The government is being very irresponsible by keeping secret the magnitude of the risks of deep sea oil exploration.
Please explain the risk because what I’ve been reading seems to point in the direction that Greenpeace and the Greens are telling total bullshit about the risks associated with deep sea oil drilling off the cost of NZ.
I’ve been reading that the oil fields found around NZ are mostly low pressure.
To extract oil from these fields, the oil has to be pumped out unlike the gulf of Mexico where the oil fields are under pressure.
Turn off the pump the oil stops flowing.
Makes a Gulf of Mexico scenario basically impossible.
According to Petroleum Exploration & Production Association chief executive David Robinson all the wells in Taranaki are all low pressure wells.
Anadarko is scheduled to begin drilling at two deep-sea sites
1. Taranaki Basin
-Chances of a blow out here is nil
2.Canterbury Basin.
– Don’t know and not sure where one would find that information, but I’d take a guess and say it’s along the same lines as the Taranaki Basin.
Plenty of information available on the geology of the Canterbury Basin, along with some quite specific predictions of hydrocarbon traps and seals.
It would be quite a coincidence if the geology there were similar to that off Taranaki, what with them being on different tectonic plates and all, but it’s your guess, not mine.
You need to understand the difference between shallow water drilling and the proposed deep water wells. There is no such thing as nil risk as you suggest. The government’s assessed risk at Taranaki site is 10%. At the deep water sites, it’s 70%. Whilst it’s true that a ‘notifiable incident’ includes injury to staff, collisions, fires and spills, at 7 times the risk of Taranaki is a heck of a chance to take with our coastline.
The government’s tide and wind modelling shows a single blow out at Raglan would gradually pollute the top half of the west coast of NI. I think it’s reprehensible of Minister Amy Adams to change the word when ‘quoting’ from a risk report. She described the consequences of any spill as ‘significant’. The actual word used was ‘catastrophic’.
As an American judge said to a corporation recently, “I’m going to judge you on what you do, not what you say you’re going to do.” How well do you think they would cope with a spill?
@ BM
Oil is on the way out. It is a backwards approach to pursue such. It not only endangers the environment it also has been creating a lot of wars and suffering (indirectly I guess, due to the greed of the individuals profiting from it). It is a backwards move to start drawing NZ deeper into this filthy (physically and morally) industry.
Humans are extremely clever (well some are) and can devise other ways to propel vehicles and ‘industry’; it is time that we started investing in green technology.
It would be nice to have a government that was looking toward the future and being real about this issue of energy. Not one that attempts to fool its citizenry into believing that this is the way to create jobs and that the risks are minimal. Just so a few can profit at the expense of everyone else. That approach is really simply a waste of all our time and energy.
Free Health Care and Education is available to us today without these unecessary wells. All we have to do is elect a government that will do that [i.e. the Greens]
This country is extremely wealthy. The only problem is the nation’s wealth is not distributed evenly amongst the nation’s people.
A truly progressive tax system would reap the benefits you refer to.
Gifting dirty oil to foreigners will not achieve that.
You mean the country that allowed oil drilling by US oil giants, which, once discovered, Norway created their own national oil company. The oil pays for their generous “socialism”, not redistribution.
Someone else’s fault? What new drivel is this? Oh, no wait, it’s the old drivel, the zombie argument walks again.
Why can’t you parrots ever say anything original? So tiny is your intellect that you spend hours desperately trying to come up with new ways to say someone else’s lines.
Take this witless shite, that Socialism is somehow about deflecting blame, based on the notion that reasons are excuses. Do you enjoy espousing illiteracy or are you just too stupid to understand the difference?
We need better wingnuts.
PS: Perhaps if you could comprehend, you might have comprehended some of my other remarks on this thread, and noticed that they undermined your stupid assertion that I deny the value of hydrocarbons before you even made it. What kind of fuckwit makes a basic mistake like that?
PPS: Higher per capita GDP, lowest unemployment in NZ history, lower GINI. If these are examples of my “Socialism” not working, then your National Party must be completely shit, failing as they do to even match these paltry achievements.
Your eloquence is really something, One Anonymous Knucklehead
Your anger is understandable, because. once again, there is living proof that socialist economic principles don’t work in practice. Venezuela is collapsing from self-inflicted ideological idiocy, and Chavez is to blame.
They implemented it, they need to take the blame for the predictable results.
Regarding your suggestion to read your other posts, I’m not sure I want to read them as I fear the level of rhetorical flatulence involved. If you want to calm down and discuss things like a reasonable adult, then perhaps there is a way forward.
