Newsletter No. 22 For 2010 From The Climate Realists Against The ETS

Hello again Climate Realists,

Activists, Neil & Esther Henderson

Greetings to all, particularly the many new members who have joined this network over the last few weeks. Welcome aboard!
The ETS is now in force as you are all well aware.
We have organised one formal and one informal petition against the ETS, supported several others, helped to organise a protest march, lobbied MPs till our names are most likely on their ‘blocked senders’ lists, written to newspapers, blogged on the internet…..
The question which arises for us now is: “What next?”
One need is for the wider public to become much more aware of this issue– and the fact that there are strong and credible challenges to the science which is continually being fed to them as ‘fact’ in almost every form of media they encounter.
I was very encouraged to receive an email from a person in Grey Lynn (Auckland) who had received one of our pamphlets in a letterbox drop:
Hi – just wanted to say thanks for the pamphlet drop!
I live in Grey Lynn, and if ever an area needed some truth distributed to its
residents regarding climate change, this is it! Hopefully people will read it
and start to question some of the so-called “facts” regarding climate change
that have been fed to them by our media so far   🙂
Keep up the good work!
We have plenty of pamphlets available if anyone else would like to obtain some in order to drop them in letterboxes around your neighbourhood.
Given that about half the people we questioned at the recent Fieldays had no idea what the ETS even is, this approach would be worth a try.
Contact us at if you’re interested.
The  speakers at last week’s protest march have each been reported in the media in various ways-
see the links below.
This newsletter is rather lengthy due to the decision to reproduce two of the Pastural Farming Climate Research newsletters in full- but they were too good to leave out- particularly if members are motivated to take action in the ways suggested!
all the best,
Don Nicolson  of Federated Farmers
Bob Mc Coskrie of Family First
Kiwi Party Media release:
ETS could be funny comedy theatre play if it wasn’t so serious!
The Prime Minister has now finally acknowledged that households will bear more than their fair share of increased energy costs when the next phase of the Emissions Trading Scheme takes effect on Thursday this week.

Kiwi Party leader Larry Baldock said it makes no sense to impose additional costs on every household at a time when so many are still struggling to recover from the recession.

“By now stating the ETS imposes a ‘disproportionate burden’ on every family in NZ the PM is finally admitting that the ETS is in fact taxing household budgets heavily so he can make a pretence of addressing climate change on the world stage.

“If the Prime Minister would take a good look at that ‘world stage’ he would notice that most of the players have ended their major performances and can now be seen hanging about in the wings of the stage waiting for the curtain to come down on the greatest comedy act in recent history!

“There are still the usual ‘King Canute-like’ speeches and promises to stop global warming going beyond 2 deg C, but paragraph 23 of the G8 Muskoka Declaration Recovery and New Beginnings report reveal a definite shift away from the desperate action on reducing Greenhouse Gas (GG) emissions to save the planet.

“23. While remaining committed to fighting climate change, we discussed the importance of ensuring that economies are climate resilient. We agreed that more research was needed to identify impacts at the global, regional, national and sub-national levels, and the options for adaptation, including through infrastructural and technological innovation. We particularly recognize the situation of the poorest and most vulnerable countries. We will share our national experiences and plans for adaptation, including through a conference on climate change adaptation in Russia in 2011.”

“The words, ‘climate resilient’, ‘options for adaption’, ‘plans for adaption’ and ‘more research needed to identify impacts’ should alert the reader to political speak for ‘how do we dig ourselves out of this global warming hole!’

“After all if the climate is to get warmer by more than 2 deg C by the end of this century, as the doomsaying prophets have predicted, it is hard to explain why the Global Average Temperature (GAT) has not increased since its peak in 1998 while GG emissions have continued to dramatically rise, especially assisted by the recent Icelandic volcanic eruption. To achieve anything like a 2 degree increase by 2100 we should have seen the temparature increase by at least an average of 0.2 over the past decade and nothing like that has occured.

“Instead of being admired for leading the world, New Zealand may ultimately become the laughing stock of the world because we blindly went ahead while others were starting to discern between fiction and reality,” said the Kiwi Party leader.

Robin Grieve- Pastural Farming Climate Research
Members Newsletter

John Key believes there is not much opposition by farmers to the ETS. He said this on the radio news after it was reported he got a roasting at the Federated Farmers conference.

