Tuesday, January 29, 2008

Some champion!




So Dear Leader has won an award from the United Nations as a "Champion of the Earth."
Some champion!
As David Farrar noted recently , New Zealand's carbon emission record under Clark is worse than that of the US, which did not sign Kyoto.
I'm sure Kiwiblog might remind us of those figures again.
Dear Leader might talk the talk, but can she walk the walk? Do we want her to?
Maybe, I have just read that New Zealand's dams are emptying because of the hot summer so the lights may be out in New Zealand by the time I return in 2 weeks.
Detailed analysis of government energy policy a few months back warned that in a few years from now, brown outs and other power cuts may be commonplace. New Zealand just won't have the capacity to keep the lights on.
And pictured above is Dear Leader's support for biofuels.
You remember those biofuels, the ones that the front page of the NZ Herald reported would cause kiwi cars to explode. The biofuels that need so much land to grow that orang utang habitat is being cleared in Indonesia to grow the palm oil used to make such biofuels.
The Midnight Sun last week noted a European Union Report, that was featured in the respected Spiegal newspaper, that producing biofuels was taking land used for food production so food prices will rise and people will starve.
And of course, as I have also covered on this blog, the making of such biofuels also produces as much greenhouse gases in their production as traditional diesel, so biofuels are not greener emissionswise anyway.
So if you believe Dear Leader is a Champion of the Earth, you truly are green, but only in the sense of naive and stupid, which i guess sums up the United Nations anyway.
Still, by fitting with their line of thinking, it shows Dear Leader may well make it to the UN after all!

2 comments:

Mrs Danvers said...

Do you think Clark really cares about 'climate change'. It's all about perception with her and her lefty mates. She's got her eye on a cushy job with the U.N. when she gets turfed out on her arse later this year.

Mr Dennis said...

What is promoted as good for the environment and what actually is are two different things, as you have alluded to.

What is promoted is:
- Hybrid cars (take so much energy to produce they are much worse than normal cars, and don't get much better economy anyway).
- Biofuels (destroying rainforests and not reducing emissions anyway).
- Renewable electricity (yes, this one is good) and closing coal fired plants (destroying security of supply and causing blackouts).

What is actually good:
- Old cars. Even if spewing a little smoke. At least you don't have all the environmental damage needed to create a brand new one.
- Economical diesel cars. As economical as hybrids and more eco-friendly to produce.
- Keeping the coal fired power stations and using the electricity to run electric public transport and rechargeable electric cars and scooters. Coal fired power stations are much more efficient than petrol engines.

But as no-one can make much money off old cars, and coal is a dirty word at the moment, we hardly seem likely to get any sensible policies that actually help the environment and save money any time soon. Environmental policy should be decided by a coalition of scientists, not politicians.