Open Letter to ETS Review Committee by way of a Submission
Open Letter to ETS Review Committee by way of a Submission
With all due respect, it is farcical for me to make a submission under the stated Terms of Reference. Dr Smith in a reply to my protesting E-mail on 07/06/10 assured me (and all other protesting parties) that there would be a full and thorough review of the NZ ETS being introduced at that time. This review to take place early in 2011.
This was a statement that appears to have been designed to mislead the people of New Zealand because now the Review Terms of Reference specifically exclude the following;
- whether New Zealand should be taking action on climate change
- whether an emissions trading scheme is the most appropriate response to climate change for New Zealand
- climate change measures outside of the ETS (except to the extent that the issues above, to which the Panel has been asked to give particular attention, raise broader issues about the best means of meeting New Zealand’s international obligations).
This makes a mockery of the Review Process and the Panel appointed to carry out the Review.
The Minister and his Department have produced a document entitled “What is climate change” (Foot note 2} http://www.climatechange.govt.nz/science/what-is-climate-change.html ) which is used to support his views and purporting to be the views of the vast majority of Scientists in many Countries.
THIS IS NOT TRUE!
They may be the conclusions put out by the IPPC but that organization has lost all credibility in the Science World as a result of revelations that major contributors have been altering data and manipulating results. This is not conjecture but solid information as revealed partly by the Climate-Gate E-Mails and other journal articles.
Even the Secretary General of the United Nations himself has ordered an inquiry and has ordered the IPCC to change its processing methods. The scandals and other revelations are now accepted as true by all leading Scientists.
As a Scientist myself (50 years as a Secondary Teacher of Chemistry and Physics and a UK Degree in Chemistry and Geology) I am absolutely appalled by the behaviour of many “Climate Scientists” who ignore the basic tenant of Science which that “Honesty and Integrity are sacrosanct”.
I will not bore the Panel with the countless examples of Data Manipulation and deliberate distortion but will simply point out some gross examples from the information put out by the Minister for the Environment.
|
The more greenhouse gases we emit, the faster the world's climate heats up. This process is often called ‘global warming’ but it is better to think of it as ‘climate change’ because it is likely to bring about more extreme events – floods, storms, cyclones, droughts and landslips – rather than an increase in temperature alone. Climate change could have significant impacts on our economy, environment and the way we live – the effects of a warming planet and subsequent changing climate patterns are already becoming evident.
|
There is absolutely no evidence to show that Man-made Carbon Dioxide leads to significant warming. Note that the term “Greenhouse Gases” is often used to obscure and confuse. Much real evidence shows that cooling is now taking place.
Then the term Climate Change is introduced but not explained.
Here is the IPPC definition of Climate Change
|
The United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) defines “climate change” as “a change of climate which is attributed directly or indirectly to human activity that alters the composition of the global atmosphere and which is in addition to natural climate variability observed over comparable time periods”. The UNFCCC thus makes a distinction between “climate change” attributable to human activities altering the atmospheric composition, and “climate variability” attributable to natural causes
|
So when the Prime-Minister states that he “believes in Climate Change” he is not saying that he believes that the climate changes (which is certainly what most people accept as being true) but that any change in climate are the result of human activity. Note that animals other than humans and trees (Plants) etc. are excluded from his statement which is bizarre.
AND THEN WE HAVE THE IPCC GRAPH !
|
The Earth has gone through massive changes in its 4.5 billion-year history. Its climate has naturally fluctuated between being very cold and covered in ice, or very hot. In the past 10,000 years the planet’s climate has become much more stable, leading to flourishing flora and fauna, and the subsequent population explosion of humankind. However, over the past 50-100 years, increasing industrialisation and human activity (such as industry, agriculture and transportation) have begun to affect the natural climate balance. These activities are increasing the amount of greenhouse gases in our atmosphere and causing Earth not only to heat up, but to heat up at an unprecedented rate.
|
The first paragraph fails to point out that warmer periods (such as The Holocene Optimum and the Medieval Warm Period) are in no way linked to population explosions or industrialisation. Equally absurd in the second paragraph that Earth is not only heating up but doing so at an unprecedented rate. The IPCC itself admits that world warming over the ten years from 1998 has been a meagre 0.6’C which is a negligible (0.06’C per year) and certainly not unprecedented if you look at historical records of global temperatures.
|
Since the start of the industrial revolution (about 1750) the overall effect of human activities on the climate has been a warming influence. The human impact of this era greatly exceeds that due to known changes in natural processes such as solar changes and volcanic eruptions. Scientists are now detecting changes which suggest the climate is becoming hotter on average, and more variable. This variability is being attributed in part to increased levels of carbon dioxide in the Earth’s atmosphere. According to scientific studies, in the past 650,000 years the planet has never had so much carbon dioxide in its atmosphere as it does today, and the levels are continuing to rise.
|
These statements have NO scientific credibility. The first paragraph carefully omits the influence of the Dark Ages (from 1600 to 1750) which was another very cold period (the Thames froze solid) etc. etc. The Earth is a wonderful complex system which is in Equilibrium. It adjusts itself by a variety of processes when things get out of balance … hence the initial warming to counter the last Ice-Age..
