Scoop has an Ethical Paywall
Licence needed for work use Learn More

Gordon Campbell | Parliament TV | Parliament Today | News Video | Crime | Employers | Housing | Immigration | Legal | Local Govt. | Maori | Welfare | Unions | Youth | Search

 

The Real Cost Of Greenhouse Target

ENVIRONMENT AND CONSERVATION ORGANISATIONS of NZ Inc.

Wellington – Monday 10 August 2009

The Real Cost Of Greenhouse Target

Government Greenhouse target relies on misleading presentation of costs: New Zealanders will still be better off

The government is misleading people into thinking that they will be $30 on average worse off than they now with the greenhouse gas target when in fact they will still be much better off said the Environment and Conservation Organisations of NZ

The Infometrics and NZIER study of the costs of greenhouse gas emissions reductions was not always clear on the cost reference in the Executive Summary, but on Friday Adolf Stroombergen, in presenting the study at Victoria University made it very clear.

ECO Spokesperson, Cath Wallace said, what they really found is that in 2025, we will on average in New Zealand be $16,000 better off than we are now with emissions reduction; and $18,000 better off than now without – in the unlikely event that the rest of the world lets us getting away with shirking.

“Dr Smith is making people think they will be worse off in future if we take action on climate change, and that is not true.  We will be markedly better off, either way, even with a price of carbon of $100 and a variety of assumptions run through a model.”

Adolf Stroombergen, in presenting his paper, gave the following figures for average Gross Disposable National Income:

“2009: $38,500 per capita

            2025: $56,000 per capita

            2025: ≈$54,000 per capita with $100/tonne CO2.”

Advertisement - scroll to continue reading

“The models that Infometrics and NZIER used, have a number of flaws, incorporated no costs of climate change or of retaliatory action by other countries if New Zealand shirks its duty to cut emissions.”


“The 10-20% emissions reduction that Dr Smith and the government is well short of the UK binding emissions reduction target of 33%, and much less than the 25%-40% commitments made by developed countries in Bali.”

“Dr Smith is misleading people into thinking they will be $30 week worse off than they are now when in fact they will be very much better off.”

ends
 
 

© Scoop Media

Advertisement - scroll to continue reading
 
 
 
Parliament Headlines | Politics Headlines | Regional Headlines

 
 
 
 
 
 
 

LATEST HEADLINES

  • PARLIAMENT
  • POLITICS
  • REGIONAL
 
 

Featured News Channels


 
 
 
 

Join Our Free Newsletter

Subscribe to Scoop’s 'The Catch Up' our free weekly newsletter sent to your inbox every Monday with stories from across our network.