Jeanette Fitzsimons
Nick Smith doesn’t get it

Nick Smith’s response to “Getting There“, the Green Party’s analysis of how much of a 40% greenhouse gas reduction target we could meet in NZ at low cost, was entirely predictable. We asked him 7 questions in the House today and are none the wiser.

First, he refused to give any information about any work the Government had done to set out possible emissions reductions, other than to say a lot of departments had worked on it. We suspect that is because there is nothing to say. The Government has relied on macro-economic analysis about emissions prices instead of analysing opportunities. Smith had made it clear that it was up to NGOs and volunteers to work out how to meet a target, not the job of the well resourced government departments he controls.

Then, he claimed he had not read our package. While it is true that we got a copy to his office only about an hour and a half before he had to answer the question, you can be totally sure that his staff had read it and advised him. It would have been obvious when it turned up that it related to question 1 in the House which they would already have been working on. Clearly they advised him not to address anything it actually said. That is good news; it means he could not rebut it.

Then, he set about rebutting things we had not said – like proposing 100% renewable electricity, which he said would raise power prices 30%. That’s the reason we didn’t propose 100%. When I was leadng EECA’s work under the last government, we had some robust analysis done by EECA and MED  to determine the costs of various levels of renewability in the electricity system. We found 90% renewable by 2025 was entirely achievable and hardly raised prices at all, as there is a lot of low cost geothermal and wind energy waiting to be built.

Going to 100% is costly because you have to build a huge amount of capacity which just sits around unused until there is a very dry winter, given that people don’t like power cuts. Much better to have a couple of gas peaking stations that are cheap to build and only run a small proportion of the time. The greenhouse gases are negligible in the scheme of things and the saved capital is much better used to make significant reductions in transport or agriculture which are a much bigger worry than electricity.

Next he attacked the idea of reducing farm animals by a third. That would mean reducing dairy farm stocking rates from 2.83 cows/ha which is the current average to 1.86. Our proposal was to reduce them to 2.3, which is the intensity that research has found is most profitable for the farmer if milk prices are below $5.50. The current price is $5.20, which is also the average price (inflation adjusted) over the last ten years. The extra return from additional animals per hectare just doesn’t pay for the huge increase in urea, bought in feeds, off farm grazing of animals not in milk and animal health costs that are needed to cram more animals on to the same land. Dairy farmers could be making more money and reducing emissions.

We didn’t get as far as transport where fuel economy standards for vehicles could dramatically lower petrol costs for motorists – but he’s bound to have a reason not to do this too.

He quoted again that mysterious figure attributed to the NZIER/Infometrics report, that a minus 40% target would entail a cost of $14.5 Billion a year – impressive, except that no-one can find it in that report. Did he make it up?

Not a single question of mine answered, not a single  point in our report addressed, but finally, the last refuge of someone with no arguments,  a personal attack: emissions rose while I was leading the Government’s work on energy efficiency. Well, of course! Programmes take a couple of years to get through Cabinet and operational; then they take some time to have measurable effect. And energy efficiency is only one part of a much larger problem. The effects of the Government doing nothing today wil be felt over the next decade.

NZ deserves a “can do” minister, not a “can’t do, won’t try” government.

148 thoughts on “Nick Smith doesn’t get it

  1. Smith is toast – a bogus economic analysis, no sign of a comprehensive mitigation analysis, and he can’t even come up with a decent personal attack.

    What a dork!

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

  2. And what about Key saying Keisha Castle-Huges should stick to acting – what a dork!

    Who voted for these dorks?

    What dorks!

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

  3. Its not unreasonable that he is unable to respond intelligently so soon, although it would have been nice to see some indication that he intends to engage with the information presented. So far it looks like wriggling avoidance and denial. It would be a real pity if that remains the Government’s response. I assume and hope there is a strategy to try and engage them because we so need them to take this great piece of work seriously. It will take everything you’ve got I imagine. Jah guide your path.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

  4. Interesting that the Greens subscribe to the “Two Cows” theory of Government;

    COMMUNISM: You have two cows. At first the government regulates what you can feed them and when you can milk them. Then it pays you not to milk them. Then it takes both, shoots one, milks the other and pours the milk down the drain. Then it requires you to fill out forms accounting for the missing cows.

    Let’s face it, the Greens want to shoot cows because the Dairy industry is profitable and profitability is anathema to their dreams of building a post-capitalist peasant/worker collective.

    The Green party, New Zealand’s answer to the Khmer Rouge.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

  5. “The Green party, New Zealand’s answer to the Khmer Rouge.”

    …or to paraphrase: Don’t ever take anything I say seriously.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

  6. “Let’s face it, the Greens want to shoot cows because the Dairy industry is profitable and profitability is anathema to their dreams of building a post-capitalist peasant/worker collective.”

    Actually oob, the only parts of the dairy industry that are profitable are the ones that have already reduced their herd size and their inputs. It’s already happening, and we never proposed any regulation that it should happen, so your theory ain’t worth the rawhide it’s written on.

    The dairy industry, IMHO is NZ’s sub-prime crisis ready to happen. Debt laden, over inflated, and that 20% or so of bad debt is going to drag the rest of the hard working farmers down with them. Pity really.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

  7. oob is also quite likely to be brian spondre..

    ..he runs/manages the blogs of trotter/hickey..

    ..and openly boasts about using variety of rightwing troll names..

    ..to disrupt others’ blogs/forums..

    ..and it reads like the drivel he posts..

    ..is that you..?..brian..?

    phil(whoar.co.nz)

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

  8. No, Wat usually posts longer and has SOME sort of basis (albeit mistaken) for what he says.

    This is less sensible than Wat.

    BJ

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

  9. “And what about Key saying Keisha Castle-Huges should stick to acting – what a dork!”

    She should.
    Why should any body listen to a little girl who plays make believe for a living.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

  10. Shunda said:

    Why should any body listen to a little girl who plays make believe for a living.

    Out of the mouthes of babes, Shunda. Truth that is. You don’t have much faith, do you, in those of tender years. Especially those who tell you that hitting them is bad. They should know. They’re on the the receiving end, after all (or are you one of those, ‘This hurts me more than it hurts you’ hypocrites?)

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

  11. Phil – on Bryan Spondre/oob. I don’t know for sure if it is he (though I trust your instincts), but the not-so-charming oob expressed a desire to shoot my Kiwiblog greenfly self, with a high powered rifle with a scope, from a roof top, on several occasions while I posted there. The more appalling aspect of his threats was that he believed I was a young girl and this didn’t stay his threats at all. I found him to be a very despicable poster.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

  12. Doesn’t matter who he was, he successfully hijacked the thread. I reckon we should just delete all the obvious troll comments and not respond to them.

    Meanwhile I have fallen for the bait too …

    CORPORATE CAPITALISM, you have two cows, you shoot one and feed it to the other one which then gets mad cow disease. You employ an advertising agency to convince everyone there are no public health issues with your product and it doesn’t need to be recalled. You fund biased research that shows there are no public health issues with your product. You fund a think tank that places opinion pieces in the media in order to lead public opinion towards the view that there are no public health issues with your product. You employ a lawyer to sue anyone who says there are public health issues with your product. etc etc

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

  13. (or are you one of those, ‘This hurts me more than it hurts you’ hypocrites?)

    Nope, I don’t feel any pain when I smack my kids. I don’t like having to discipline my kids, but I don’t see any point in using “the loving smack” nonsense.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

  14. Shunda – you didn’t express an opinion about Bill English’s blatant rorting. I thought that would be something that you would have a view on. He’s been a bit of a toff about the whole thing, hasn’t he… entitled and all that.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

  15. stuey said..

    “..I reckon we should just delete all the obvious troll comments and not respond to them..”

    (and you’d volunteer to be chief censor ..eh stuey..?

    ..you’re actually gagging for it..aren’t you.?

    and to you..i am a troll..eh..?

    ..’disrupting’ with my vegan ways..eh..?

    ..so i’d be ‘gone’..eh..?

    ..why are you so contemptuous of readers abilities to either accept or dismiss what they read..?

    to such a degree you enthuse about settting up a censorship-regime..?

    ..bah..!

    phil(whoar.co.nz)

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

  16. “He’s been a bit of a toff about the whole thing, hasn’t he… entitled and all that.”

    Yeah maybe, but he is going to give some of it back, which is a lot more than any Labour MP would do.
    And thats really how I see it, national have a long way to go before they are any where near those corrupt liars.
    First NZ conviction for corruption?, Labour MP for exploiting immigrants, paying them less than the minimum wage, slavery in other words. From the flippin labour party!!!! :roll:

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

  17. I have just read the transcript: Nick Smith simply hadn’t read the article that Jenette sent him this morning,
    All he had to do was to say that he will comment until he has read the documents.

    But I get the impression that reducing carbon emissions are not a National Party priority.

    I think that stuey has the more accurate analogy of the dairy industry and it’s corporate excesses.

    Ignore oob he is just a red baiting anachronism – - – they are such boors

    YAWN time for bed!!!!

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

  18. Yeah maybe! YEAH MAYBE!!

    Oh I see Shunda. Your boy made a wee slip up and he’s fixed it all up, so we’re all sweet, right?

    H
    Y
    P
    O
    C
    R
    I
    T
    E

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

  19. I’ve never really liked Bill greenfly, but I think people are making a big deal out of a minor issue. It would seem this sort of thing has been going on for years by all parties, why didn’t Duncan Garner expose his beloved Labour party?
    Mps are dodgy, I voted for the less dodgy, thats all.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

  20. It would seem this sort of thing has been going on for years by all parties…

    but what do you think of BILL ENGLISH DOING IT Shunda??

    He’s Minister of Finance for New Zealand!!

    He’s No.1 in the Government you love!!

    Don’t you feel a little anxious over his dishonesty and sneakiness??

    ARE YOU BLIND?

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

  21. “He’s No.1 in the Government you love!!”

    The only “love” is because its not Labour greenfly.
    You mis-understand my political motivations.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

  22. Shunda! Brilliant! You are defending Sir Double-Dipton!

    (The thunder of horse hooves, the clopping of those of a donkey..
    swish, swish, swish go the ragged blades of the windmill)

    For goodness sake!

    You’re flapping around like a pilchard on the beach at Brown’s Bay!

    (I’m embarrassed for you!)

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

  23. se..shunda..this where your rightwing trollness becomes clearly evident..

    ..you can’t even admit that both major parties both suck and blow on this..

    (tho i’m sure the greens aren’t tardy in grabbing their ‘entitlements’ either..)

    ..and i know ‘dismissing it’ is yr parties’ ‘line’..

    ..but the punters won’t let this go..

    ..they can smell fear/see fear in their eyes..

    ..and don’t you see how english giving it back is him admitting he is/was rorting/milking it..?

    ..how could it not..?

    ..be an admission of guilt..

    ..heatley will be next..

    ..let the tumbrils roll..!

    phil(whoar.co.nz)

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

  24. Is the prime minister going to do anything about it?

    Oh Lord!

    Tumeke!

    I’m retiring, beaten by a blind man.

    How feeble my powers have become.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

  25. “se..shunda..this where your rightwing trollness becomes clearly evident..”

    phil, I am no where near as right wing as you suppose, no where near.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

  26. Phil – and the timbrels fly!

    Go Davey Jones, you wee beauty!

    Those Pentecostals, eh Shunda!!

    I’ve got it!

    Glossolalia! That’s what Shunda’s spouting!!

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

  27. Greenfly, Just imagine the scandals we would be enduring right now if Liarbore had of won the election.
    The greens would be getting a sound thrashing from their Labour overlords, jumping around their feet like an abused puppy.
    You owe me man.
    You owe me big.
    :)

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

  28. “Go Davey Jones, you wee beauty!

    Those Pentecostals, eh Shunda!!

    I’ve got it!

    Glossolalia! That’s what Shunda’s spouting!!”

    :D
    You do make me laugh sometimes fly!!

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

  29. One more time – just for silly old me – the Greens signed the MoU because why?

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

  30. Manure lagoons! Mmmmmmm………..

    Exotic! Intoxicating!

    I hope we get one!

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

  31. This line:

    The visceral reaction against anyone questioning our God-given right to bathe in bacon has been enough to scare many in the environmental movement away from this issue.

    is the one that caught your eye, I’m betting Phil and therein lies the greatest challenge.
    How can you even think of denying good-hearted folk their Sunday roast??

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

  32. i’m finding it quite fascinating how fast the ‘wild/radical’ vegan argument around climatechange/environmental destruction/degradation..

    ..is moving into the mainstream dialogue..

    ..(tho’..not here..yet..over to you..!..green m.p’s..!..)

    ..this vegan-chatter will not lessen..

    ..tipping ponts ahead..!

    ..ahoy..!

    http://whoar.co.nz/2009/meat-climate-change-and-industry-tripe/

    and..

    ..’manure lagoons’..?

    ..i think we already have some..

    ..fly..

    ..tell us more about local revulsion at the gouging by english..

    ..from down around dipton way..

    ..(inquiring metropolitan minds .. want to know..)

    phil(whoar.co.nz)

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

  33. Phil – I drove through Dipton yesterday – all quiet, but there was the air of embarrassment about the place. Even conservatives here are dismayed (the forgiving ones) or disgusted by the rorting by their boy. A woman I spoke to this morning had been ‘on Bill’s team’ over past elections and related stories of his arrogant disregard for paying for things (or not) such as his drycleaning. Small bickies yes, but these are the kinds of stories doing the rounds down here. The greatest eye-rolling is saved for talk of ‘hand in the till Bill’ over his insistance that he lives here. He don’t! I keep an eye out for his visits and they are few and far between. I wrote to the Southland Times a while back, pointing out his lack of presence and he answered my letter, which I thought curious. He’s got a watch on dissent in his electorate. There have been a number of critical letters in the Times, mostly cynical in tone. I campaigned on the same stages as English at one election and though he was fun and funny on a personal-comments-under-his-breath kind of way, he has a nasty streak and will say ‘cruel’ things to gain audience support. He can easily be goaded though. Worth bearing in mind.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

  34. that ‘easily goaded’ was evident in his pathos-drenched..’won’t someone think of the children!’..performance

    ..that was troughing-excuse number two..?..wasn’t it..?

    ..it came straight after..’move along..!..nothing to see here..!’

    ..which in turn..followed “never mind about me..!

    look..!..over there..!..global economic meltdown!..”

    ..(and i swear his lower-lip trembled during that maude-flanders ‘turn’..)

    phil(whoar.co.nz)

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

  35. Greenfly, were you this critical of the 9 years of Labours scandalous behavior?
    If not why not?
    Perhaps that’s why the average Kiwi doesn’t give the left a drop of credibility when they start the “pointing of the finger”.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

  36. “swinging voters beware!”

    No, the Philip field affair will keep the “swingers” right of centre, as will the bumbling Phil gooof.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

  37. Shunda, yes, I was.
    I’m not a Labour supporter. Why do you think that I am?
    It’s not the ‘left’ pointing the finger at Bill. Everyone knows he’s rorting and everyone (bar the one-eyed) wants him to come clean. His ‘I’ll give half of it back’ won’t keep them befuddled for long. He’s been duplicitous.

    Phil – great title!

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

  38. “I’m not a Labour supporter. Why do you think that I am?”

