Of course you could also post photos of a quiet paddy field in the vast Chinese countryside vs some factory in an industrial part of any NZ city, but don't let that get in the way of a good story.
Sean, I agree that there are vast stretches of countryside in China, in spite of the 1.3 billion Chinese people living there. It would look most photogenic.
I think I concur with Andrei's point though. The photogenic NZ farm land is what we are being castigated, and financially penalised for and the amount of industrial pollution we generate is quite small.
On the other hand, it is no surprise that China is now the world's largest polluter and yet, there are no financial penalties for them as yet.
The point seems valid to me.
I guess for the future we could also look to India, as they will soon be the most populous country.
Hah! That's funny. Seems to also point out that a methane tax cannot be far away after the carbon tax settles in.
That is, if China ever sign on to paying a tax.
Which is perhaps another pertinent point.
Since the first seed was sown, farming practices have been improved. This article highlights that - and it was all discovered without a need to tax methane directly.
Methane is already part of Kyoto and our ETS and will be part of any future agreements too.
Since the first seed was sown, farming practices have been improved. This article highlights that - and it was all discovered without a need to tax methane directly.
Sure, and I wish the ideologues behind the organic movement would realise that obvious fact. But why will farmers take up methane reducing measures if there is no incentive?
Please be respectful. Foul language and personal attacks may get your comment deleted without warning. Contact us if your comment doesn't appear - the spam filter may have grabbed it.
Amount China pay under Kyoto Stage 1: NIL (Exempt)
ReplyDeleteContribution to pollution: World's largest polluter.
Amount NZ Pay: $Huge
Contribution to pollution: negligible
Of course you could also post photos of a quiet paddy field in the vast Chinese countryside vs some factory in an industrial part of any NZ city, but don't let that get in the way of a good story.
ReplyDeleteNobody is claiming that rice paddys = pollution Sean.
ReplyDeleteThey are however claiming that Dairy Farming does and that it is in fact New Zealand's biggest planet wrecking activity.
Dairy farmers to be penalized accordingly.
Actually its even weirder than that, the taxpayer is going have to pay the pollution penalty initially.
Sean, I agree that there are vast stretches of countryside in China, in spite of the 1.3 billion Chinese people living there. It would look most photogenic.
ReplyDeleteI think I concur with Andrei's point though. The photogenic NZ farm land is what we are being castigated, and financially penalised for and the amount of industrial pollution we generate is quite small.
On the other hand, it is no surprise that China is now the world's largest polluter and yet, there are no financial penalties for them as yet.
The point seems valid to me.
I guess for the future we could also look to India, as they will soon be the most populous country.
Nobody is claiming that rice paddys = pollution
ReplyDeleteAs ever, so well informed
Hah! That's funny. Seems to also point out that a methane tax cannot be far away after the carbon tax settles in.
ReplyDeleteThat is, if China ever sign on to paying a tax.
Which is perhaps another pertinent point.
Since the first seed was sown, farming practices have been improved. This article highlights that - and it was all discovered without a need to tax methane directly.
Methane is already part of Kyoto and our ETS and will be part of any future agreements too.
ReplyDeleteSince the first seed was sown, farming practices have been improved. This article highlights that - and it was all discovered without a need to tax methane directly.
Sure, and I wish the ideologues behind the organic movement would realise that obvious fact. But why will farmers take up methane reducing measures if there is no incentive?
ZT - I was more critiquing the emotional imagery, but the message is obvious. I don't disagree with the subsequent points made by yourself and Andrei.
ReplyDeleteAnd don't forget Andrei, they'll only go after the poor farmers in NZ, they won't really go after their commie brethren in China.
ReplyDelete