“Venezuela is under the usual massive banking/US sanctions pressure.”
Always someone else’s fault, eh. Funny how the failure of socialism is always the capitalists fault. The US doesn’t blame the faults of capitalism on Greece, or Russia, or China, or North Korea does it? No, it blames it on their own people, namely banks.
If socialism is that vulnerable to US policy, then perhaps that tells you something about one of the many flaws of socialism.
Maybe you can explain why you present the weird imperialist adventures of the USA as some sort of natural order, rather than continuing with this failed attempt to draw conclusions about Socialism based on cherry-picking Chavez’s populism rather than Holland’s reduced prison population, or some of the other available comparisons.
Oh, and perhaps, while you’re at it, you can explain why you and the other wingnuts all rehearse the same lines. Not an original thought among you.
Their level of state spending is not sustainable, which is why the likes of Sweden have swung right. The Netherlands is another interesting example when it comes to dealing with offenders. They use containers as housing to isolate problem families. The Dutch are quite Germanic when it comes to dealing with people who don’t play nicely.
I’m not sure why so many on the left seek to put people in boxes and stamp a label on them. Perhaps it makes life appear more simple. I don’t see myself as being right or left, but issue based and pragmatic. If something makes sense to me, I’ll support it, and I don’t really care where the idea comes from. The Greens are right about drug law, for example, and National are wrong.
Chavez style socialism sounds nice, but the evidence is that people soon go without. The lesson seems to be that incentives and market signals are important.
A poor argument BM
Green technology can provide the funds we require…that is if our stupid bloody government started encouraging it.
There is a good chance that more alternatives would already have been developed if it weren’t for the greedy monopolistic behaviour of this fossilized industry.
I suggest that you start thinking outside the fossilized square that’s been provided for you care of the industry players and our current idiotic government, BM.
If that opportunity existed, the private sector would be all over it. There is no shortage of investment money chasing projects, but there is a shortage of good projects.
You don’t get a profitable enterprise just because you throw money at something. See the myriad of failures in those industries, prime examples being Suntech, Solyndra and the Spanish solar industry. They threw billions at it, and got absolutely nowhere.
I suggest you start thinking in terms of comparative and competitive advantage, not fanciful ideological wish lists.
Where will the competitive and comparative advantages be? Geography, obviously plays a part. We can’t change that, but maybe we’ll get lucky.
The oil is getting harder and harder to access, weaning ourselves off it is not an option, it’s going to happen whether we like it or not.
So the other advantages can be delivered by successful adaptation, but research involves going down blind alleys occasionally; whoopdeedo, you can point at one.
I note the private sector manufactures solar panels and windmills. Does that count as “all over it”, or does it just throw your shallow “argument” a bone?
We’ll replace oil one day. Until then, we need oil.
So, if the hippies and peaceniks don’t like oil, then they’re going to need to come up with a lot more alternative energy at a lot lower price point in order to substitute. The first world isn’t going to stop using the energy oil provides for ideological reasons. Even hippies like Hughes makes substantial use of plane travel in order to be “effective”. Well, so does everyone else, Mr Hughes.
Shrugs.
So get inventing. Trying to stop oil use without equivalent energy replacement at reasonable cost won’t work.
We’ll replace oil one day. Until then, we need oil.
Oil companies already have access to enough oil that if it were all used, the effect on our climate presents an existential threat to humans.
We have enough oil. There is no need to drill for more.
This is known as an argument from ignorance.
So, if the hippies and peaceniks don’t like oil, then they’re going to need to come up with a lot more alternative energy at a lot lower price point in order to substitute.
Labelling those who disagree with you with regard to the danger presented by fossil fuel use as “hippies and peaceniks” shows that you are disingenuous.
It’s also an example of an ad hominem.
.. a lot more alternative energy at a lot lower price point in order to substitute
This is correct as far as it goes, but it makes the assumption that profit is the primary consideration for any activity. The profit motive may well be the root of the problem facing the world.
You are also ignoring the fact that the oil industry is heavily subsidised, and does not price in a lot of the cost of extracting and using the stuff.
Pollution produced during extraction and consumption is externalised and some of that is paid for with public monies.
The increased number of fires in Australia, the additional damage caused due to increased intensity of storms. Oil spills where the state (our taxes) pick up the bulk of the clean up costs.
The first world isn’t going to stop using the energy oil provides for ideological reasons.