It is hard to believe he means this, and it is hard to believe any farmers support an ETS which takes punitive measures against farmers because their livestock produce methane, but does not factor in the rest of the methane cycle and does not give farmers credit for their role in that. The net effect of a livestock farm on the atmospheric concentration of methane is zero. The emissions in effect do not exist.

Why would any farmers be happy to pay for emissions that don’t exist?

The problem as I see it is that Federated Farmers only ever slam the ETS on the basis of cost. John Key thinks that the only issue he had to address is that of cost. His scheme has reduced the cost from Labour’s scheme so he thinks farmers will be as pragmatic as he is and accept that they are getting a good deal because it is cheaper and they should be happy with that.

Pragmatism is great if you don’t have principles, but most people do. John Key does not understand that it is not just about money it is about fairness. He wants to take money off farmers for emissions that don’t exist and that is unfair, it is an injustice, and John Key needs to be told that.  The people of NZ don’t care how much it is going to cost farmers and nor does John Key. The people of NZ though are fair minded people and they do not like injustice. If they were told that these emissions are not calculated fairly, that they don’t actually exist, they would be more supportive. If they were told that forestry does not have to pay for their nitrous oxide emissions but farmers do they would be even more supportive because nobody likes such blatant unfairness.

If John Key was told that a sheep in a green paddock of grass has no effect on the concentration of methane in the atmosphere even he might find some principles in behind his pragmatic veneer and realise that farmers are getting a raw deal from his Government.

John Key needs to be told that NZ farmers are getting a raw deal from him and we need hundreds if not thousands of farmers to email him right now and tell him you do care and that he is wrong to think that farmers don’t.

His email is

All you have to say is that you are opposed to the ETS. Something like this;

Dear Mr Key

I am opposed to the ETS and every farmer I know feels the same way. (say it in your own words so it is not seen as a form letter)

Regards ………….

If you want to say more you could explain that your farm is methane neutral because as much methane oxidises to CO2 and grows grass which your animals eat, as there is methane produced. So you do not want to pay for any methane emissions an dcould he explain why you should.

You could say that you have always voted National but you will never vote for them again (I hear this a lot)

You could say that no other farmers in the world are paying for livestock emissions

What ever you say, say something it will make a difference. It only takes a minute to send an email, (maybe even 30 seconds) do it right now, click on the link, write a sentence and say your piece. John Key thinks you are not upset by his ETS lets show him how wrong he is.

A few thousand emails flooding in and he will take notice.


Pastural farming Climate Research- Members Newsletter

ETS meetings

Dr Smith and National are doing the hard sell on the ETS. He uses all the logic he can to justify National’s position on the science of using an ETS.

From his promo;

First, can I give you the Government’s view on the science. We don’t claim a consensus or a perfect scientific understanding of the earth’s climate system.  But we are satisfied that enough is known to be of concern and that action is justified to curb our growth in emissions. This is about sound risk management.  New Zealanders expect governments to prudently manage risk of phenomena like earthquakes. We all pay EQC levies even though we may not need the billions that have been collected. We see managing the risk of climate change in a similar context.

Risk management is what they are calling it now, and the Government is satisfied that ‘action is justified to curb our growth in emissions’ in case they are causing global warming. A subtle change from ‘the science is settled’.

Earthquakes are real, they happen. Global warming is not in the same category.

The global problem is that mankind is burning fossil fuels and clearing forests at increasing rates, and this is changing the chemical composition of the atmosphere. CO2 levels are up 35% on pre-industrial levels already. As developing countries industrialise, these levels are set to be double by 2050 and double again by 2100.

To put our fossil fuel emissions in perspective, every New Zealander emits an average nine tonnes per person per year.  Nine tonnes of CO2 is three times the volume of this auditorium.  That’s each year, and is for every one of us.  And the science tells us that the CO2 will be around in the atmosphere for thousands of years. It would be a brave person who would say we can carry on indefinitely doing this and expect it to have no effect on the atmosphere or climate.  The considered science tells us it’s a problem.

Not a word about livestock methane. He only has an argument for fossil fuels. Yes they are changing the chemical composition of the atmosphere. (and this may or may not cause warming) But he doesn’t mention enteric methane because he knows it does not change the composition of the atmosphere. Therefore there can be no RISK of global warming from them so no need for any Government action to mange that risk.

That removes any need to include enteric methane in an ETS on the basis of the science, so it only leaves our Kyoto commitments as an argument to keep enteric methane in the ETS.