The second paragraph makes unsupported and inaccurate claims (see my comment above about temperature). The Otago University Ice-Core samples show that Carbon Dioxide levels have varied widely over the last few million years and at one stage were SEVEN TIMES higher than they are now.
Concentrations of greenhouse gases from 0 to 2005
The graph shows atmospheric concentrations of important long-lived greenhouse gases over the past 2000 years. Increases since about 1750 are attributed to human activities since the industrial era. Credit: Graph courtesy of the IPCC.
That this graph is used by Dr Smith is an absolute disgrace. Firstly it is taken from a report by the discredited IPPC. Why use that graph when NIWA provides NZ data for all to see. Oh, it is because we are making our contribution to Global Warming by introducing an ETS.
But if the Temperature in NZ is cooling (See the Australian Bureau of Weather which states that the average temperature in Australia FELL by 0.6’C in 2010) why do we need an ETS?.
That Graph would be laughed out of the hall if any real Scientists were present. You can get any graph to show what you desire by altering the scales on the axis. Why are years shown in units of a hundred when the Carbon Dioxide scale is PARTS PER MILLION and the Nitrous Oxide and Methane have a scale of PARTS PER BILLION !!!!! It’s the same technique as that used by the Green Party to show that the level of Carbon Dioxide has risen by 30%. But the actual increase is from 0.028 % of the atmosphere to 0.035% of the atmosphere. Plot that on a graph using a sensible scale and you get a FLAT LINE ….. no dramatic rise at all. In Science we often say that “60% of nothing is still NOTHING”. But then they don’t want to clarify, they just want to baffle the people of New Zealand.
In a meeting in Picton (in 2010) the audience became so incensed that Dr Smith would not allow discussion of the Science being used to justify the introduction of the ETS, that the security guards had to be called in to settle the meeting and several people were ejected. How’s that for a consensus of Scientists, Dr Smith?
|
Since the start of the industrial revolution (about 1750) the overall effect of human activities on the climate has been a warming influence. The human impact of this era greatly exceeds that due to known changes in natural processes such as solar changes and volcanic eruptions.
|
Where is the evidence to support these statements? The IPCC produced one graph (in the Second Report) which showed that Temperature Rise PRECEEDED rises in the levels of Carbon Dioxide. Hows that for an example of CAUSE AND EFFECT ???? NOT!
SUMMARY
- There is NO unprecedented Global Warming taking place. Some say we should be preparing for Global Cooling which will have far worse social and economic effects.
- There is no evidence to support the concept that AGW is the result of increases in Greenhouse Gases. Emmision Trading Schemes have NO effect on Global Temperatures.
- The economic effect of ETS is to lower the living standards of the population by increasing the price of all commodities.
- The Carbon Credit Scheme has crashed and is heading for oblivion. That is not surprising as it was dreamed up by the management of ENRON, a company which was wiped out by their illegal and dishonest activities
I accept that the Review Panel will not be happy to receive this submission but hope that they will at least acknowledge it and read it. Surveys in several countries are showing the majority of people do not believe in AGW Global Warming (or Climate Change) and the link between levels of man-made Carbon Dioxide (and other Greenhouse Gases) and Temperature has yet to be demonstrated despite spending billions of dollars attempting to do so.
The Panel would do well to research all of the claims above. There are so many books written on this subject but I strongly recommend the following two.
“AN APPEAL TO REASON. A COOL LOOK AT GLOBAL WARMING” by Sir Nigel Lawson. Ex Chancellor of the UK Exchequer. He was a supporter of the Global Warmists until instructed by the British Government to investigate the science behind the claims. What he found caused him to then rapidly change his mind.
“THE REAL GLOBAL WARMING DISASTER” by Christopher Booker . A scientific reporter.
The Panel will already know why there is such support for the AGW theories and the implementation of ETS schemes. There are vast fortunes to be made by big corporations and quasi Governments (like the EU who have long passed their industrialisation peak). The funding of “Research Projects” at the University of East Anglia and the UK Hadley are well documented and I would be not surprised to find that similar funding is taking place in New Zealand.
Simon
Copies to ; ETS Review Panel. Dr Nick Smith
The Prime Minister; Dr Lockwood Smith
Leaders of the Labour Party, Green Party, NZ First,
Act NZ, Maori Party, United Future.
NZ Climate Realists. Carbon sense.com . The New Zealand Herald, TV1 TV3
Newsrooms