    Greenie pleeeeeeese, The Green party should have Labour up on charges for battery, they have abused you guys for years yet still you rule out working with the other main party before the election and go cowering back to your abusers.
    Its heart breaking watching.
    But I voted National for you greenfly, I’ve got your back bro.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

  39. Shunda

    Your blind defence of ‘fingers-in-the-till Bill’ has blunted your already dull ability to understand simple concepts.
    You asked if I was this critical; of Labour.
    I answered ‘yes’.
    You heard, ‘no’.
    (Important note to Shunda: I am not the Green Party)
    Nevertheless, I’m glad you’ve got my back. Leaves me free to move foward.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

  40. Shunda, its just not about who’s nice to who. You really seem to want to personalise the issues between the Greens and Labour (which is odd since the real personal issue that had an actual impact on the course of events was between Clark and Turia and yet you try your hardest to ignore that). But the Greens are an issues party and any analysis of the policies of Labour and National shows we have a much better policy match with Labour. Whether they are nice to us or not doesn’t change a thing. The current govt is so bad on Green issues that people wonder why we work with them on the 1% of common ground that does exist, ffs. You’re analysis is effectively meaningless.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

  41. “Your blind defence of ‘fingers-in-the-till Bill’ has blunted your already dull ability to understand simple concepts.”

    Ok then greenfly explain it to me.
    As someone who voted National, how do YOU think I should respond to ‘fingers-in-the-till Bill’?
    At the end of the day, he broke no laws but you seem to insist that unless I renounce all support for National I am some how an intolerable hypocrite.
    This is minor stuff, it is house keeping that will affect all MPs including the Greens.
    The Prime minister has said they will do something about the rules, what more do you want?

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

  42. “The current govt is so bad on Green issues that people wonder why we work with them on the 1% of common ground that does exist, ffs.”

    Well they are no worse than Labour but that wasn’t an issue for the Greens was it.
    I would bet that the greens would have far more luck in implementing common sense sustainability policy with national than they would with labour.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

  43. Shunda

    This National/Act government is considerably worse than Labour on Green issues.

    This National/Act government is considerably worse than Labour on Green issues.

    (I’m using repitition to drive the point through the blue fog that sometimes surrounds you)

    How should you respond to Bill English treating himself so generously at the taxpayers expense, despite his very handsome salary?

    I think you should forgive him his trespasses, Shunda, and ask that due process be followed. If he has done something wrong, he should have to pay the real price. If he has been exploiting his position, he should be answerable. If he has been dishonest, he should pack his bags. If he has been negligent, he should hand his responsibilities over to someone who can manage financial matters better than he managed his own.

    As for ‘renouncing all support for National’ being the prerequisite for ‘not being a hypocrite’ – you made that up, all by yourself, but you can do so if you wish. I’d respect you for it :-)

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

  44. Well they are no worse than Labour but that wasn’t an issue for the Greens was it.

    I guess I shouldn’t be surprised you believe that, but nothing could be further from the truth. Labour were dismal in most environmental areas through 2005 and remained dismal in some through 2008. But in their last term, they started doing good things, so many of which Green MPs were involved with, particularly Jeanette with energy efficiency.

    I would bet that the greens would have far more luck in implementing common sense sustainability policy with national than they would with labour.

    National reversed most of this work in their first “emergency” session of Parliament. That’s how good they are. In every area outside the MoU (did I say it was 1%, more like 0.1%) they are doing nothing or making things worse, hopefully baring water allocation schemes, but that remains to be seen. You’re really dreaming if you think the Nats would ever do better. If they are serious, they could start by changing their policies to be less anti-environmental.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

  45. Though you are unaware of it Shunda (so subtle is my craft) you are 99.99% there. There’ll be a party when you do step aboard.
    (I’ll supply the cider – and that might just be the decider!)

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

  46. The Garden party, btw, is going from strength to strength!
    Our numbers are growing, boosted by this bullsh*t coming from the Government.
    Our newest initiative, ‘Prison Guards to Prison Gardeners’,
    is proving a vote winner and our DeFence policy is shaping up to be inspirational as well.
    Don’t hold out too long Shunda, you’re only hurting yourself!

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

  47. “(I’ll supply the cider – and that might just be the decider!)”

    Mmmmmm, cider……….

    No!!! I must not be swayed by the potions and tonics of the garden party elite.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

  48. “You’re really dreaming if you think the Nats would ever do better. ”

    You know what Valis? I would really love to be part of a “green” party I just can’t do the whole communist/socialist thing.
    Whats a Tree hugger like me to do?

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

  49. My word can someone please ask him if he understands the difference between gross emissions and net emissions? Keep it simple. Just that.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

  50. Greenfly, what’s the Garden party going to do about hedge funds?

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

  51. Shunda: Who cares of beneficiaries get a bit too much money or a few economic opportunities are lost to excessive regulation if it means the worst of climate change is averted? Giving a toss about the left-right spectrum is a luxury that people had in the 20th century when the environment was in ok shape. We’re well past that stage now.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

  52. “in the 20th century when the environment was in ok shape. ”

    Hilarious.
    Right rimu, the sky is falling-LOOKOUT

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

  53. kahikatea – hedge funds are a difficult issue, as you are doubtless aware.
    On one hand they provide shelter from adverse elements and on the other they obscure the activities of those who create them.
    For the sake of clarity and transparency, The Garden Party will require that all hedge funds are managed in manner of our Japanese political equivalents, the ‘Bonsai (Small Government, Much Happiness) Party’, and kept to a minimum. That way, New Zealanders can be assured that there is no untoward behaviour occuring out of sight of public scrutiny.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

  54. “Shunda: Who cares of beneficiaries get a bit too much money or a few economic opportunities are lost to excessive regulation if it means the worst of climate change is averted?”

    When has socialism ever been good for people OR the environment?
    While I guess I am sympathetic to some mild socialist ideals, in practice they never stay mild for long!!
    People don’t give a stuff about the environment when they are poor.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

  55. Shunda,
    Socialism has been central to the survival of large societies for centuries.
    The romans used social welfare to prevent to poor from starving; they recognised the power of hungry masses.
    The egyptians had one of the largist social welfare programs known: during the wet they employed thousands of workers to build the massive scuptures and palaces still standing today. They were paid in grain from the pharohs store houses because otherwise they would starve and iot during the wet season; the pyrimids, etc were the first recorded ‘work for the dole schemme’. The records even show holidays, sick days, and doctors. Slaves building the pyrimids is just a juedo/christian lie.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

  56. You know what Valis? I would really love to be part of a “green” party I just can’t do the whole communist/socialist thing.
    Whats a Tree hugger like me to do?

    It’s not for me to say, but you may want to reflect on the fact that your voting shows you are more concerned about left/right than you are about the environment. I find that a terribly sad position for a tree hugger to be in, particularly given environmental issues are as serious as any humanity faces. Good luck sorting things out.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

  57. # Shunda barunda Says:
    August 6th, 2009 at 3:44 pm

    > When has socialism ever been good for people OR the environment?

    depends what you mean by socialism. If you mean an attempt to reduce poverty, reduce inequality and provide public health and education services within a capitalist economy, then there is plenty of evidence of it being good for both people and the environment, though it can’t help the environment by itself.

    > People don’t give a stuff about the environment when they are poor.

    This is the main reason why a fairer distribution of resources makes it easier to protect the environment.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

  58. Look, I am sure all you nice people would never advocate a system of oppression like many socialist regimes have, but like I said, when has socialism as the dominant system ever worked?
    Some of what the Greens and especially labour have developed (or wanted to develop) is Marxist plain and simple.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

  59. “It’s not for me to say, but you may want to reflect on the fact that you’re voting shows you are more concerned about left/right than you are about the environment.”

