BANKS PENINSULA: The Windflow turbine.
View of the front of the Grey Glacier where it 'calves' or falls into the glacial lake. The glaciers of Patagonia are some of the fastest retreating glaciers on Earth.
Energy strategies
The Government's Energy Strategy (NZES) and Energy Efficiency and Conservation Strategy (NZEECS) were released as part of the Government's climate policy package, the central focus of which has been the emissions trading scheme.
While the Government admits the main purpose of the emissions trading scheme is not to reduce New Zealand's emissions but to meet our international Kyoto obligations at least cost, the two energy strategies are specifically designed to make a dent in New Zealand's emissions.
Part of the energy strategies are the very commendable goals of sourcing 90% of New Zealand's electricity from renewable energy sources by 2025 and halving domestic transport emissions per capita by 2040.
But possibly the most exciting thing to come out of the day was the Government's announcement that it was going to "ask" state-owned electricity generators not to invest in new base-load fossil fuel generation for the next 10 years. Some rushed to call this a "ban", which it isn't quite, but it's still an extremely positive step in the right direction.
It is also a strong endorsement of Greenpeace's Energy Revolution report, which was released last year and concludes New Zealand can and must achieve a 100 per cent renewable electricity supply system by 2025.
We're pleased to see the Government sending a clear message to power generators that fossil fuels have no part to play in New Zealand's future. There is a "security of supply" caveat on the policy, meaning where security of supply is an issue they can okay fossil fuel projects. But we can take comfort in David Parker's statement "I actually don't think it will come to that" (in relation to needing to build more fossil fuel plants to ensure security of supply).
Other elements of the policy include:
- Considering regulatory options under the Electricity Act to limit fossil fuel facilities (i.e. extend the SOE directive to the private sector)
- Develop a national policy statement for renewable energy in 2008
- Provide greater guidance on "call-in" under the Resource Management Act (i.e. on when cases are best decided by the Environment Court rather than local consent authorities)
- Better arrangements for distributed generation and smart metering
- Clear priority to be given to public transport, walking and cycling
- Become a world leader in the deployment of electric vehicles
- 80% of vehicles to be capable of using 10% biofuel blends or to be electric powered by 2015
- 10% reduction in single occupancy vehicle trips by 2015 (probably through increased use of multiple passenger road lanes)
- More grants (for low income households) and interest free loans (for others) for insulation, energy efficiency and clean heat retrofits
- More work to improve the efficiency of appliances, including a target to get rid of 450,000 energy inefficient fridges within 20 years
So where to from here if no new fossil fuel generation? Renewables! Greenpeace has long called for a national policy statement on electricity generation. This would be designed by government and would provide guidance to local consent authorities (ie- local and regional councils) who're processing renewable energy project applications. The Government is also likely to use their "call-in" powers more frequently for difficult cases that the Environment Court is better suited to deal with. David Parker says there will still be strict guidelines to ensure that only good renewables projects are authorised. However it will mean that gaining consent for renewable projects will be a lot more achievable.
Overall, the two energy strategies are a great move. They show the Government has shifted a long way towards the Greenpeace vision of using clean energy to tackle climate change. The devil will be in the detail with a lot of the policies, but things are looking positive.
However we mustn't get complacent! The New Zealand Government is leading the pack in many ways. Yet we are still a long way off the mark. The climate issue in New Zealand is not resolved, and it won't be resolved until we bring our emissions down significantly.
Even when all of these policies (including the emissions trading scheme) are functioning, we will continue to overshoot our Kyoto target. And the Kyoto Protocol currently requires far less than the emissions reductions required to avoid dangerous levels of climate change.
We need to push the Government to a) put in place a strong domestic emissions reduction target and b) support a strong global cap during negotiations in Bali in December for the next phase of the Kyoto Protocol.
The energy strategies offer hope of some emission reductions, but not nearly enough. A domestic emissions reduction target will provide the political imperative to work hard and fast on genuine emission reductions within New Zealand. And a strong cap in the next phase of the Kyoto Protocol will provide the economic incentive to do so.
Court of appeal
In a strange coincidence, on the same day as the Government's energy strategy announcements, Greenpeace New Zealand was in the Court of Appeal fighting it out with Genesis Energy over whether the Resource Management Act requires councils to consider the effects of greenhouse gases on the climate when processing applications for non-renewable energy projects.
Genesis was trying to get a ruling overturned that we won in the High Court in our fight against Mighty River Power and Marsden B. The ruling declared that councils must take climate change into account for applications for discharge of greenhouse gases. This didn't fit so well with Genesis' plans for a new gas station at Rodney.
The timing was remarkable. Here was a state owned enterprise fighting it out with Greenpeace in court to have the only legal protection for the climate removed, on the same day in which the Government - it's main shareholder - was trying to position itself as a great climate protector.
If Genesis wins the case it will remove the only legal control on polluters' greenhouse gas emissions. In 2004, the Government removed consideration of climate change from the RMA because at the time a proposed carbon charge was expected to protect the climate. Then plans for the carbon charge were dropped.
What this taught us is that we cannot rely solely on the Government's climate policy package to protect the climate, at least until the associated legislation is in place. The Government needs to ensure continued legislative protection of the climate, and that a legal vacuum doesn't exist which would allow millions of tonnes of greenhouse gases to be emitted, as Marsden B would have done.
The outcome? Genesis said that they plan to go ahead with Rodney Gas Station unless the Government tells them in "clear and direct" terms that they shouldn't. The judge is holding off on judgment until he receives an affidavit from the Government explaining exactly what the effects of their policies are for Rodney. The judge will rule in a few weeks.
Be The Change
Be a part of the change