The so called carbon zero bill is to be reported back to Parliament after being in select committee on 21 October.
James Shaw has said that the coalition support for the bill has been wrapped up, which indicates NZ First will support it, although it may be they have negotiated some changes particularly around methane targets.
National is still not saying what it will do. Shaw wants National to support it so may lower methane targets to get that support.
So farmers have a chance to play National against NZ First to get significant changes to the methane targets. National will want to get the credit for reducing the methane targets but if farmers can convince NZ First to reduce the targets then National will have to push for even lower targets to get any credit.
It is hard to imagine, given the overwhelming support for lower targets by informed submitters, including the Parliamentary Commissioner for the Environment, that NZ First will want to incur the wrath of regional NZ by supporting a bill which is so unsupported in science and so open to ridicule.
To try and get NZ First to call for lower targets we wrote to all NZ First MPs telling them of our concerns about the methane targets and asking them to submit to us the reasons they support them. If I get any responses I will publish them on the website.
The more farmers who raise these concerns with NZ First MPs the better. To email then the format is first name dot second name like this email@example.com
NZ First MPs are listed on parliament website. It would not hurt to put pressure on National as well. Make sure they stay staunch.
These are the concerns we listed.
The 2030 methane target is not conditional whereas there is no CO2 2030 target at all and any CO2 targets set by the Climate Commission will be conditional. Why do you think that is fair?
The 2050 target likewise is not conditional whereas the 2050 CO2 target of zero is. Why do you think that is fair?
The 2030 target relies on NZ capping production because all the analysis done indicates it can only be achieved if that happens. We see this as immoral given a growing world population and that it will also increase global emissions given the fact that we can produce meat and dairy products with lower emissions, so by us producing less of the global demand, global emissions increase.
The 2050 targets in your bill are based on the IPCC SR15 model pathways which explicitly says
From the Special Report SR15
These pathways illustrate relative global differences in mitigation strategies, but do not represent central estimates, national strategies, and do not indicate requirements.
What’s even more damning is that the same model suggested pathway targets for nitrous oxide of between -26% to +39%, yet in your Carbon Zero Bill you have a target of -100%.
Not only is there no justification for using these targets in the first place but then to use them for methane but not nitrous oxide demonstrates as you have in the bill how disingenuous the targets are.
Pastural Farming Climate Research believes these targets are indefensible and we and all NZ farmers and regional NZ will be watching to see which political parties and MP’s support them, but in the interest of open mindedness, we do invite you to justify your support for these methane targets.