No. But they may stop using it for existential reasons. However it may be too late by then.
Even hippies like Hughes makes substantial use of plane travel in order to be “effective”. Well, so does everyone else, Mr Hughes.
Gareth Hughes also makes a point of being carbon neutral and has initiated sequestration measures (planting a shit load of tree mainly) to cover his carbon use.
Even so, I think air travel will be one of the last things to go.
In the mean time; * closing coal powered generation * redirecting the subsidies that currently go to oil companies toward clean end point generation (solar and wind generation on every house and building). * a commitment to quality public transport which will reduce emmissions per journey for commuters, reduce the driving time when do actually use a car. * continuation of the Greens insulation initiative, which has produces great results reduced power costs and health savings.
The area of alternate energy is currently worth billions, and in the next couple of decades will be worth tens of billions. For New Zealand, it’s a massive opportunity. The current government, they really have no clue.
So get inventing. Trying to stop oil use without equivalent energy replacement at reasonable cost won’t work.
This is a red herring.
Many people are actively working toward alternatives, however currently there is not a level playing field. If the actual costs of oil were included into the price, you would see a massive shift to alternative power sources.
“Oil companies already have access to enough oil that if it were all used, the effect on our climate presents an existential threat to humans.We have enough oil. There is no need to drill for more.This is known as an argument from ignorance.”
There is no evidence using oil presents an existential threat to humans. If a company thinks it needs to meet demand with supply, then they do so.
“Labelling those who disagree with you with regard to the danger presented by fossil fuel use as “hippies and peaceniks” shows that you are disingenuous.It’s also an example of an ad hominem.”
Perhaps, but it’s also descriptive. People often use the term “right-wing” or “Tories” or “wing-nuts”. Should they?
“This is correct as far as it goes, but it makes the assumption that profit is the primary consideration for any activity. The profit motive may well be the root of the problem facing the world.”
Well, you could generate energy at a loss, but it isn’t sustainable. Eventually, you get Greece, where they can no longer pay for many essential services.
“You are also ignoring the fact that the oil industry is heavily subsidised, and does not price in a lot of the cost of extracting and using the stuff.”
How is it subsidised? Are you against subsidy?
“The increased number of fires in Australia, the additional damage caused due to increased intensity of storms. ”
That is false. There is no evidence to connect oil use to storm activity.
“No. But they may stop using it for existential reasons. However it may be too late by then.”
I see no evidence to suggest this is true.
“Gareth Hughes also makes a point of being carbon neutral and has initiated sequestration measures (planting a shit load of tree mainly) to cover his carbon use.”
How about he stops flying and plants trees? Because he seems to be missing the point as trees eventually release carbon. They are a medium term store, not elimination.
“The area of alternate energy is currently worth billions, and in the next couple of decades will be worth tens of billions. For New Zealand, it’s a massive opportunity. The current government, they really have no clue.”
Just because a market is worth billions doesn’t mean you can get a share of it just because you throw money at it. The silicon chip industry is worth billions, but if we have no competitive advantage, then we will command no market share.
If it were as easy as deciding to do it and throwing money at it, I’d be all over it. Business is not that easy and suggesting it is shows a fundamental misunderstanding on how businesses are created and thrive.
“Many people are actively working toward alternatives, however currently there is not a level playing field. If the actual costs of oil were included into the price, you would see a massive shift to alternative power sources”
Great. I’m not sure about the subsidies you’re talking about, and whether you reject all subsidy.
Government can step in and get the research done as government has got a longer time horizon than the private sector and no need to meet the requirements of profit demanding shareholders.
If that opportunity existed, the private sector would be all over it. There is no shortage of investment money chasing projects, but there is a shortage of good projects.
Most of this private sector money is afraid of real risk.
Who exactly do you think is going to fork out for the bill in the event of an oil spill occurs in one of these deep sea drill sites proposed for the coasts of New Zealand?
Who has lost revenue in the event that that occurs?
You appear to be omitting to factor in the negative effects of monopolies that are clearly evident these days.
The advantages that those already in large industries are receiving – tax ‘incentives’, cheap finance and lobbying power.
‘Investment money’, in case you haven’t noticed (and obviously you haven’t) has been more interested in making money off things like mortgage debt recently than investing in something that might actually give benefit to people.
To join the dots for you: being ‘too big to fail’ is a negative monopolistic effect. A sector being so huge they get bailed out when ‘market discipline’ rears its stern head is an example of why market theory is defunct at present.
