Skip to content

Lede of the Day..

December 1, 2009

Comes readily extracted from the linked article, to say unto all who readeth thereof:—

“… the burgeoning climate change industry expects Copenhagen to open the door to more than $10tn of investment in low carbon technologies by 2030.”

Who would/could say such a thing..? Answer: the back-office boys

But then we hear about recent past/present activities such as:—

  • Electric utilities poured at least $4.2 million to 27 US lawmakers.
  • The oil and gas sector pumped $5.8 million to the group over the past 20 years.
  • Transportation companies/allies associated gave $6 million combined
  • Forestry companies and agricultural interests doled out more than $2 million.
  • And the OBVIOUS question now is which of these guys is betting each way re the TRILLIONS bonanza.? Any parties spring to mind..? No, they don’t have to be among the likes of those above.. can be but there’s no must about this.
  • Yet one does spring to mind. As, for instance, in answer to the question well why the heck did the enzed government go to all the trouble of amending and.. and.. actually gutting the existing legislation.. to dash ‘Fast-Track’-type legislation of their own. Oops, of MMP’s own according to the environment minister’s latest utterance. King of the blame game, is minnick. Blandifying as it does his particular National brand wash over corporate coalitioning interests..
  • Anyway, the deal was done, majority vote 5 in Parliament. Yet still the question why?
  • How about this for an answer. Small country. Pretty broke. Recession looks like a head on shark. But the new bossman has been corporately-skilled to recognise an opportunity when he (and his team et al) see one. At very least for himself, mates and diaried countrymen.
  • Yep, those skills include making and/or constructing a unique selling propositions(USP). Like an ‘all sectors and all the time’ ETS. That all sectors is important because if nothing else it makes for pitching carbon reduction schemes and schedules over a longer timeframe. Making room for a longer credit catch. And claims like ‘gas prices and other prices, all prices down’. Gotta keep the public onside, heh Bill.
  • Yet, and the main point to any dealings whatsoever* arising, a fully legislated ETS so baldly stated and regardless its reality to local taxpayers means heaps to USPee-ers. Behind those closed dealing doors. Elsewhere.
  • So there. An answer to the question. Too cynical? Or just another cynical view of/on wouldbe climate change negotiators in Copenhagen. And around.
  • * There’s word of forester parties wanting plant pinus radiata, eucalypt and douglas fir to sequester carbon and thereby ‘earn’ credits in the greater scheme of things now apparent. Just as well I point out then that increasingly widely known across the world is how temperate location trees can only at best grow and sequester local carbon from the local atmosphere. If it is true that enzed only emits zero-point-two percent of global GHG emissions then that figure will cap total remittances(likely less since non-carbon gases are in the mix).
  • Whereas tropical plantings are something else again. And more than likely to get a very fair share of the credits.

Technorati Tags: , , , , , , , , , , ,

No comments yet

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: