14 June 2012.

Rt. Rev. Michael Langrish

Bishop of Exeter

The Bishop's Office

The Palace

Exeter, EX1 1HY

Dear Bishop Langrish

Earlier in the week I listened to what you had to say following the welcome decision to withdraw the diocese's application to erect wind turbines in Devon. I see that your remarks have now been republished in The Daily Telegraph. In particular, it is striking that you consider that you and your staff were subjected to abuse by objectors. Well, I was not part of any such exchanges and do not condone, in your own words, 'bullying tactics'. On the other hand, I cannot help pointing out - to a churchman and so an ethical standard bearer, most especially - that such tactics are an absolutely routine component of the dialectical arsenal favoured by climate change proselytisers, amongst whose ranks the prelatariat of all denominations have constituted a prominent and discreditable cadre of alarmist partisans. Accordingly, whilst I will certainly not stoop to the use of opprobrious language, neither do I have any intention of pulling punches simply in deference to 'the cloth', if I may so put it.

NZCPR Submission on the Emissions Trading Scheme Review

1. THIS SUBMISSION IS FROM:

Dr Muriel Newman on behalf of the New Zealand Centre for Political Research
 

Gentlemen:

I have read the consultation document regarding updates to the New Zealand Emissions Trading Scheme. It was all about HOW this onerous scheme (estimated to cost the average NZ household $1500/year for starters) could be implemented, but nothing about WHETHER it should be implemented. Apparently, that’s a subject that’s not open to discussion, since Nick Smith directed the Panel last year as follows:

"The review panel should NOT focus on:

4^th January 2012

Dr N Smith                               cc The Prime Minister

Minister for Climate Change         Rt Hon John Key

Parliament Bldgs                           Parliament Bldgs

Wellington                                    Wellington

Dear Dr Smith,

Your letter of Jun 30 2010

The book Air Con (post Climategate Copenhagen edition) returned unread

The Canadian withdrawal from Kyoto and your response

ETS Committee called to consider rate of implementation and quality of data – also returned my book unread.

Your Quote within the book when the massive fraud was being discovered

Your response to Canadian withdrawal from Kyoto

Minister, with the greatest respect you’re a zealot with your head in the sand. For a man with a doctorate on an issue such as this that is really quite shameful. However your response to the Canadian withdrawal was so pathetic, mealy mouthed and weak that I suspect you may be developing a little cynicism regarding what you’ve been fed and may now choose to do some research yourself. I truly hope so!

Dear Minister

Thank you for taking the trouble to come and speak about the ETS in Gisborne. I apologise for not identifying myself to you when talking with you after the meeting.

I made a point during question time about the amount of warming that livestock methane could produce. You expressed doubt about my figures. I did not get the chance to fully explain myself later, so here is the explanation. The maths is very simple. I am amazed someone has not done it sooner. The basics were done by Dr. Wilson Flood, a Scottish chemistry teacher. He starts with the assumption that doubling CO₂ raises the temperature by two degrees. CO₂ makes up 390 parts per million (ppm) in the atmosphere. Methane is 1.8 ppm. We multiply by 21 because of its Global Warming Potential (GWP). But we adjust it down because the molecular weight of methane is only 16 as opposed to CO₂ at 44, meaning it takes more molecules of methane to make up a kg. This makes methane’s relative effect to CO₂ 13.75 ppm. So if doubling CO₂ raises the temperature two degrees, doubling methane will raise the temperature by 0.07°Livestock make up about 15 % of the methane emissions, so that means if they double their emissions the temperature rise is an insignificant 0.01°globally.

To: jonathan.coleman@national.org.nz
Subject: ETS SCHEME

Unfortunately National decided to push ahead with its ill conceived adoption of an ETS regime.

If it is still in place by the next election my vote, both party and individual, will be going to ACT. I will also do my best to encourage as many voters away from National as possible.

I had hopes that National would have proved to be a party of thinkers capable of making the types of decisions that would see New Zealand move forward economically.

Sadly they have done nothing since taking office to confirm my hopes. One tax reduction taken away by

ETS,
ACC levies
GST increases

Hopefully John Key can be persuaded that he does not need to sell us down the drain over the Foreshore and Seabed to gain Maori Party support. I very much fear I am about to be disappointed yet again.

Roll on election year.

These letters are available in a scanned form- click here to read.