    I want to ask all you guys a serious question.
    Do you really think we would have been better off under a labour led Government?
    They would have stuffed any chance of us riding out this recession because they are blinded by there socialist (marxist?) ideals.
    They were well and truly past there use by date.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

  60. Sapient

    Yeah, the Egyptians working in construction while the waters of the Nile were covering their fields with water and lovely rich silt. I find that really interesting. The stone they quarried was easier to move from the quarry sites as well, with the flood waters providing a ‘road’ to the sites of the pyramids.
    The fate of the Nile a la Aswan Dam is a tragedy.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

  61. Do you really think we would have been better off under a labour led Government?

    In many ways yes. Its not that I don’t think the individuals in govt didn’t need to change. They were tired and jaded and Labour needs to renew itself like any party that’s been in for a while. They would have taken an even bigger fall next time if they didn’t go out this time. But that doesn’t mean I support a govt that will do worse things by design, just because they are new and fresh. That’s a bit of a paradox, I realise.

    They would have stuffed any chance of us riding out this recession because they are blinded by there socialist (marxist?) ideals.

    A govt more likely to invest in sustainable infrastructure would have not only helped us ride out the recession, but would have made the economy more resilient for the future. And if you think Labour are in any way Marxist, you don’t know the meaning of the word.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

  62. Shunda,
    You did not specifiy as a dominant system.
    How do you define what is dominant in a world where the majority of economies are third way and integrate both capitalist markets and socialist redistribution?

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

  63. I get it—it’s the full moon.
    Be in touch when your all over it.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

  64. Shunda

    Now you’re for it!

    Valis and Sapient, asking probing questions!

    I hope you will stick with it and do your best to argue your case without
    nonsensical stuff. I’m interested in the debate as well.

    Go Shunda! Rah, rah!

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

  65. “And if you think Labour are in any way Marxist, you don’t know the meaning of the word.”

    Why cause the left don’t like how it sounds?
    You can call a Duck a Chicken, but it is still a Duck.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

  66. define your interpretation of ‘marxist’..shunda..

    that you call a centre-right party..(on any international ideological spectrum)..marxist..

    only proves that like most of the rightwing trolls at/from kiwiblog..

    ..your ideological-debates..consist of throwing labels/catch-phrases that you really don’t understand..

    ..eh..?

    phil(whoar.co.nz)

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

  67. Shunda – just looked and it’s there. Looks really interesting. I’ll settle to it shortly.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

  68. BJ this reinforces my idea that the wealthier you are the less likely you are to care about what is happening to the planet.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

  69. # Shunda barunda Says:
    August 6th, 2009 at 6:51 pm

    > Why cause the left don’t like how it sounds?
    > You can call a Duck a Chicken, but it is still a Duck.

    Indeed. You can call a capitalist mixed economy Marxist, but if it doesn’t include public ownership of all farms, factories and shops, with prices set by the government to prevent any competition, then it is capitalism and not Marxism.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

  70. Kahikatea, I guess I am not thinking of where Labour were, but where they were heading.
    Didn’t Marx see it as a progression from socialism to communism ?

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

  71. Be in touch when your all over it.

    Kelpie, I’ve been all over it for a while now.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

  72. Kahikatea, I guess I am not thinking of where Labour were, but where they were heading.
    Didn’t Marx see it as a progression from socialism to communism ?

    Yes, he did, the problem is that you think this progression actually applies to Labour. Really Shunda, I start to think you’re just playing with us. Surely you don’t believe this stuff?

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

  73. “Surely you don’t believe this stuff?”

    Not in the way you think I do.
    It seems to me that many “progressives” think that their ideas are new and revolutionary and will result in a wonderful advancement for the human race. All I see is a hodge podge of old ideas with a new label stamped on them, played to a contemporary jingle.
    Some of the ideas being advocated are quite destructive in my opinion, there is simply no way Labour could have continued to tax and spend the way they were without doing massive damage to our country.
    Socially and economically.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

  74. So why not just be clear about what you think the problem is in the first place, instead of talking utter nonsense and expecting us to figure you out? I’ve never been a mind reader and its even more difficult over the net.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

  75. Shunda asked:

    I want to ask all you guys a serious question.
    Do you really think we would have been better off under a labour led Government?

    How about asking the real serious question Shunda -


    Do you really think we would have been better off under a Green led Government?

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

  76. “..Really Shunda, I start to think you’re just playing with us..”

    i repeat..shunda is a rightwing troll..

    whose role here is to distract/disrupt..

    and the amount of qxygen you give the troll..

    he/she is being very successful..

    i repeat..again..

    ..shunda at kiwiblog could not be more contemptuous of the people he/she comes here and pretends to ‘engage’

    yes..he/she is playing with you..

    ..and you are being sucked in..

    ..look at what he/she says..

    it is the same eminently simplistic stuff..

    ..repeated again..and again..(ie…’marxist’./smacking.)

    phil(whoar.co.nz)

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

  77. “Do you really think we would have been better off under a Green led Government?”

    No!!! You guys are much more efficient as a small party. I and others have suggested before that the Greens would do better as a single issue party, I don’t think it would work if the Greens led a government.
    While I can understand that the Greens need to have policy in other areas, at the end of the day can a ‘green’ party really not be a single issue party?

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

  78. oh well..carry on..

    the troll has the intellect/debating skills of a newt..

    ..but if it amuses you..

    phil(whoar.co.nz)

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

  79. “..shunda at kiwiblog could not be more contemptuous of the people he/she comes here and pretends to ‘engage’”

    Oh paarrrleeeeeese phil.
    My contempt has dropped in recent months as I learn more about the attitudes and motivations behind certain individuals and organizations.
    I do have serious differences of opinion on much of the social policy of the left in general and I have never tried to hide that anywhere.
    I will make a personal confession phil, just for you. Here goes.
    I have re-read some of my old posts on Kiwi blog and frog blog and decided that I often sounded like a reactionary idiot, I am now trying to transition into a more reasonable tone.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

  80. so valis..presenting the ideas/arguments/links/evidence i do..on core green issues..

    (even if you don’t recognise them..)

    ..is ‘trolling’..

    eh..?

    whereas you are the voice of the incrementalist/do nothing/’scared’ greens..

    eh..?

    phil(whoar.co.nz)

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

  81. gee..!..valis..

    d’yareckon the early labour party people/activists..

    ..sat around fretting over not saying stuff..’cos it might affront/offend some of the populace..?

    shhh..!!..don’t talk about unions..!

    ,,the bosses won’t like it..

    (how about growing a pair..?..eh..?.)

    phil(whoar.co.nz)

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

  82. Wasn’t referring to trolling, but debating skills.

    d’yareckon the early labour party people/activists..
    ..sat around fretting over not saying stuff..’cos it might affront/offend some of the populace..?

    No and I bet they won some of those debates too.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

  83. “I answered that one a while ago:”

    Aaaa yes those were the days, I have to say Valis, that was one of your best posts. Infact I might save that one as a reference for future study.
    Politics is very interesting in NZ, kind of like a history of what happens when the ‘working class’ settle a nation. After being to the USA a couple of times I can appreciate the value of NZs political system, but like all things it requires maintenance and balance.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

  84. you are like a perpetual-motion bullshit machine..

    eh shunda..?

    yes valis…but at least they were having the debates ..eh..?

    not just sitting around ..scared..going ‘sshh!!..don’t say that..!..don’t talk about that..!

    ..some people (with vested interests)..won’t like it..!

    ..and we must not get anyone angry..

    ..’cos..’cos..we’re the greens…

    ..and we don’t do that..’

    (btw..!..anyone had an update on how the sows are getting on..?)

    phil(whoar.co.nz)

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

  85. “you are like a perpetual-motion bullshit machine..

    eh shunda..?”

    I would like to share some of my green “credentials” with you Phil, but I fear you may identify me and hunt me down!!
    Just relax dude, why do I piss you off so much?

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

  86. You missed my meaning phil. By winning some debates, I mean they actually had the skills needed to make meaningful progress. These include picking the right battles at the right time, not conflating broad issues with immediate goals, and effectively answering points the other side raises rather than just rabbiting on about one’s own hobby horses no matter what is said. It means knowing the difference between raising difficult issues and just being difficult.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

  87. Phil,
    I know you have put on your blinders but:

    d’yareckon the early labour party people/activists..

