Gisborne letters on climate action, aerospace issues, health funding

Baku, the capital of Azerbaijan, is hosting the Cop29 global climate summit later this year.

Opinion

OPINION

Hoping for a better result at COP29

Each year I have diligently reported here on the Cop conferences, since the failed 2009 United Nations Copenhagen Summit.

This year maybe not - here’s why.

This year’s UN Cop29 climate summit in Baku, Azerbaijan, will focus on climate finance and raising funds for developing countries affected by the climate crisis.

Cop stands for “Conference of the Parties”, which is a generic phrase in international relations-speak.

Each year a different country becomes the Cop president, in charge of organising and running that year’s meeting.

In the 2015 Paris Agreement, 194 nations agreed to reduce their GHG (greenhouse gas) emissions but few actually have - human-induced GHG emissions are rapidly increasing.

We are aware of the activity of politicians, diplomats and government representatives, but they are far from being the only ones who attend the conference. Many others join, aiming to influence the outcome – some to push forward climate action and justice, others to advance their interests.

For example, many fossil fuel lobbyists join the talks to attempt to protect their industry from much-needed action to keep coal, oil and gas in the ground.

There was double the number of fossil fuel delegates at Cop28 in Dubai than at Cop27.

Indigenous peoples, contending with environmentally destructive industries such as logging, mining and industrial agribusiness, were calling for greater protections for their territories.

Barriers exist to prevent environmental activists and civil society organisations from meaningfully participating in global decision-making processes - consequently, those most affected by the climate emergency don’t have a final say.

During Cop28 the fossil fuel lobbyists altered the call for a “phase out” to the less stringent “phase down”, ending with no legally binding document in play; the fossil fuel industry still has plenty of leeway to continue with business as usual.

I am dubious of climate finance being a core topic at Cop29. The summit’s success will be influenced by who gets to benefit from how climate innovations and markets would be controlled.

Nonetheless, I will follow this year’s procedures hoping to witness a better result than the to-be-expected past failures.

Bob Hughes

Explicit exclusions needed

Re: Aerospace industry full of opportunities for Tairāwhiti: New study, September 6 story.

Any local aerospace industry development plan needs to explicitly exclude involvement with military purposes, space junk and greenhouse gas emission increases.

And what happened to Trust Tairāwhiti’s previous commitment to measuring and reducing its contribution to greenhouse gas emissions? Seems to have flown out the exhaust pipe.

Manu Caddie

Food for thought on climate change

Let us imagine a rewrite of New Zealand history, which has produced a country so clean and green that it is held up as the ultimate example to the rest of the world.

Do you think, under this scenario, that the world would see any difference in the area of climate change?

In the hypothetical New Zealand, as outlined, what sort of country would we live in, in terms of living standards such as greater equality and opportunity for all?

I think the sad facts are that there are just too many of us, worldwide, and a lot of us are into rampant consumerism.

I am ploughing my way through a massive tome written by Peter Frankopan, who is Professor of Global History at Oxford University. This is called The Earth Transformed (An Untold story). It is a comprehensive study of climate change over the years and its terrible effects on human civilizations.

It appears we are always optimistic, even in the face of repeated failure. We also consistently display the human failings of greed and the ability to exploit the misery of others.

It is interesting to note that Thomas Jefferson and Benjamin Franklin were both concerned about global warming.

Ron Taylor

Health funding

PM Luxon says that his Government is investing a record $16.7 billion into health. That’s at the same time as his Government is cutting expenditure in health by $1.4b. Taken together, those two statements make perfect sense and there is nothing weird about this at all.

Bruce Holm

Frankenstein projects

Re: Milk replacement on way, time to adjust farming - September 10 letter.

What cows do efficiently by eating grass, precision fermentation tries to do in factories, using huge amounts of energy and a number of machines and technologies. Cows do all that from the free energy of the sun.

The end product of precision fermentation, trying to mimic cow’s milk, will never be as good as natural milk.

Precision fermentation has been made possible by huge financial input from governments and the private sector. It will end up the same way as lab-grown meat, factory-made food and insect-based proteins. These are buckling one after the other, due to lack of interest from consumers and investors withdrawing their money to cut their losses.

It is truly disgraceful that NZ tax money has been used in such Frankenstein projects both here and overseas, given that the NZ economy is fundamentally agricultural.

Even more disturbing is farming organisations like Fonterra using farmers’ money for such research.

If anything, precision fermentation will make NZ natural milk and meat more attractive to overseas consumers wanting natural products.

NZ farmers are improving their practices all the time to reduce the impact of farming on their environment.

It will be up to farmers to decide what they produce on their land and I am sure they are quite versatile if demand for natural milk ever falls.

Simin Williams