You are citing ideology that has failed and is failing us in front of our very eyes – not least due to the monopolistic effects that you are refusing to acknowledge.
Not strawman at all. By your comment I believe that you are not acknowledging the destructive effect of monopolies that is going on at present across the western world. You can’t keep arguing ‘standard business practice’ theories when the pivotal mechanism of that ideology is currently so corrupted it isn’t functional.
I think that’s a simplistic view. Most of our technological achievements are down to the energy density of oil. There’s a good reason why life expectancy has improved so dramatically in the last hundred years.
You might call it greed, but people like having the security that cheap energy brings.
We have to stop using it, but a strategy that pretends the only people with skin in the game are oil barons is doomed, and that’s before we even begin to address the military implications.
My personal view is that the weather will degrade our capacity to emit carbon before any real progress is made. I hope to be proved wrong.
I am unclear whether your comment is in response to mine or not, however you referred to greed and that is a word that I used and so I am guessing you are responding to my comment.
I am of the opinion that green energy technology has likely been slowed down by the oil industries need to continue to profit through their monopoly (I accept this isn’t cold hard fact, I think it is a reasonable call though.) Some may call this ‘profiteering’ rather than greed, or perhaps ‘a pragmatic approach of looking after one’s own interests [profits]’ however when this occurs at the expense of a greater good, this is when a more pejorative term such as ‘greed’ can become a more accurate term to use.
Out of a similar such ‘phenomenon’ – keen to profit- I believe the oil industry is now researching green technologies with the understanding that their resource is on the way out. So why does our Government not take such an intelligent approach?
You appear to be arguing that we all have a vested interest in oil, yes we certainly are reliant on oil at present, however we also have a [greater] vested interest in having a healthy environment and energy sources that create less damage to our environment and that are renewable. So lets get on with dealing with that interest.
I’m arguing that a strategy that pretends oil barons are the only people with vested interests is doomed. Leave the super-villains to Batman.
Having described them as greedy you then credit them with intelligence. Perhaps they’re just becoming more ethical with the introduction of unleaded petrol.
A greedy group is capable of pursuing an intelligent idea. Or do you not think so?
I believe it is not only intelligent to to invest (time and money) into green technology it is sensible. I believe the oil industry is now doing that. I think that the lack of investment into this area is and was not intelligent and some of this lack was driven by greed. I am relaying the picture as I see it occurring and sorry this doesn’t fit in with your apparent need for everything to be either something for ‘Batman’ to deal with if they are not perhaps ‘Mary-Poppins-like’ non-perjorative. These are the facts as I understand them and this is what I put forward.
I think that ‘calling’ a sector’s behaviour as it is can be very helpful, especially when it is that quality that is tripping everyone else up. I fail to understand why your view that doing so leads to a strategy that is ‘doomed’? I have supplied a reasoned response as to why I referred to them as greedy. I would appreciate the same from you.
OAK’s simply saying that there are far wider interest groups who favour the continued use of fossil fuels than just the fossil fuel barons.
Most people who live in the modern world for instance.
Who may say that they are keen to stop deep sea oil drilling. But aren’t going to give up their summer holiday to Australia, nor their purchases of imported goods, because they enjoy the benefits of fossil fuels too much.
“yes we certainly are reliant on oil at present, however we also have a [greater] vested interest in having a healthy environment and energy sources that create less damage to our environment and that are renewable. So lets get on with dealing with that interest.”
That’s pretty much it CV, and it isn’t just trips to Aussie. Cosmetics, plastics, ink, sellotape, aspirin etc. etc.
You’re going to have a hard time convincing people that the manufacturers and consumers of these goods are all a pack of bastards.
It comes down to a choice between seriously diminished quality of life administered voluntarily and seriously diminished quality of life administered by the weather.
I’m sorry to say my money’s on the weather. It’s not going to stop me trying to make a difference, but.
“yes we certainly are reliant on oil at present, however we also have a [greater] vested interest in having a healthy environment and energy sources that create less damage to our environment and that are renewable. So lets get on with dealing with that interest.”
Who is this “we” business? The people with the most power, capital and authority in society don’t care.
All they are doing is lumping most of the costs of their recent decisions on to those under 30.
It’s what they’ve been doing since Thatcher, and it’s what they’re still doing now. Inter-generational inequity is booming, not receding.
Look at rich countries in Warsaw telling poorer and developing countries like the Philippines to fuck off, during the climate talks.