    ..sat around fretting over not saying stuff..’cos it might affront/offend some of the populace..?

    They did alot of controversal stuff but they did that, and benefited from it, because it struck a cord with a large potion of the population, unlike your vegan-nazism. I am sure they moderated their opinions in some cases to prevent alienating the majority of their supportive body.
    Its politics phil. Stop ignoring that fact. Stop ignoring the importance of maintaining a base of supporters sufficent to actually get something done. Do a cost/benefit analysis.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

  88. Phil,
    I know you have put on your blinders but:

    d’yareckon the early labour party people/activists..

    ..sat around fretting over not saying stuff..’cos it might affront/offend some of the populace..?

    They did alot of controversal stuff but they did that, and benefited from it, because it struck a cord with a large potion of the population, unlike your vegan-nazism. I am sure they moderated their opinions in some cases to prevent alienating the majority of their supportive body.
    Its politics phil. Stop ignoring that fact. Stop ignoring the importance of maintaining a base of supporters sufficent to actually get something done. Do a cost/benefit analysis.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

  89. All right folks, this has drifted some

    The economy of the big guy is in the toilet. Green shoots are what is coming out of his XXXX. I have called it before, I am pointing it out again… this link is just a representative, the problems have not gone away.

    http://market-ticker.denninger.net/archives/1283-Is-The-FDIC-Broke-And-Covering-It-Up.html

    The Chinese are demanding 40% and not showing a “we’re negotiating” flag here, and the US is looking like it won’t pass climate legislation for another year.

    http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5jQtnKDstFSWBJLaVndcOcla3GGTw

    http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0809/25802.html

    Which means that we, WE have to consider that there is not going to be that global agreement and cooperation that is ESSENTIAL if this is going to get done.

    What should NZ do absent a significant global agreement to reduce emissions.

    I think we still go for all the renewable power we can find and wean ourselves off the imported fuels. We still go for housing efficiency.

    These things relate to being ready for the point where such fuels become largely unavailable/too expensive.

    What else?

    BJ

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

  90. You fund biased research that shows there are no public health issues with your product. You fund a think tank that places opinion pieces in the media in order to lead public opinion towards the view that there are no public health issues with your product. You employ a lawyer to sue anyone who says there are public health issues with your product.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

  91. These things relate to being ready for the point where such fuels become largely unavailable/too expensive. Altogether independent of CO2 emissions.
    …. just to morph this towards the other points being made in this thread.

    I don’t think Greens have prepared themselves (I think many Greens are completely UNprepared) – to govern. A Green led government would be a damned good thing. Probably far better than Shunda believes, but I cannot imagine the party itself surviving the experience.

    respectfully
    BJ

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

  92. What else?

    We support research and development of new renewable energy sources such as wave power, tidal stream power and salinity gradient power (such as pressure-retarded osmosis), so that when the energy crunch does come, we will still be able to buy or make more of our own equipment to harness our renewable energy resources and assist other countries to do the same. (If this is done by way of partnerships, we may make a significant profit on this investment.)

    We invest in efficiency improvements, not just in homes but also industry and commercial arenas. We also invest in infrastructure efficiency improvements, such as lower power street lighting and traffic lights.

    We encourage conversion of vehicles to CNG, and enhance our CNG distribution network. We support renewable sources of CNG (methane) such as biomass plus sources such as coal-seam gas, landfill gas all for transport rather than electricity generation or fixed energy applications. We encourage home, commercial and industrial users of natural gas, oil, coal, LPG, etc to switch to off-peak electricty, solar or geothermal at least some of the time, to save the CNG for transport.

    I am sure there is more…

    Trevor.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

  93. Trevor

    I didn’t mean to get down to each specific renewable :-)

    The point about doing the R&D here and developing some capacity to make the tools to extract the energy locally is good.

    I am thinking about other areas in which we should be considering insulating ourselves from difficulties that happen elsewhere.

    I mentioned (for example) the need for some local chocolate and coffee production. I was joking then. Not really so much now.

    Is it possible to grow sugar cane? Sugar beets? The economy will not tolerate such things done before the products become “unavailable through import”, but ensuring that nascent capacity is there could be a reasonable measure against catastrophic changes.

    A seed bank of some sort.

    To what degree do we count on being able to continue to trade with Oz? To what degree do we discount the ability to trade elsewhere? Who makes bearings here? Can we?

    Not easy questions.

    Not pure green either.

    respectfully
    BJ

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

  94. How could Nick Smith comment on ‘Big Affordable Climate Change’ other than to say. “that’s a load of wooly nonsense”.
    The saddest thing is that the greens are right. 40% is probably doable at almost no economic cost for NZ. They are also right in that there is no hope of much change unless there is practical leadership from government institutions.
    An ETS where the prices and rules change every few months is not going to achieve any fundamental developments.
    That Green’s document is simply a rehash of the same old tired and impractical exhortations that they have been droning on about for the last ten years. Not a single example of how to get the things actually done in practice.
    So many errors as well, where do you start?
    Forestry. The greens were partners with the government that managed to destroy any desire to plant new forests in NZ in a single decade. I don’t believe that they have any understanding of foresters at all.
    A small practical point about their 25000 H/yr planting. If somebody wanted to plant a forest so that the government could steal it off them where would the seedlings come from? Most of the tree nurseries from the nineties are gone.
    Getting any significant increase in tree planting is not a trivial problem. Some kind of obvious fundamental change in the altitude of the NZ govt. to forestry is needed. Credit guaranties and grants for new nurseries would help as well.

    Energy. If the Electricity Commission got off their butts and did some proper public detailed risk scenarios then the greens would be less inclined to resurrect the ’3000 MW of wind will save NZ from power shortages’ myth.
    Sadly wind is almost no use in the 1 in 7 calm/dry summers. Detailed replacement scenarios also show that wind in this amount has a ten year carbon payback period, not a lot of use to stop global warming. The cost of this much wind and the grid to support it would require a 50% increase in the retail electricity price.
    Everybody knows that using wood fuel to replace coal would be a ‘good idea’. Do the greens have a plan for guaranteed prices and a distribution network to implement it. If so there is no sign of it in this document.
    No technical knowledge or imagination at all in this part of the document.

    Transport. Why have the greens no ideas at all on encouraging people to use low energy private transport? All the ideas are punitive. This must be a political bias.

    Indigenous forest enhancement. This does sound like a plan to cover the world in 10/80.
    The problem with this is that on most of DOC’s land in shrubland-forest succession from existing shrubland-forest vegetation to tall forest is inhibited primarily by poor soil condition. DOC have shown themselves unable to deal with this except on a very small scale.
    So how do the greens hope to deal with this very challenging and probably expensive ecological engineering problem in a short time scale? No clue in the document , again.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

  95. Emerald,

    I don’t know about your other points, but you are wrong on the transport issue. The Greens have always promoted the use of low energy private transport. What do you think shoes and bicycles are? Sure, they’re not suitable for everyone’s transportation needs all the time. However, if people walked and cycled whenever practical, there would be major savings in fuel, carbon dioxide emissions and health care costs (and the reduced number of cars on the roads would make them safer for the cyclists and pedestrians as well).

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

  96. Please remember the context of this analysis. Jeanette said at her press conference that she only started this work two weeks previous to releasing it upon realising that the government was doing nothing to assess the potential for emissions reductions in the NZ economy and instead planned to base the achievement of its 2020 target entirely on the ETS alone. The Green Party does not have the resources to do the govt’s job and cover their negligence.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

  97. Sadly wind is almost no use in the 1 in 7 calm/dry summers.

    Begging pardon, but this depends a lot on where the turbines are sited, and the fact that this is the roaring 40′s means that there is no such thing as “calm” from 37 degrees South to 47 degrees South. I don’t think that you can make that case as strongly as you seem to want to, and I would very much like to know where you are obtaining this statistic. If it is true it means that we will need solar as well as wind generation, unless of course we harness the power of Cook Strait properly.

