Written By:
Bill - Date published:
9:22 am, December 9th, 2010 - 9 comments
Categories: climate change, Conservation, Environment, Mining -
Tags: climate collapse, coal, Environment, lignite, solid energy
At Copenhagen, the NZ government said it would reduce CO2 emissions by 20%. But a proposal to manufacture diesel and urea from low grade Southland lignite would increase CO2 emissions by 20% and cost us taxpayers about $NZ 1 billion in free carbon credits to the coal companies.
The $NZ 1 billion is a conservative figure based on the Commissioner for the Environment’s calculation after she was refused access to Solid Energy’s own calculations.
Meanwhile, Solid Energy were explaining that they didn’t release their CO2 calculations because of ‘commercial sensitivity’. They then went on to explain that they would mitigate CO2 emissions by relying on science fiction ‘carbon capture’ measures among others.
So Solid Energy and others want to build a $NZ10 billion diesel plant. It won’t produce permanent local jobs in an area that already has the lowest unemployment rates in NZ. And processing 6 billion tonnes of lignite will come at a $NZ 1 billion financial cost to us all as well as an indeterminable environmental cost to us all.
I know that companies are in the business of making money. But really, what is it with these idiotic business propositions that are so decidedly divorced from the realities of climate collapse and current technological and scientific capabilities?
The current rise of populism challenges the way we think about people’s relationship to the economy.We seem to be entering an era of populism, in which leadership in a democracy is based on preferences of the population which do not seem entirely rational nor serving their longer interests. ...
The server will be getting hardware changes this evening starting at 10pm NZDT.
The site will be off line for some hours.
And Solid Energy is an SOE for God’s sake. What are they doing acting against government policy?
Under the proposed TPPA if a foreign investor was involved in this crazy scheme it would be illegal to, not do it.
‘Commercial sensitivity’ my ass.
Solid Energy have estimates on the externalities that they are going to impose on us and on our wider society and they damn well better make that information public. Frakin social irresponsibility from a (Government owned) corporate cover up artist.
Yep, it’s about time commercial sensitivity got overturned by our need to know.
Yeah, I don’t understand what it even means. It’s like how Bob Parker won’t say how much the Ellerslie Flower Show cost because of commercial sensitivity.
What does that even mean in context? That Dunedin will try and buy it off Chch if they found out how much they paid? That some competitor will start up their own flower show in Gisbourne?
Information regularly withheld from market players. There’s free market theory out the window right there. Again.
Don Elder’s (CEO of Solid Energy) has said no unconventional fuel will be produced from lignite in Southland until at least 2015, and then only at a trickle and making up a minuscule part of our liquid fuel needs. Given all the issues identified in Jan Wrights report , even if this diesel plant got approval… do not expect any production until at least 2020…. .if ever.
Meanwhile the Parliamentary report says an oil supply crunch and petrol price hike may come as soon as 2012.
http://oilshockhorrorprobe.blogspot.com/2010/10/mining-group-believes-in-tooth-fairy.html