OAK
It comes down to a choice between seriously diminished quality of life administered voluntarily and seriously diminished quality of life administered by the weather.
I think that the voluntary and conscious move can create a society where our material standard of living is unavoidably significantly less, but our cultural, spiritual and community standard of living is overwhelmingly high.
If we leave it to the climate and unmanaged break downs in complex civilisation systems, its gonna be way uglier.
@OAK
I think that I understand where you are trying to say now and it appears that you are missing what I am am attempting to say.
I am emphasizing research because it is always easier to make a change when one is swapping from one thing to another, rather than completely removing something from our lives.
I mentioned ‘greed’ in that it seems reasonable to conclude that the reason we have not a huge variety of options already is due to the profiteering of a certain industry – not because we are not capable of finding alternatives. We are.
I think you are picking up on the word ‘greed’ and fixating on that and not actually looking further into what I am putting forward.
Sorry if my writing style confuses – sometimes don’t put things in the simplest of terms.
“Who is this “we” business? The people with the most power, capital and authority in society don’t care…”
So what are you trying to say? “Oh, so now that those with power, capital and authority in society don’t care, then we should all just give up and stop thinking about ways to deal with the issue.”
This is defeatism
And yep, I know, having read your comments elsewhere, it is unlikely that ‘giving up’ is what your view is, however, just take a look at what you are really saying here.
Yes, I agree, people effecting public decisions at present don’t appear to care (or think further ahead than the length of their noses). However last I checked the Roman Emperor is not the main power in the West anymore….surprising perhaps, but things have a habit of changing.( /sark)
And how does this occur? People change their minds in response to circumstances and through talking together.
Enough people change their minds and things start happening.
It appears that OAK and you are saying “oo don’t talk about greed and research because people won’t do it anyway because it might mean a massive change in their lifestyles”.
You are bound to say this is a strawman, and perhaps it is somewhat, however, really take a look at what you are implying by what you write.
Actually there might not be a massive change required if new forms of energy are cultivated…and as you say in response to OAK, any changes required (where ‘conveniences’ can’t be replaced) might end up enhancing our lives, not being a degeneration of them.
You think they are completely unconcerned with the loss and destruction of all that precious real estate they’ve hoarded?
They would be concerned if they allowed themselves to believe that the next 50 years might be very different to the last 50.
But hindsight bias means that its extremely difficult for humans to view things as being much different to their recent past.
Also many of these people know that they won’t be around in 15 years let alone 50. So as a mate of mine says – if you know oil is going to run out, you should make sure to use your fair share right now.
@BL: I don’t think much further research is required. The changes we need to enact now are well well within our current capabilities.
(I will respond to your longer comment in a moment) 🙂
1) Defeatism: a captain who does not know what is possible and what is not will surely lead his entire crew and passengers, however bravely, to disaster.
2) Roman Empire. The Empire fell. Massive knowledge and wealth was lost. Peoples were scattered and millions lost. It took mankind centuries to recover, although recover they did through a very painful and dark time. The lessons of the end of empire are there, except ours is a global empire. So no /sarc there at all.
<blockquote.Actually there might not be a massive change required if new forms of energy are cultivated…
Certainly, there are opportunities there. But nothing will beat a 20L can of diesel.
And yes, I agree that life may actually be much better for us at generally lower levels of available energy and material resources.
“oo don’t talk about greed and research because people won’t do it anyway because it might mean a massive change in their lifestyles”.
It’s important to talk about what we want, and about issues of greed and avarice.
Research as I noted above is a bit beside the point. Everything we need to have for a solid sustainable civilisation is well within our grasp now.
It is a little amusing that you cite in the same comment that “defeatism is a captain that doesn’t know what is possible” and then go onto say that “we probably don’t need more research”!
I was reading [only a wee bit] of information on energy and it seems that so far nothing has been discovered that is as powerful as fossil fuels is for creating energy. I was of the understanding that this is one of the reasons that we continue to use it.
There is a possibility that there is some way to create energy that is cleaner and as powerful, however it seems from what I read [and again, I can’t say it was extensive reading] this is yet to be discovered and would require more research.
Research was not actually my main point – I did say I wanted a government that “encouraged” green technology. This means encouraging the use of it, not just researching it. [I am all for research though too for the reason cited in the above paragraph.]
I am of the understanding that the oil industry get some sort of subsidies to make it more affordable for people (bit unclear on this point) and it is this type of thing that is ‘skewing’ people’s perception that it is more cost effective or irreplaceable.
