The greenhouse Policy Coalition have released a commissioned report that attempting to meet our Kyoto targets will both stifle GDP and create economic hardship.http://www.gpcnz.co.nz/content/files/Castalia_Greenhouse_Policy_Report_1.pdf
There were a number of factors that have still not been identified by this report.One of the main points that should be identified is the Kyoto Protocol and its technical parameters are still not fully prescribed!These are still to be finalised .
With regard to levels of allowable emmissions for each country.We understand these are to be negotiated at the COP Kyoto Montreal meeting in November.The present allowable emissions are not yet fixed.This is on the agenda for the Montreal meeting.
This brings a number of questions to how New Zealand can go forward economically under and within Kyoto and the presumed targets of carbon tax to remain within the parameters you have budgeted for.
The extent the carbon sink credits for forestry was so remiss of parameters,and the reforrestation changes that changed the coefficient of the sink equation were estimated without the guidelines that were published in March has changed the risk factors.
These that were published in March yet Canesis had already predicted this anomly in November of 2004 brings the question of accuracy and ability of any of the departments formulating policy.
The treasury in its post election update provided for the first time contingencies of cost for 300 million dollars per year,This is set at 6 $Us per ton where as the market has been trading at 21-25 Euros per ton.This takes the contingency to 1.2 Billion dollars.
This brings the following questions .
1)Are the forestry sinks now finalised.(within resource change parameters)?There is futher discussion on the COP agenda in November and furhter changes to the Marakeech discussions.
2)The carbon tax is this fixed or will it change if New Zealand emmissions levels are reduced in November?Will the government have to increase this by 400% as allowed under its contingencies?
3)Are carbon credits for projects still going to be available as we approach our 10% allowable limit or will these be phased out.
4)What are your expectations of carbon credit pricing with the possibility of Russia and the CIS countries expecting limitations of 300 Billion Dollars.
5)As Russia and the CIS are the biggest future supplier of carbon credit emmisions and have been told there are 6 possible scenarios for emission levels and carbon credits to be renegotiated at the Montreal meeting in November how can we be sure for future planning?It is to be identified that the levels are still to be ratified in November.
6)Why have there been no CDM projects for either research or technology been undertaken in NZ?
7)Why has no funding been provided for new technology testing,R&D or the introduction of new technology or efficiencies.?
There were a number of factors that have still not been identified by this report.One of the main points that should be identified is the Kyoto Protocol and its technical parameters are still not fully prescribed!These are still to be finalised .
With regard to levels of allowable emmissions for each country.We understand these are to be negotiated at the COP Kyoto Montreal meeting in November.The present allowable emissions are not yet fixed.This is on the agenda for the Montreal meeting.
This brings a number of questions to how New Zealand can go forward economically under and within Kyoto and the presumed targets of carbon tax to remain within the parameters you have budgeted for.
The extent the carbon sink credits for forestry was so remiss of parameters,and the reforrestation changes that changed the coefficient of the sink equation were estimated without the guidelines that were published in March has changed the risk factors.
These that were published in March yet Canesis had already predicted this anomly in November of 2004 brings the question of accuracy and ability of any of the departments formulating policy.
The treasury in its post election update provided for the first time contingencies of cost for 300 million dollars per year,This is set at 6 $Us per ton where as the market has been trading at 21-25 Euros per ton.This takes the contingency to 1.2 Billion dollars.
This brings the following questions .
1)Are the forestry sinks now finalised.(within resource change parameters)?There is futher discussion on the COP agenda in November and furhter changes to the Marakeech discussions.
2)The carbon tax is this fixed or will it change if New Zealand emmissions levels are reduced in November?Will the government have to increase this by 400% as allowed under its contingencies?
3)Are carbon credits for projects still going to be available as we approach our 10% allowable limit or will these be phased out.
4)What are your expectations of carbon credit pricing with the possibility of Russia and the CIS countries expecting limitations of 300 Billion Dollars.
5)As Russia and the CIS are the biggest future supplier of carbon credit emmisions and have been told there are 6 possible scenarios for emission levels and carbon credits to be renegotiated at the Montreal meeting in November how can we be sure for future planning?It is to be identified that the levels are still to be ratified in November.
6)Why have there been no CDM projects for either research or technology been undertaken in NZ?
7)Why has no funding been provided for new technology testing,R&D or the introduction of new technology or efficiencies.?
posted by maksimovich | 10:37 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home