NZJFor Home Search Join Author instructions NZIF website NZJFor Home NZJFor

    ABSTRACT

New Zealand Journal of Forestry (2017) 62(1): 43–44
©New Zealand Institute of Forestry

Opinion
Last word

Euan Mason *,1 and Carolyn Mason *,2

1 Professor, New Zealand School of Forestry, University of Canterbury, Christchurch. Email: euan.mason@canterbury.ac.nz
2 Lecturer in Philosophy, University of Canterbury, Christchurch. Email: carolyn.mason@canterbury.ac.nz
*Corresponding author.

Abstract: It was 2014 and we were debating whether or not purchasing credits as a speculative investment was hypocritical. There is a difference between making money and creating wealth, just as there is a difference between having a token, dysfunctional emissions trading scheme (ETS) and addressing climate change. Our government had finally, after years of criticism, agreed to disallow ETS surrenders of ‘hot air’ credits obtained from former Soviet countries, and a gradual rise in prices of NZUs was virtually guaranteed now that polluters were required to surrender NZUs instead. ‘Hot air’ credits did not represent any response to address climate change, and they were available in enormous numbers very cheaply. After they were banned NZU prices rose a bit faster than predicted, and we would have made a 400% return in less than 18 months.
(no keywords)


Issues > 62(1) > Abstract
Cover

Get PDF
Download article as 323 KB PDF file

As an issue ≤ 3 years old, access to this article is restricted to subscribers. (All articles from issues > 3 years old are free.)

(You can read PDF files with the free Adobe Acrobat Reader)