I do agree that we have enough knowledge to get moving on a greener lifestyle now however having observed things like the improvements in the efficiency of cars over my lifetime, I deduce that more research is likely to provide better efficiency for green energy devices aswell.
Thanks for the positive feedback, coming from someone whose views and extensive knowledge I admire – that is very pleasing!
Blue Leopard, I get your objection, but I’m not really saying that. Practically speaking, if we can’t replace the benefits that hydrocarbons represent, then we face Hobson’s choice: between reduced life expectancy – to put it another way increased infant mortality, plus weather related damage (and associated risks) which is going to happen anyway – cf: the forty-year lag between CO2 emissions and climate change, or, BAU and the inevitable weather related damage.
This is why “our” “leaders” are (present tense) planning for a medium to high level catastrophe: because that’s the most likely scenario no matter which path we choose.
When enough people get this – that sacrifices are going to be made, then maybe we’ll start working out how to address this in a concerted effort, and we will keep doing what we can as individuals in the meantime.
I can’t see any value in apportioning blame, or judging people for being curious and inventive. We have enough on our plates already.
Blue Leopard, I get your objection, but I’m not really saying that. Practically speaking, if we can’t replace the benefits that hydrocarbons represent, then we face Hobson’s choice: between reduced life expectancy – to put it another way increased infant mortality
Of course, it’s also possible to accomplish good life expectancies with much less spending and resources. Cuba being a good example. Less easy availability of McDonalds and private motorised transport plus more requirement for physical work and bicycling. Fewer Playstations and less broadband = organise more community get togethers and local bands.
BL
I was reading [only a wee bit] of information on energy and it seems that so far nothing has been discovered that is as powerful as fossil fuels is for creating energy. I was of the understanding that this is one of the reasons that we continue to use it.
We should start with the understanding that energy is neither created nor destroyed…
Move on to the understanding that the power of fossil fuels comes from embodying millions of years of energy captured from sunlight, heat, pressure and gravitational forces, stored in highly concentrated, convenient, relatively safe to handle and simple to transport forms.
Then recognise that it takes 50-100 years (or more) to move a civilisation from one power source to another. People power to beasts of burden to wood/charcoal to coal to oil to building out a power grid which covers a nation. The transition to nuclear is very slight and incomplete because nuclear is bad, expensive, low energy.
Therefore – any really good energy source which is going to come along and save us from fossil fuels in time would already be well on the scene. Put another way: the cards we have in our hand right now, are the only cards we have to play.
The cornucopian fantasy that mankind is going to discover and commercialise cold fusion (or dilithium crystals or tylium or zero point energy) in time is at this stage a true deus ex machina worthy of an SF show.
Personally, I’m betting on the true old faithfuls, things like hydro, coal, geothermal to see us through.
btw the only truly green kW of energy is the one which is not used.
Addressing the ’emotions’ driving a problem is helpful in the process in of working out how to solve that problem.
A bit of exaggeration :
“or judging people for being curious and inventive. We have enough on our plates already.”
Nope, there is no way I promoted such views. In fact, I was promoting ways to encourage the curious and inventiveness of humans.
@ CV
Same message to you. A bit of exaggeration:
“The cornucopian fantasy that mankind is going to discover and commercialise cold fusion (or dilithium crystals or tylium or zero point energy) in time is at this stage a true deus ex machina worthy of an SF show.
Nope, I was not aiming at such, just believe that we are likely to discover improved energy sources/ways to use the energy we have.
@OAK & CV
Apart from these ‘errors’ I think you both make some good points and debating like this deepens my understanding. Thank you 🙂
Your question is misdirected. Ask Anadarko what the risk is . . . only trouble with that, though, is that they are not saying. Nor is the John Key led National Ltd™ government. Its a secret.
The main thing is to understand the difference between Taranaki wells in shallow waters and the proposed deep water drilling. Using the government and Anadarko’s own criteria, the risk of a reportable incident at a Taranaki well in shallower, calmer waters is 10%. Using the same criteria, the risk balloons to 70% in deep water sites. Following an OIA, the government’s modelling, based on tides and winds, shows one blowout at Raglan would eventually pollute the top half of the west coast of NI. (The rescue rig is 15 days away). Amy Adams changed the wording in the risk analysis report, describing any incident as ‘significant’. The word used was ‘catastrophic’. Anadarko has set up Anadarko NZ Ltd as a stand-alone company who can just walk away from a spill once their relatively meagre assets are taken. We are are left with polluted beaches and 99% of the clean up costs. I’ll get Anadarko’s safety equipment list – what they currently have on the drilling ship – barely enough to clean up a spill on the forecourt of your local gas station. No wonder the EPA has abdicated its responsibility by not sighting their ERP. This isn’t tree hugging stuff, there are plenty of alternatives in bio fuels and solar/wind. Create the jobs and industry in NZ and keep the profits here. We’re playing for keeps here. Let’s have a New Zealand we can be happy to pass on to future Kiwis.
