You have commented 375 times on Rantburg.

Your Name
Your e-mail (optional)
Website (optional)
My Original Nic        Pic-a-Nic        Sorry. Comments have been closed on this article.
Bold Italic Underline Strike Bullet Blockquote Small Big Link Squish Foto Photo
Down Under
(New Zealand) Govt admits huge Kyoto cost miscalculation
2005-06-16
The Government has admitted it has made a massive miscalculation in the cost of the Kyoto Protocol. Original estimates were that New Zealand would have a surplus of 30 million tonnes of carbon dioxide credits between 2008 and 2012, worth around $450 million. Climate Change Minister Pete Hodgson says new estimates put it at a deficit of 36.2 million tonnes. That will cost New Zealand $543 million, and it will have to be borne by the taxpayer. Mr Hodgson says it is largely due to huge growth in energy and industrial process emissions. He claims the Government would still have ratified Kyoto if it knew of the deficit risks. New Zealand will now have to cut its emissions, or buy carbon credits on the international market to the tune of $543 million. Mr Hodgson rejects accusations the first estimates were a gross miscalculation. He says the error is a change in assumptions, which will always be the case in energy issues.
The New Zealand economy is small. You have to multiply these numbers by at least 100 to get the equivalent effect on the US economy (by 8 or 9 for Australia). Combine this with the recent news on forest being cut down as a direct result of Kyoto and steep increases in the cost of energy to consumers and the Kyoto lunacy would have given the USA a 100 billion budget hole after cutting down upwards of 5 million acres of forest, combined with a sharp increase in inflation, and for something that even if it were a good idea (and its not) just isn't working.
Posted by:phil_b

#22  comments); ?>werwer
Posted by: Matt   2005-06-16 20:52  

#21  comments); ?>werwer
Posted by: Frank G   2005-06-16 19:56  

#20  comments); ?>werwer
Posted by: Shipman   2005-06-16 19:50  

#19  comments); ?>werwer
Posted by: Matt   2005-06-16 13:49  

#18  comments); ?>werwer
Posted by: Carl in N.H.   2005-06-16 12:28  

#17  comments); ?>werwer
Posted by: Captain Pedantic   2005-06-16 12:26  

#16  comments); ?>werwer
Posted by: mhw   2005-06-16 11:26  

#15  comments); ?>werwer
Posted by: Classical_Liberal   2005-06-16 11:02  

#14  comments); ?>werwer
Posted by: tu3031   2005-06-16 10:57  

#13  comments); ?>werwer
Posted by: rjschwarz   2005-06-16 10:54  

#12  comments); ?>werwer
Posted by: rjschwarz   2005-06-16 10:54  

#11  comments); ?>werwer
Posted by: eLarson   2005-06-16 08:51  

#10  comments); ?>werwer
Posted by: Alaska Paul   2005-06-16 08:50  

#9  comments); ?>werwer
Posted by: BA   2005-06-16 07:50  

#8  comments); ?>werwer
Posted by: Rex Mundi   2005-06-16 03:16  

#7  comments); ?>werwer
Posted by: anon1   2005-06-16 02:52  

#6  comments); ?>werwer
Posted by: anon1   2005-06-16 02:52  

#5  comments); ?>werwer
Posted by: anon1   2005-06-16 02:37  

#4  comments); ?>werwer
Posted by: Bomb-a-rama   2005-06-16 02:17  

#3  comments); ?>werwer
Posted by: .com   2005-06-16 02:10  

#2  comments); ?>werwer
Posted by: badanov   2005-06-16 01:51  

#1  comments); ?>werwer
Posted by: phil_b   2005-06-16 01:14  

00:00