Kyoto was signed by Simon Upton of the National Government of the day and he made a monumental cock up when he included enteric methane, and he knows that. He still has a Government paid job believe it not. A third of the emissions NZ agreed to account for do not change the chemical composition of the atmosphere. They should not be in there, Kyoto in this form was a mistake and NZ should not honour a mistake. If Nick Smith wants prudent, I say it would be prudent to do the research to determine if enteric methane changes the chemical composition of the atmosphere, before spending tens of millions of dollars trying to figure out how to mitigate it.

It is not prudent for a government to fix one mistake (Kyoto) with another (including enteric methane in an ETS). We are not stuck with Kyoto, we are a sovereign nation, and we should tell the world Simon Upton cocked up, we’re sorry but enteric methane should not have been put in it and so we are out!

And any arguments that this will hurt our trade are not based on anything other than imagination and fantasy.

Nick smith has a few meetings to go, dates are


Thursday 8 July at 7.30pm

Darfield Recreation Centre, North Terrace, Darfield


Thursday 15 July  at 5.30pm

Heartland Hotel, Waimea Street, Gore


Monday 19 July at 7.00pm

Call 07 5799016 for venue information


Tuesday 20 July at 7:30pm

Call 03 6831386 for venue information


Thursday 22 July at 7.30pm

Call 09 5759842 for venue information


Monday 26 July at 7.30pm

Coronation Hall, Gordon Road, Mosgiel

The one they held in Blenheim sounds as if it was quite lively, apparently they wanted to take a vote and the National MP Colin King who was chairing the meeting wouldn’t let them. Nick Smith told the media that those opposed were in the minority, and the media believed him! If anyone went along, tell us how it went.

For the meetings still happening go along if you live handy, ask the hard questions. Don’t ask about global warming because he has the answer, they are managing risk.

Ask about enteric methane, how does it change the chemical composition of the atmosphere? He should be able to demonstrate how livestock emissions from a steady source (not increased production) increases the concentration of methane.

He won’t be able to do this, to try and fudge things he might explain that yes the methane oxidises to CO2 and so there is no net increase in the methane levels but methane has a greater global warming capacity than CO2 so while the Carbon is in the form of methane you get warming. This is rubbish because you can only get warming if you increase the concentration of something. He has to show how methane in the atmosphere is increasing due to steady state livestock production. If he can’t explain it keep the pressure on him until he cracks. He is not silly he knows enteric methane is harmless, this is his achillis heel! It is also the achillis heel of the whole ETS.

If you want to embarrass the Govt and get the ETS discredited, debate with them about enteric methane, debating about global warming itself will not achieve the same result.

Keep those emails going to John Key so that he is not under the wrong impression that there is not strong opposition from farmers to his ETS.

Tell him you hate the ETS and enteric methane should not be in it.

Let us know how you get on at the meetings.

John Boscawen / Rodney Hide meetings:

The ETS Must be Dumped

Come to a Public Meeting to learn about the ETS and the damage it will do to New Zealand’s economy. No spin, just the facts. Learn also about the back downs that have already resulted from ACT’s campaign and ACT’s strategy going forward should it go ahead.

WHAKATANE – 13 July – 11.30am, Eastbay REAP Head Office,21 Pyne Street– Rodney Hide

ROTORUA – 13 July – 7.30pm, Pig and Whistle Function Room, corner Haupapa and Tutanekai Sts, Rotorua – Rodney Hide

OTOROHANGA – 14 July – 11.30am, Otorohanga District Library Meeting Room – Rodney Hide

PAPAKURA – 19 July – 7.30 pm, Hawkins Centre, 13 Ray Small Drive, Papakura – Rodney Hide and John Boscawen

WARKWORTH – 9 August – 7.30 pm, The Bridgehouse Café, 16 Elizabeth Street, Warkworth- Rodney Hide and John Boscawen

TE KAUWHATA – 1 September, 7.30 pm, Waikare Golf Club, 66 Waerenga Road, Te Kauwhata

Country Channel video of protest at Parliament- it would have been great if this had made the main 6pm news!
Waitomo News- good coverage of protest and ETS generally- June 24th issue (find in back issues on this link)

Check out  also the front page of the June 17 Issue and page 5 of the June 22 issue.

Gisborne Herald- opinion piece by Alan Nicholl

Hi Esther

I found an online link so that means you could use it in a newsletter if you like

There is some interesting stuff in this magazine – not all climate change related either.