    . Do the greens have a plan for guaranteed prices and a distribution network to implement it. If so there is no sign of it in this document.

    As much as I wish this party were endowed with the wealth of resource that National has access to, it isn’t. Other posters also seem to expect every implementation detail of a policy laid out for them for free.

    Your choice to be critical of an effort that WE should not have had to make at all, is telling. Moreover, it is not constructive criticism. It serves no purpose. You blame us for Labour’s misdeeds, as though we were in control of that dog.

    The problem with this is that on most of DOC’s land in shrubland-forest succession from existing shrubland-forest vegetation to tall forest is inhibited primarily by poor soil condition. DOC have shown themselves unable to deal with this except on a very small scale.

    An interesting problem indeed. Clearly you are an expert regarding forestry, so what should be done? Or is your mission statement merely to tear down rather than to help figure out how to make things work.

    If I ever came to my boss and said “here’s a problem” and in the next breath “I didn’t look for a solution, YOU fix it”, I’d have been fired long ago (used to work in the USA) and if I had an employee who did it a second time, it would be what we call a “career limiting decision”.

    That is basically what Nick Smith has done with the population of NZ, and we (who are NOT his bosses) came up with ideas of how to solve the problem. You come here to find problems with our solutions and you have provided no suggestions. You provide nothing of value.

    BJ

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

  98. bjchip-My problem is that the Greens have stated no solutions. Vague ideas, some of which are obviously wrong, are not solutions.
    Nick Smith may be ecologically clueless but he is at least being honest. I think his position boils down to “the NZ govt has been so hopeless at CO2 emissions reduction in the past that it is not realistic to hope for much better in the future”. Without some kind of moral epiphany in Wellington I can’t see his prediction being wrong.

    As to specifics. The dry summer problem with wind power has been covered by quite a few submitters to the various wind power hearings.
    Your roaring 40’s quote is disingenuous. NZ’s climate is fairly homogenous. Around 20% of the time wind the total windpower in NZ provides less than 10% of the installed total. This means that 3000MW installed is worth less than 200MW actual capacity.
    Because NZ is short of reliable generation capacity water must be kept in the southern storage lakes to cover peaks. This is very inefficient and wasteful and is not helped in more than a very minor way by any amount of wind power.
    NZ needs reliable renewable power that is not dependent on weather. Biomass generation using woody plants is probably the best option. It is certainly the cheapest.
    There would already be a lot of biomass generation in NZ if the govt and SOEs were not so determined to keep an iron grip on the supply of electricity.

    As to improving the indigenous forest recovery. A change of DOC’s structure from top heavy bureaucracy to semi autonomous local groups would drastically improve the quality of land management but even with world class techniques it is hard to see a drastic improvement being possible in less than a 30yr time frame. So it would be useful but not so important in the context of rapid climate change.

    I believe that forestry is the key to reversing NZ’s carbon balance blowout but overcoming the legacy of the govt’s greed and stupidity in this area over the last decade will be a very hard thing to do.
    Suggesting that an large increase in forestry is possible without having a solution to the above is irresponsible.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

  99. Sadly wind is almost no use in the 1 in 7 calm/dry summers.

    Good thing that our high electricity demand is in late autumn to spring then, isn’t it?

    Trevor.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

  100. Around 20% of the time wind the total windpower in NZ provides less than 10% of the installed total. This means that 3000MW installed is worth less than 200MW actual capacity.

    New Zealand’s existing wind farms were clustered in a few areas, primarily the Manawatu. The outputs of these farms tended to track each other because they were extracting energy from the same weather systems. New farms have been, are being and will be build in other areas of the country so that they tap into different weather systems. This will increase the probability of getting an average generation rather than a peak or trough. The average is around 40%, but some wind farms might achieve an average closer to 50%. Therefore 3000MW of capacity will deliver an average of 1200-1500MW of power.

    Even with spacial diversity, there will be some periods where the wind generation all peaks at a time when demand is low and power is wasted. However our demand has troughs around 1700MW (might be higher now) so most of the power would still be used, and the waste would only be for relatively short periods. The other side of that coin is that there will be periods of low wind generation when demand is high, and alternative generation will be needed, such as hydro and gas peaking plants. The wind generation allows us to preserve the water in our hydro lakes for times of high demand. We could do with more storage in the North Island so the demand can be averaged out.

    The conclusion is that we can make use of almost all the output of 3000MW of installed wind capacity to generate an average of over 1000MW of power, i.e. more than 8500GWH per year. Your claim that it is worth less than 200MW is itself worthless.

    Trevor.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

  101. bj

    I think we should take some steps that can give other areas of the world hope – otherwise those that can will make their way here :(

    I suggested investing in new renewables such as wave, tidal and salinity gradient. These are technologies where the total output of all the installations is of the order of megaWatts, not GigaWatts. Salinity gradient is not even in the megaWatts. However the potential of each of these technologies separately is in the order of a TeraWatt or more, except possibly for tidal flow. Put together, these technologies will not save the world, but they can make a big difference for some countries with access to these resources.

    There are other renewables where I wasn’t suggesting we develop the technology because there are already large investments from the larger countries, such as solar photovoltaic, solar thermal and wind. Besides, as the land of the long white cloud, New Zealand doesn’t really suit solar for power generation.

    However if the rest of the world does “go to h311 in a hand basket”, then an investment in home grown silicon technology might not be a bad idea, and we already have at least one company developing wind turbines.

    As one who is addicted to caffeine :shock:, I would have to support your idea of growing some coffee here too :)

    Trevor.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

  102. Memo to self – don’t put a comma after a smilie. :shock: works but :shock:, doesn’t. And remember to try the preview button first :D

    frog – the help link for smilies still gives me Error 404 :(

    Trevor.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

  103. Brilliant Emerald – this is a whole lot better – thanks :-)

    The problem with wind is that it needs the hydro lakes as backup and keeping water in the lakes is inefficient.

    That is not a correct understanding of the effect of using the lakes as storage for power. The entire point of having lakes is to be able to store energy. The distinction is a subtle one but it relates specifically to the difficulty of storing potential energy. The most common stored energy is chemical, in the bonds of various petrochemicals, another place it can be stored is in the organic chemistry of the woody biomass you have just pointed out.

    If you used the raw flow of the river (without a dam and lake) the electricity supply would vary all over the place with the river flow and could not be tailored to demand. Just EXACTLY like the wind does. The dam is there to STORE energy for release as needed.

    When you use wind to meet demand, you are preserving the energy stored in the lake. You are preserving the gas used to power the thermal generator. You are preserving the coal at Huntly.

    If you require more kwh than the hydro generators can provide when running at full capacity, you have to find other methods to smooth out the wind or the load or both.

    Your roaring 40’s quote is disingenuous. NZ’s climate is fairly homogenous. Around 20% of the time wind the total windpower in NZ provides less than 10% of the installed total.

    Where it is CURRENTLY installed. Not where it should be installed. This may be a bit disingenuous on your part :-)

    A more efficient national grid is a big issue for Greens and has been for as long as I have been here. You want to install wind where natural features create near constant wind conditions. An east-west mountain pass is usually good. The top of a North-South ridgeline is usually good. If that ridgeline is looking at an unobstructed 10000 km of ocean to the west you can COUNT on the wind being there.

    The West Coast of the South Island has zero wind generators because current wind installations are constrained by the power grid. They are being sited close to loads rather than close to the best place to get power.

    So I think Wind is a more important part of the solution than you are giving it credit for being, but it is only a part of the solution.

