Join! it's $20

Nz's international carbon policy position.

Nz's international carbon policy position.

I feel the richer nations should create a massive fund that poorer nations could access to develop low carbon technologies thus reducing their emissions on a permanent basis. This would create positive incentives for carbon reduction rather than a minimum compliance mentality

Showing 13 reactions

How would you tag this suggestion?

Sign in with

Or sign in with email

    Please check your e-mail for a link to activate your account.
    • Brendan Clarke
      commented 2016-12-07 11:48:36 +1300
      I like the idea of giving foreign aid to countries only if they promote environmental goals. However we really need to tidy up our own backyard before we do so. In short I believe we need to put an immediate halt to all new fossil fuel exploration and excavation, and put in timeframes for phasing out existing mining/excavation operations. Ideally we’d do the latter immediately also however given a number of communities rely on these activities economically, we need to be able to develop transition plans to ensure communities are not left out to dry. The same goes for existing coal and gas fired power plants in the country.
    • Brendan Clarke
      tagged this with important 2016-12-07 11:48:35 +1300
    • Robert Murray
      commented 2016-11-30 21:42:06 +1300
      Given we would have to wait until such a scheme was agreed to by the larger nations – it might be easier just to put this slant on the countries we give aid to (especially Pacific Islands.) If we spent money on developing cheap basic carbon technologies we could then donate them and the skills to teach them to other countries. Might avoid problems with corruption, vested interests and lack of interest. Sort of follows the VSA principles.
    • Alan Barraclough
      commented 2016-11-30 13:20:45 +1300
      Hi Matt, Yes.. agreed.. there is a further issue. 30 percent reduction globally isnt enough because the forests are being cut down .. so the carbon sinks are disappearing at the same time. ..
    • Alan Barraclough
      tagged this with important 2016-11-30 13:20:45 +1300
    • Matt Walkington
      commented 2016-11-30 11:33:41 +1300
      Such funding is an essential component of climate justice.

      The other, more critical and immediate, component is that the rich 10% of emitters in the rich nations rapidly cut their lifestyle emissions by say 50% to quickly reduce global emissions by 20-30%.

      We can take both these actions.
    • Matt Walkington
      tagged this with essential 2016-11-30 11:23:50 +1300
    • Matt Walkington
      followed this page 2016-11-30 11:23:39 +1300
    • Alan Barraclough
      commented 2016-11-29 20:47:33 +1300
      We must give no quarter when it comes to protecting the environment. We need to maximise opportunity within the constraint of sustainability which i believe is our TOP mission. I dont think we can compromise on sustainability. An extra $100 profit doesnt allow us to slide down the slippery slope and allow $1 of environmental damage. we are already 50 percent down that slippery slope
    • Alan Barraclough
      commented 2016-11-29 20:44:34 +1300
      I think the technology is already there and cheaper than coal or oild for developing countries. However corruption and ignorance and bribery from vested interested in devloping countries means coal fired stations continue to be built. Read about greece plans for 2 new coal stations by thr guardian. Renewables do hav the added Storage/base electricity supply issue solved by electricity storage tech. All our foreign aid should be tied to say.. no more coal power, electricity storage tech, education about the environment, no deforestation.
    • Sue Rine
      tagged this with important 2016-11-29 18:40:09 +1300
    • Sue Rine
      followed this page 2016-11-29 18:38:02 +1300
    • Clyde McLeod
      published this page in Suggestions 2016-11-29 18:14:08 +1300