[pf] simple-thinking - Right or Wrong?

At 03:40 18/12/2001 +1300, Murray Ogilvie wrote to GV-NZ, about a GV post
quoting one of the Greens-NZ's co-leaders, with the title:
Re: [GV]NZPA: Greens Won't Support Flatulence Tax :-

>I'd have thought we are either for greenhouse gas or against it.
>
>Any tax regime that is inconsistent is going to fail in the long run. I
think this is a mistake.
>
>Murray
>

· Many politicians, in speaking to the general public, start: "Clearly, ..."

· [early-90s Prime Minister] Jim Bolger frequently said: "Very simply, ..."

· I do not regard human choices, actions, as typically simple: black-white,
for-it-or-against-it, yes-no, right-wrong, open-shut, There Is No Alternative

· With one exception: human activities on earth _must_ become sustainable.
That is what The Greens have to be absolutely consistent about: the goal.

· There may be several ways to get there, and although sooner is better
(we'll have a higher standard of living if we stop further degradation
_now_), there's even some adjustment possible in "when".


· As an example; in the first draft of my Climate Change submission (due by
Friday), I make (what I see as) a strong case for _increasing_ NZ's use of
high-CO2 coal in electric power stations (which _can_ be supplied by rail),
so as to retain enough natural gas in the ground for the later stage of
road transport's transition to truly sustainable running: using natural gas
in hybrids or fuel cells, just before using pure hydrogen.
 [NZ has a little hydrocarbon reserve, but natural gas runs out in '07-'20]

· Be clear about the fact that this is my personal submission, nothing to
do with The Greens - there are a number of things I don't agree with The
Greens about.

· I mention the _increased_ use of coal for five-to-twelve years, here, as
an example where "we're for it or against it" is far too simple.
  If it appears simple, it's suspect, IMO.

· A discussion list is for discussion of ideas; so lets discuss them!

David.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
{Earlier, 17/12/2001 +1300: }

>At 10:09 17/12/2001 +1300, Fred wrote to GV:
>>Yeah, I agree with a flatulence Tax and feel the party should support it.
>>We should be discouraging pastoral farming in this country except on the
small percentage of land that is suitable.
>>Cattle farming is destroying New Zealand (try and get a drink of water
from a stream sometime!)
>>The Amazon jungle is being destroyed to make way for mac burgers; seems
like we may have grabbed the cheap shot here. This way we will win the
battle of the soundbite and lose the planet!
>>Fred Look
>>
>
>- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
>At 17:34 17/12/2001 +1300, Rosalie wrote:
>
>  I talked with [that co-leader] about this just today - she said the
reasoning is that the carbon tax is for 'providing incentive' to shift from
one form of energy (fossil fuels) to another (renewable fuels) and that
there _was_ at least _an_alternative_. 
>  Whereas shifting from farming animals to farming other things isn't seen
as being reasonable.
>
>
>- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
[I wrote: ]
>· Some data, before people say too much:
http://www.climatechange.govt.nz/sp/consultation/pdf/CC021%20Topic%20sheet%2
03%20v3%20PDF.pdf [all on same line in browser]
>
>· has, on page 3, these graphs & related text:
>
http://davd.tripod.ca/Gr/GHG-agric-pie.gif
>
http://davd.tripod.ca/Gr/GHG-agric-line.gif
>
http://davd.tripod.ca/Gr/GHG-agric-text_p3.txt
>
>· They show a large decrease in sheep emissions from 1990,
> a significant but smaller (both in tonnes not %) _increase_ for cattle,
> and on page 1:
>
>"According to latest estimates, emissions from agriculture are currently
very close to 1990 levels."
>
>· That is, virtually no net increase in greenhouse gas emissions from
farming ruminants in NZ, in the last 11 years.
>
>David.
David MacClement davd @ ihug.co.nz (remove spaces)
http://davd.tripod.com/GrAPR-011214.html#top
http://www.geocities.com/davd.geo/index.html#top
***********************************************

==^================================================================
This email was sent to: csf@moscow.com

EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://igc.topica.com/u/?aVxifP.a2yAZH
Or send an email to: positive-futures-unsubscribe@igc.topica.com

T O P I C A -- Register now to manage your mail!
http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/register
==^================================================================