    Your suggestion that we work on biomass – thermal is a GOOD idea, and there is no reason it cannot improve and enhance a more complete solution. One important consideration is that continued use of the soil to grow anything that then gets taken away and burned has an effect on the soil itself. We will need to master the art of rebuilding the soil and keeping it productive for such usage. It will tie up land in the rotation cycle (crop rotation for trees!?) but there is no reason I know of this cannot be done (I am not a forestry expert).

    There is NO single answer on earth (there is a single answer that will work but it is NOT something on earth or in reach of NZ). The way to make this work is to have a repertoire of methods and mix them intelligently.

    On the political and management structure of DOC I have no opinion at all. I hear what you are saying though. I imagine there are some others in the party or reading this blog, who might better comment on it.

    Really thanks though… you came back with a very good very real suggestion. One I appreciate that the more because it is so very rare that these conversations bear fruit.

    respectfully
    BJ

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

  104. Biomass???

    come on does anyone actually have a biomass process that produces net energy, I thought most of them on a “good day” just break even.

    They certainly don’t get anywhere near close to Wind or Solar in terms of energy returned on energy invested.

    While biomass for producing bio-diesel or CNG is fine, please provide the science to back it up as a major source of electricity generation.

    BJ is correct when he talks about the NZ grid.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

  105. Turnip

    I think it depends a lot on how much of a hurry you are in. Harvesting wood for use as an effective fuel depends on an extended natural drying process or an accelerated artificial drying process. I imagine that to make this work it will take more land and effort than current methods might entail.

    respectfully
    BJ

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

  106. Turnip

    The pulp and paper mills regularly burn wood residue in co-generation plant. This means that it is currently economical. It will be more economical as electricity prices are pushed up with rising gas and oil prices.

    Trevor.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

  107. I think there are a few people that need to do some background research on this forum.
    Turnip. power generation from wet biomass is a bit of a job. From good wood material it is easy.
    NZ is very fortunate in that high quality fuel wood can be grown very quickly.
    So quickly in fact that the most economic power generation for the north island (even cheaper than coal without its carbon cost!) is IGCC gas turbine fuel by intensively grown acacia / eucalyptus mixed rotation trees.
    Transport costs mean that the most economic size for this type of plant is 10-20 MW. This is local coop size so you can imagine that NZ’s SOEs do not want this technology to get a foothold. 100MW and over plant sizes require very cheap transport, something like river barges.
    Radiata is a poor fuel but eucalypts have a very high calorific value even with a short (minutes for chip) drying cycle.

    Trevor29, you need to learn that the devil is in the details in things like electricity generation for a whole country for a whole decade.

    The numbers I gave for equivalent capacity for wind power above were based on an analysis for the thing we were discussing ie. 3000MW of wind power. In fact for 2500MW placed where there have already been applications for wind farms.
    NZ’s climate as far as wind goes is fairly homogeneous for the area between Auckland and Dunedin. If turbines were installed from North cape to the south of Stuart Island things would be better. This is not in prospect.
    A detailed analysis of different generation options using the actual weather of previous years and the same level of risk for each clearly shows wind as a bad option. In two years out of three 3000MW of wind is relatively useless. Even 3000MW of CC gas turbines run on gas save three times as much carbon emissions on average. They also cost less than half even including the fuel!
    If you want to check then look at the last years wind generation. There have been turbines installed from the south of the south island to mid north island for the last year. See how often they are generating very little power.
    Even if all the 3000 MW are installed they will only extend another 200KM north. This area just gets a lighter version of the manawatu winds, it won’t improve diversification.
    If NZ wants wind power than there are two obvious options.
    Install singles or small clusters of the cheap-efficient-green wood structure based 100-250KW turbines. (opps there goes the govt monopoly on power again). A quarter of the price of the big 2-3MW ones for the same power and much less of a grid upgrade needed. About 1/50th of the carbon emissions per MW as well.
    Build 2000MW of heavy duty turbines on Auckland Island and a undersea DC link to the SouthIsland, this is about half the price of 2-3MW turbines to produce the same power on the main islands.

    The bottom line is that 3000MW of wind power will cost about 30 billion dollars with the grid upgrade needed for it and most of this will go abroad. At least 2000MW of proper non weather dependant base load generation needs to be built as well before 2013. If Huntly is decommissioned add another 1000MW!
    The proliferation of heat pumps is a ticking power time bomb. If the base load generation is not built the next hot dry summer will see extensive power cuts in Auckland, not just in the rural areas like last year. Wind power will not help!

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

  108. If you want to check then look at the last years wind generation. There have been turbines installed from the south of the south island to mid north island for the last year. See how often they are generating very little power.

    Hmmmm… the use of the wind to keep water in the reservoirs is still valid. That energy is still there in the summer months.

    I don’t need heat in the summer. If we are going to need A/C in the summer that is another issue. Might well need it, but that is why a smarter mix is required. Expanding wind generation by building in the North of the country would be be unlikely to be cost effective. Did we propose that? No.

    I am stilll wondering where you are getting information. Someone who hates wind generators . The disinformation on that front has always been deafening, but there is room here for both.

    This seems useful…

    http://www.google.co.nz/url?sa=t&source=web&ct=res&cd=12&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.shortrotationcrops.org%2FPDFs%2F2003Mtg%2F18-SimsTransportEconomics.pdf&ei=M-R9StyXEofKsQPB96TuCg&usg=AFQjCNEXsx73sqCPcNxCv_pTbmtB52ih7g&sig2=01tzPjbsLRmaXYb6hZEYQw

    respectfully
    BJ

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

  109. Emerald said:
    NZ’s climate as far as wind goes is fairly homogeneous for the area between Auckland and Dunedin. If turbines were installed from North cape to the south of Stuart Island things would be better. This is not in prospect.

    The wind resource north of Kaitaia is significant. The only problem is the lack of transmission lines, so the cost of setting up a wind farm there is significant.

    Wind generation coupled with local storage (such as vanadium redox flow batteries) could provide a significant amount of Stewart Island’s power as well. I don’t know what the wind resource is like on the south coast of the South Island, but I do know that they have a good wave resource there.

    And yes, as an engineer, I am fully aware that the devil is in the details.

    Could you provide a link to the wind generation statistics from last year? All I have to go on is the quarterly information that says wind generation exceeded 3% of our demand. While you are at it, where can I find this detailed analysis that you mentioned?

    Trevor.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

  110. bjchip. My point about the heat pumps that are being encouraged by ECA etc. is that they are also air conditioners. People that wouldn’t bother with aircon buy these for heating.
    The problem is that when hot weather turns up they use them for cooling as well.
    I’ve seen data that suggests that if the current rate of sale of heat pumps continues at the current rate for another 2 years then the peak electricity usage for the upper north island will go from cold winter to hot summer.
    This is a big deal for NZ electricity providers and a a very big deal for wind power as it is not usually available on hot summer days.
    Don’t assume that everybody is a partisan. Since the start of big government subsidies on wind power the wind power business has become sleazy place. But there are still people involved who started out as greens and still believe that selling somebody something they don’t need by misrepresentation is fraud and theft, not business.
    Spending money to keep water in reservoirs IN CASE you need it is very wasteful.

    Trevor29, I don’t get your obsession with wind power. vanadium redox flow batteries! how much money are you willing to spend just to go for a bad option? VRFs cost as much as the turbine to store just 2 hours of output! Another thing not made in NZ as well, as though importing expensive electricity from Denmark is not enough.
    Energy market services do a breakdown of energy supply. I don’t think you can get very detailed data without an account. If you work for govt or a big co then somebody in your org should be able to help you.
    Go to http://www.em6live.co.nz for a snapshot. As I write this it is a ‘windy’ day for most people. NZ’s wind turbines are producing at 21% of capacity (if you include the ones that are broken).
    If you google “Relative Carbon Emissions Superior alternatives” you should find evidence on the MFE site that refs that study. I suspect that once again you have to pay for the whole thing.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

  111. This is a big deal for NZ electricity providers and a a very big deal for wind power as it is not usually available on hot summer days.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

  112. Emerald

    Don’t dismiss VFR batteries that quickly! They are already being used for exactly this purpose on King Island (Tasmania)
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vanadium_redox_battery

    I wasn’t suggesting VRF batteries for storage on the main NZ grid. Instead I was suggesting it for Stewart Island, and they would also be useful for other isolate (i.e. not grid connected) areas such as the Chatham Islands. And so what if they would double the price – the diesel generators currently used on these islands cost twice as much to run as the generation on the main grid anyway, and we can expect the price of diesel oil to rise further.

