many of you have the attitude to grab one of these chances? Not many, judging by the pathetic,whingy comments.--most of which have had a complete honesty bypass. Losers-that's what a several of you are. Hate success. Hate working hard too??

If the young couple you refer to made their fortune in the last ten years or so , then they have done so at a time when animal welfare was very poor in the dairy industry , and environmental restrictions were virtually non-existent. Conditions for dairy farm workers weren't so flash either ; or maybe your couple exploited the short-stay Filipino dairy workers.
The point is that working your way up from the bottom will never be so easy again ; it may not be possible at all as sharemilking positions become harder to find.

In reply to the "prophet", who would scare us into negative population growth if he could. Do yourself a favour and Google search on Malthusian theory. It's so old, but still holds true today. Just because time has moved on doesn't mean the science has moved on that much. The main motivation for those so called scientists promoting these scare stories is for funding. Without climate change funding, more than half would be out of jobs. So it's not surprising that they tweak their models all the time, fudge results, hide data which doesn't "work" for them, and keep up a torrent of new scare stories. But just like the price of carbon credits, their whole misadventure will collapse around them. Thank heavens NZ is not following into more Kyoto, and we can also be sure that when Gillard goes, so will the Australian carbon tax. Stock up with carbon enhanced champagne now. Prophet enjoys his doomsday scenaria, but he can't figure out why nature puts in 150 carbon equivalent units versus man's 5 units every year. The original lies about dangerous man made runaway climate change are now conveniently buried in a generic "climate change" which everyone knows has been going on since climate was measured by man. It has had cycles of much higher temperatures without man, and has also had ice ages, none of which can be influence by mankind. The laws of physics can't explain that today, even after billions of Dollars of taxpayers funding. But it does keep a whole new form of bureaucrats in jobs, that's why they won't be giving up yet.

According to Malthusian theory of population, population increases in a geometrical ratio, whereas food supply increases in an arithmetic ratio.
This disharmony would lead to widespread poverty and starvation, which would only be checked by natural occurrences such as disease, high infant mortality, famine, war or MORAL RESTRAINT. His main contribution is in the agricultural sector. According to this theory there are two steps to control the population: preventative and positive checks. Preventative means control in birth rate, and uses of different methods to control birth; and positive checks means natural calamities, war, etc.

His theory was WRONG because Malthus only considered two factors when he established his basic graph: food supply and population growth. Other factors such as improvements in technology proved him wrong. He was right at his time but development made him wrong. If it wasn't for outside influences on population growth and food supply, his mathematical reasoning which proved his theory and was right.

Farmer Brown - bet you're not :)
The conditions of which you speak would occurr, collectively or otherwise, on a very small number of farms. There are bad people working in every industry you can name. To imply that farmers would deliberately ill-treat their animals is puerile. That would hardly optimise income. Also, there is always a good employer waiting for a good employee. Farmers do not ill-treat good workers - they are too valuable to the business.Once again, there are bad employers in every industry. And there are bad employees who rip you off big time. In all industries. Just as there will always by envy and untruths featuring in this type of forum. Farmer Brown (not) you are a perfect example!!

« Back to home page