Alan Nicholson

To Climate Realists Editor

John Thompson’s letter in your Issue Number 22 was a robust response to ministerial shuffle and truth spinning.

There is something interesting about his list of top 20 trading partners, where 5 of them have a shared, limited ETS.

All 5 have massive subsidy support of their agriculture. Subsidized agriculture on EC scale produces gigantic overuse of resources for no consumer benefit. Subsidized agriculture on the European scale must be the single biggest preventable source of wasteful carbon emissions imaginable.

It’s unadulterated hypocrisy for EU/ British supermarket chains to claim they would buy less from NZ because it didn’t have an ETS but continue to happily buy from subsidized EC producers. It’s mental lunacy for our govt to insist we have to go along with an ETS because of vague threats to trade implications. We’ve lived with such vague threats since Britain joined the EU and coped by getting fitter, not by loading up the core costs of doing farm business

Our unsubsidized, pastoral based agriculture is the cleanest around and we ship the output further than anyone else for the lowest carbon-mile cost. Why doesn’t this National govt stand up for what we’re the world’s best at instead of going down to collectivist UN climate agendas.

Bruce Haycock
Vice President
ACT New Zealand Party

Hi there, now that the Government seems totally fixed in their thinking about this, it seems to me that the only solution left at the next election is for National voters to give their party vote to ACT, even if they want to vote National on the electorate.  Ciao, Hugo Rusbridge.

Hi Neil and Esther
Very sorry to hear ETS has been implemented please don’t give it away I am the eternal optimist and hope this idiocy will eventually sort itself out but at what cost to the country.
Graham Griffin

With respect to vegetarianism saving the planet – much of the grazing land in NZ and the US etc, is not suitable for other food crops due to soil and terrain. This means that any move to reduce animal food products will reduce total global food production, and force prices up.


For those of you who couldn’t make it, here are some clips from the anti-ETS meetings in Feilding and Palmerston North:

Steve Wrathall

Hi Esther
Just arrived home from John Boscawen’s meeting.
There were only around 25 people there, but they were very supportive including a National party member although believe he was there to see the lie of the land, I know him well and you can rest assured he is harmless, in fact if I haven’t converted him by now, John must have this a.m.
John was very good and there were quite a lot of questions which he answered at length.  Unfortunately he had to be in Hastings at 12.00 noon and was running late otherwise believe he could have happily answered questions for another hour.  He had an answer for every question and was excellent.  Dennis made the comment that he believed one of the reasons that National is having such an easy run was because of the compliant media, particularly TV which only offers one side of the debate.  This was met with unanimous agreement.
John also produced a fact sheet which besides giving the background also gave statements made by National and his alternative view.    Its a pity this can’t be dropped into every letterbox in the country.


“National Party agriculture spokesman David Carter who, along with leader Bill English took part in the march, said an increasing number of scientists were now disputing the issue of global warming. By signing the Kyoto Protocol on climate change New Zealand had put itself at a hugely significant disadvantage, Mr Carter said. “Farmers are saying enough is enough. My advice to farmers is to keep the pressure on the Government because I think the Government will back down.”
Southland Times 25-08-2003
“National Party leader and Clutha Southland MP Bill English told the 50-strong crowd they were being asked to pay for speculative ventures that would struggle to meet the requirements of the Government’s own scientific research fund, while other countries waited for New Zealand agriculture to lose its competitive advantage.”
? Southland Times 08-08-2003

This entry was posted in Activism, Global Warming Hoax, New Zealand, NZ Climate Realists Against The ETS and tagged . Bookmark the permalink.

2 Responses to Newsletter No. 22 For 2010 From The Climate Realists Against The ETS

  1. Nik says:

    “No Carbon Taxes Party”

    One policy political neutral candidate standing in every electorate around NZ. All other matters votes with the biggest no carbon tax policy political party in Parliament & keeps those parties politically beholden to it ( probably Act ). Very simple if stuck to.

    Will clear 5% in first election, after second election cycle Carbon Taxes will be removed.

    ‘guilty until proven innocent’ & quibbling about the way the taxes themselves are applied instead of the why,

    sure way to errode the existing as well as untapped wide natural support that exists.


  2. Nik says:

    global warmers still will still have freedom for those who are wanting to, be able to incorporate no carbon living in their lifestyles – just stops totalitarian approach to their issue.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s