You can put a “virtual” banner and message on the beach of your choice if you cannot make it in person, which will be conveyed to the flotilla. I’ll take a sign with dog to Kakamatua inlet but more formal things are planned for Piha and Bethells etc.
That virtual banner idea is excellent. I have been watching that page since it started and it is so lovely to see the whole map of New Zealand being increasingly covered by virtual banners. Truly heart warming and good stuff NZ and Greenpeace!
If people think that there is no reason to be concerned they should check out the inventory of safety equipment on the drill ship. Apparently “[t]he documentation lists the Contents of the “Environmental Spill Response Kit” to be carried on board the drill ship:
The kit on the drillship includes:
• 15-4’ socks, 5-8’ socks, 190 pads, 16 pillows;
• 2-10 lb Albozorbit, 15 disposable bags with ties;
• 4 pair of nitrile gloves, 4 pairs silvershield gloves;
• 4 each splash resistant goggles, 4-Tyvek coveralls XL;
• 1 non-sparking shovel; and
• 1 emergency response guidebook.”
(page 58-59, Anadarko Discharge Management Plan from the Environmental Impact Assessment.)”
Bottom line is that they should not be allowed to drill unless there is a full clean-up ship/s in port in NZ ready to pounce instantly there is a problem.
We don’t let motor racing happen unless there is an ambulance at the track.
We don’t even let a house be built unless there is a sediment catch mound built before starting.
If you have to pump the oil to get it to move, as you do in NZ, then the chance of a blow-out is almost non-existent. The danger is the pump stops working and you lose production until you can lower another one down.
Therefore, there is no need for instant response, just in the same way there is no need for a fire-truck standing besides your TV in case it bursts into flames.
Give him (or her) a break CV.
You and I know that we wouldn’t need a fire truck next to the TV. Our TVs are quite small and a small CO2 extinguisher would be adequate.
JLTW might have one of those enormous TVs though and would be likely to have a truely enormous fire.
ps How do you get those faces to display? I would hate for anyone to take this particular comment seriously.
In the environmental impact assessment it last month lodged with the Environmental Protection Authority for its Taranaki operation, the company conceded a loss of well control would hold “significant impacts” for the environment, but stated this was “extremely unlikely”.
Currently the only modelling we have was created by the data science agency Dumpark.
We do not have access to Andarkos modelling becuase they won’t release it, and neither will our government.
If its safe as houses as you state, why does Andarko disagree with you, and why won’t our government release the data?
A loss of a high pressure well control would have consequences, but they aren’t likely to find a high pressure well, and even less likely to lose control of one.
If they did find one of significant size, that would be very interesting. We could start planning for Norway level state spending. Even if they did find one, there is nothing to suggest it is at a high-risk of blowing out.
Please cite your source for your assertion that the modelling is based on a high pressure blowout.
And please supply the data that disproves Andarkos statement that “loss of well control would hold significant impacts for the environment”
Just as an aside, the way you argue is dishonest. You dont back up any claims with data, and in almost every post you rely on the following logical fallicies; * Ad Hominem * Appeal To Emotion * Appeal to Fear * Appeal To Majority * Argumentum Ad Nauseam * False Dilemma * False Premise * Red Herring * False Analogy
I will no longer responding to most of your posts.
However when I do it will be to point out the logical fallicies therein.
When you get a break from being superior, Mr Viper, perhaps you could tell us why you’d spend a lot more on risk mitigation than the situation requires.
If there is virtually no chance of a high pressure blow-out due to low pressure oil extraction, then why would you mitigate as if you were expecting a high pressure blow-out as being highly likely?
Everything is a risk, and we mitigate to a level appropriate. We can never eliminate risk. Anyone expecting to is not being realistic.
The argument going on here really is whether a person considers any risk ‘worth it’.
You are either creating a strawman by citing ‘as if you were expecting a high pressure blow-out as being highly likely?’ or completely missing the point…or both.