    VRF batteries can be built with various combinations of power rating and energy storage. The latter is achieved simply by adding more tanks and filling them with solution, so the expensive bit is the power rating.

    Trevor.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

  113. Spending money to keep water in reservoirs IN CASE you need it is very wasteful.

    No… this is actually very very important, and I think you are blocking on it.

    Energy STORAGE takes many different forms. Biomass stores solar energy using organic chemistry. A battery uses inorganic chemistry (for the most part). A hydro dam uses gravity and physics.

    There is no difference between them except it is hard to put a hydro dam in the back of a car.

    Anything that keeps us from using up stored energy and preserves it for later consumption is (within the limits of the storage medium) valuable, not wasteful. As long as the hydro dam is not filled to overflowing, the use of wind coupled with the dam is going to provide value.

    This is more clear if the wind is used in concert with an existing diesel generator. The fuel is not burned if the wind is blowing. You save the cost of the additional fuel. You have that energy available to use later.

    It is not the same as “additional” capacity. It is however, not inefficient.

    Nor do the damned things have to be bought from Vesta. Windflow is perfectly capable of making turbines here. However, bigger turbines are quieter.

    I was looking for design specs on the 100-250 KW units you referred to earlier, wood-structure you said…. those I do not see.

    +++++++++++++++

    Summer in the North could WELL be the higher demand in the future.

    I agree, and I don’t think you’re wrong about wind in the north of the country. I don’t regard wind as a viable answer for the North. Geothermal, tidal and solar make some sense, but wind up there is simply going to be not enough or way too much. The transmission costs to get power all the way up there is going to be costly as well. Moreover, there needs to be something up there that can withstand a typhoon and keep on generating.

    People who get locked into one single solution will only provide optimal treatment for one flavor of the problem set. Auckland city and its environs provide a particularly difficult setting for a high demand region, particularly in summer. A tidal generation scheme there would help, but I am not optimistic about the volume flow involved. Geothermal potential would appear to be there as well, but that is going to take a fair whack of development. Wind is not going to figure as a large contributor. A thermal plant burning charcoal or pelletized wood might serve. There are other answers…

    … but it is not reasonable to seek them by removing one from consideration before the analysis begins.

    respectfully
    BJ

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

  114. I don’t think small wind turbines are the answer. The trend is to larger turbines for various reasons. A larger turbine has a taller tower and longer blades so it harnesses wind from further up. Wind speeds increase with height, and the power available increases with the cube of the wind speed, so this gives a significant improvement in power output. In addition, there is a significant fixed cost per turbine, so larger turbines are more cost-effective as the fixed cost is averaged over a larger output.

    I don’t think putting wind turbines on the Auckland Islands is going to work either – the cost and reliability of the undersea power cables is just too much.

    Wind power is never going to be the complete answer for New Zealand, but it can and will make a significant contribution.

    Trevor.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

  115. Wind turbines on the Auckland Islands!

    Won’t somebody please think of the albatross?

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

  116. Trevor

    I would consider a turbine which uses local renewables in its manufacture.

    There are limitations. Wood blades are feasible and have been manufactured of laminated wood, and wooden towers can also serve. That’s why I wanted the design specs. Placed in an advantageous position such turbines would be smaller and less efficient than the big turbines, but still effective, and easier for locals to maintain in the long run.

    Which is pretty much what you were on about. Wind is useful. Not the whole answer but will provide a piece of the answer.

    Same can be said of the wood industry and the biomass concept that Emerald is describing. We aren’t doing these things because the dead-dino-based industry isn’t paying for what it is actually doing to us.

    That is, on the face of it, theft.

    I do not favor being at the mercy of a supply chain to the other side of the planet if something breaks. Something WILL break, we can be quite certain. The Windpower units are good, but if you want to use wood you have to be respectful of its limitations, but wood is 2x as strong in tension as in compression. How tall can we build a tower that will serve to mount the turbine? If we use something else (steel is good) how long before it rusts? Where does it COME from and where do we get spares.

    I can see a role for the mid-size turbines where the grid is weak. and it will be weak in many places for a long time, even if we get major improvements. A better grid is imperative.

    I am thinking that something a community can build without buying a lot of components from overseas would be “a very good thing”.

    Moving power from the west coast of the South Island to the east coast is important. The west coast has the energy, the east has the industry and agriculture. Shifting industry to the west is a problem simply because the amount of energy nature expends on it, makes it a harsh place to live.

    respectfully
    BJ

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

  117. Greenfly, you are correct. The transmission costs for undersea cabling would be prohibitive.

    We probably ought to consider how we are going to get power to our new North-North-Island once this climaticide has run its course. Easier to build while the ocean hasn’t yet engulfed the land.

    What makes me not a little nervous, is that the relaxation of the earth’s crust based on the removal of gigatons of mass from the WAIS may well render the plates more mobile than they have been in millions of years.

    Quakes and vulcanism could increase too, and we are not in a “quiet” zone.

    BJ

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

  118. On TV the other night people were complaining about the noise from wind turbines in their little patch of paradise.

    I often look at renewable energy sites and there aren’t any wow factor things on the boil (as far as I can see). The wow factor things are so near and yet so far.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

  119. bjchip Says:
    August 10th, 2009 at 8:40 am

    > Moving power from the west coast of the South Island to the east coast is important. The west coast has the energy, the east has the industry and agriculture.

    I presume you’re referring to some energy source that hasn’t been harnessed yet – currently the South Island east of the main divide exports electricity to the rest of the country, or more specifically, the southern half of the South Island east of the main divide exports electricity to the rest of the country. The only significant electricity generation in the West is Manapouri, and even that is easier to get to from the east than from the rest of the west.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

  120. That’s correct Kahikatea, the potential on the west coast is large. The implementation (as I observed earlier) is zip-point-squat.

    Feeding more to the east keeps the lakes full and allows more export to the rest of the country.

    … and without people around, the noise from wind turbines is not such a concern.

    For wind turbines bigger is quieter.

    respectfully
    BJ

    BJ

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

  121. What about this as a power source?

    Capital cost of USD5m for each of 20,000 households = USD250
    Power cost of USD0.10 cents/unit
    http://www.hyperionpowergeneration.com/
    Apparently there is a six year waiting list

    At first I thought it must be a scam buy energy experts tell me it is for real.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

  122. Looks real to me. No reason it shouldn’t work.

    I can see using something like it in the North… Auckland is a horrible problem in terms of renewable resources… most of NZ’s renewables are South-Island and there is very little close to the city.

    I would only accept it if there were a subsidiary in Oz though, and refueling needing to be done every 5 years is a bit “frequent” for my taste. . . I’d prefer a Thorium power cycle with an accelerator to drive it. The waste from thorium reactions is easier to deal with. I understand the anti-nuclear stance of the party, but I don’t agree with it as much as some. The alternatives exist.

    I prefer CATS though, because SSPS is also enabled by that… as is a human diaspora into the whole of the solar system and likely beyond it.

    I have no small ambitions for the species… surviving longer than the sun itself would be among the bigger ones.

    respectfully
    BJ

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

  123. Skittish plates bj?

    It gets more and more exciting!

    ‘Quakes and vulcanism’

    Elements melt with a fervent heat

    my colleagues wail,

    End Times they are a’ comin’!

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 (0)

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>