I have a category on my blog called “If only they would listen”. I haven’t used it much lately, but then I saw this:
Keisha Castle-Hughes has hit back at Prime Minister John Key’s comments telling her to “stick to acting” over her stance on climate change.
The Whale Rider actor told Close Up last night that she would be willing to meet Mr Key to discuss the issue.
“I’d love to sit down and maybe he’d know that – if we sat down and talked – that I know a lot more about it than I think he thinks I do.”
“Oh, if I could just sit down the the PM, I’m sure I can convince him”. Really?
Outside of the fact that Castle-Hughes seems to think her fame gives her the right to skip past the public process and speak straight to the prime minister, she also seems to think that she’s every well informed compared to him.
She said the only message she wanted to send to Mr Key was that it was the perfect time to commit to the [40 per cent] emission target.
I’m sure she has her reasons. However, I doubt she has considered what John Key has to – the cost of meeting that 40% target. By all accounts, that will destroy our economy.
So as I said, let us say we get rid of every car and bus in New Zealand. We all walk to work, video-conference, cycle or take the solar powered train. That takes out 20%. Only a third of the way there.
Then we decide to join Great Barrier Island and survive off solar power. We close down all the power plants and turn off the electricity supplies. It’s candles for warmth in winter. That gets a another 9%. 29%.
To get to 60% we also really need to wipe out those agricultural methane emissions by shooting every evil cow we can find. That gets us to 50%. Yes I know it will mean no more dairy exports. In fact we may even need to import our milk and butter, but hey we will have met our target.
There is an upside though. Our incomes will all drop by thousands of dollars as we wipe out the agricultural sector. And it is tough having less money to spend. But as cars would have been outlawed, and there will be no electricity bills, as we have no electricity, then that should allow you to survive the drop in income a bit easier.
That’s a massive cost.
Even if the science is settled, the science of what might happen is not, and the political decisions are quite a different matter again.
Let’s say we did do this – we destroyed our economy. If China and India don’t follow, any gains we make are utterly pointless and we would still have to pay for all the costs associated with temperature and sea level rise.
Better to commit to modest, affordable gains, saving money to deal with the inevitable consequences. In fact, so much money is being spent lobbying politicians that we might as well stop spending that money and put it in the bank. If we did that, I recon we’d have plenty to mitigate any effects caused by the climate changing.
Keisha, I agree with John Key. Stick to acting, and if you want to make a submission join the queue with the rest of us. There are, believe it or not, people who have more interesting things to say than merely repeating whatever Greenpeace told them.