New Zealand’s ambitious plan to reach net zero emissions by 2050 is at risk of being derailed, as the government backslides on climate policies, new figures show.
In 2019, the Labour government passed landmark climate legislation, committing the nation to reducing its carbon emissions to net zero by 2050 and meeting its commitments under the Paris climate accords. It requires future governments to detail how New Zealand will meet its greenhouse gas targets on the way to a carbon-neutral future.
The coalition government – made up of the centre-right National party and two minor partners, the libertarian Act party and populist New Zealand First party – released its first draft emissions reduction plan on Wednesday.
Figures published alongside it show the country is on track to reach its first and second emissions budgets, covering the years 2022-2030, but will overshoot its third budget and will fail to meet its long-term 2050 goal.
The country had been poised to meet its third budget but the projections have been updated, partly because the government has yet to announce robust new climate policies after scrapping a number of the Labour government’s carbon reduction plans.
Changes outside the government’s control, including a new supply agreement that will see the Tiwai Point aluminium smelter continue to operate through to 2044, have also altered projections.
The new projections show New Zealand will still be emitting a net 5m tonnes by 2050, unless the government can adopt new policies or technologies to reduce levels.
Climate change minister Simon Watts said the government was committed to the overarching 2050 target and “understands the need for action in climate change” but the government would “not accept shutting down productive sectors of the economy to meet emissions targets”.
“Instead, we will use a technology-led approach to allow production to increase as our emissions come down,” he said, adding that the government would orient resources towards research and development.
While New Zealand’s total contribution to global emissions are small, its gross emissions per capita are high, with nearly half of its emissions attributed to agriculture.
“Farmers need the tools in order to be able to reduce their emissions,” Watts said. “Simply implementing a pricing regime without those tools is not a feasible mechanism to help our agricultural sector, which is the backbone of this economy.”
The government has also signalled its interest in scaling up tree-planting, which it says is an affordable way to lower emissions.
“If it removes carbon, we should be looking at the opportunity to leverage that more,” Watts said.
A 2023 climate commission report warned that achieving a net reduction in emissions primarily through planting trees would be impossible to sustain in the long term.
Reliance on ‘immature technologies’
Earlier this month, the government released its climate strategy, which included policies to double renewable energy, boost the number of public electric vehicle chargers, lower agricultural emissions, invest in resource recovery through the waste minimisation fund, and invest in carbon capture, utilisation, and storage.
But other government policies have been described by climate scientists and conservation groups as “antagonistic” to the environment.
These include: reversing the ban on offshore oil and gas exploration, introducing legislation that could override environmental protections to make way for major infrastructure projects such as mines, scrapping financial incentives for electric-car buyers, and reducing funding for cycleways and public transport.
The 2025 start date for pricing agricultural emissions has also been pushed back to 2030.
In May, the government announced sweeping cuts to climate action projects in its first budget, while making no significant new investments in environmental protection or climate crisis-related policy.
This week’s draft plan has done little to allay climate scientists’ fears, many of whom believe too much stock is being put in undeveloped technology and offsetting, rather than stopping, emissions.
“Many of their policies to date will result in higher annual emissions that will not be offset by either planting trees or the emissions reduction scheme,” said Ralph Sims, a professor emeritus in sustainable energy and climate mitigation at Massey University.
“The apparent reliance by government on immature technologies that may or may not one day reduce ruminant methane [methane from livestock] significantly, or could perhaps sequester some carbon by capture and storage systems in decades to come, is high risk given such technological solutions might never become commercially viable – and will also take many years to evolve,” he said.
Lawyers for Climate Action NZ said the draft plan raises “significant concerns” about whether New Zealand will achieve its targets.
Meanwhile, projections estimate there will be a shortfall in New Zealand reaching its first Nationally Determined Contribution under the Paris Agreement, which would force the country to buy international carbon credits.
“This shortfall will come at a significant financial cost to the government, and it’s still not clear what the plan is for meeting that,” said Jessica Palairet, executive director of Lawyers for Climate Action NZ.