The point being relayed by some, I believe, is that any chance of an oilspill is not worth the risk, whether the risk is small or large. Never mind ‘highly likely’, which I don’t think anyone has put forward.
I hold to this view; any risk is not worth it. And this is based on the level of devastation that occurs when these events happen. You appear to ignore this perspective and continue to think that arguing the risk being small …or ‘virtually no chance’ is relevant.
It might be more helpful to your case if you could attempt to argue the point that the devastation caused by recent deep sea oil disasters – the people dying due to the toxic clean up chemicals, the toxic beaches, the businesses ruined, the lives ruined, the environmental damage wasn’t all that bad. Did the oil company cover all the expenses of that damage? That would be a good start wouldn’t it? I don’t imagine that they did. I am guessing there’s been court-cases and the American government had to meet the shortfall.
Perhaps this is why you are bringing in the concept of ‘high pressure’ wells. You are saying the risk to the environment is not going to be like the Gulf of Mexico disaster, that the risk is ‘almost non-existent’. You expect the reader to take that as fact, however Naturesong has linked to information from Anadarko themselves that states if something went wrong there would be ‘significant impacts’ on the environment and I note that you haven’t responded to that comment.
So get to it and argue the point that it fine for companies to come in, take the oil, take the profits and in the event that anything goes wrong its perfectly o.k that they are not prepared to pay for the whole lot of damages they caused. Taxpayers will. And even if they did pay for everything, please explain to me how some of these damages can be corrected by money?
If you manage that, you might just change my opinion. Otherwise I’ll just stick to hoping that we get a community and government that starts putting real focus on green technologies and makes a concerted effort to move away from the on-its-way-out-dinosaur industry that is oil.
“If there is virtually no chance of a high pressure blow-out due to low pressure oil extraction, then why would you mitigate as if you were expecting a high pressure blow-out as being highly likely? ”
The answer is of course, that you would not. And no one is suggesting that happen.
However, Andarko has admitted that loss of well control would have significant impacts, but the likelyhood of that happening is low.
Thus, we should mitigate the risk at 2 levels;
1. Best practice during the exploratory phase.
2. Should the well become uncontrolled, that the response happen as quickly as possible.
New Zealand has not ratified the International Convention on Civil Liability for Bunker Oil Pollution Damage, which was adopted to ensure that adequate, prompt, and effective compensation is available to persons who suffer damage caused by spills of oil. Or the International Convention Relating to Intervention on the High Seas in Cases of Oil Pollution Casualties which affirms the right of states to “take such measures on the high seas as may be necessary to prevent, mitigate or eliminate grave and imminent danger to their coastline or related interests from pollution or threat of pollution of the sea by oil”.
The second strawman is this:
Everything is a risk, and we mitigate to a level appropriate. We can never eliminate risk. Anyone expecting to is not being realistic.
We are not mitigating to a level appropriate.
No one is saying that you can remove risk.
You end by casting all those who are calling for considered risk mitigation as being unrealistic.
A few weeks ago an invitation dropped into my email inbox to attend a joint Treasury/Motu seminar on recent, rather major, changes that had apparently been made to the discount rates used by The Treasury to evaluate proposals from government agencies. It was all news to me, but when ...
All your life is Time magazineI read it tooWhat does it mean?PressureI'm sure you'll have some cosmic rationaleBut here you are with your faithAnd your Peter Pan adviceYou have no scars on your faceAnd you cannot handle pressureSongwriter: Billy Joel.Christopher Luxon is under pressure from all sides. The reviews are ...
After seeing yet-more-months of political debate and policy decisions to ‘go for growth’ by pulling the same old cheap migration and cheap tourism levers without nearly-enough infrastructure, or any attempt to address the same old lack of globally conventional tax incentives for investment, I thought it would be worth issuing ...
The plans for the buildings that will replace the downtown carpark have been publicly notified giving us the first detailed glance at what is proposed for one of the biggest and best development sites in the city centre. The council agreed to sell the site to Precinct Properties for $122 ...
With the Reserve Bank expected today to return the Official Cash Rate to where it was in mid-2022 comes a measure of how much of a psychological impact the rate has. Federated Farmers has published its latest six-monthly farm confidence survey, which shows that profit expectations have fallen and risen ...
Kiwis Disallowed From Waiting Lists Based on Arbitrary MeasuresWellington hospital are now rejecting patients from specialist waiting lists due to BMI (body mass index).This article from Rachel Thomas for The Post says it all (emphasis mine):A group of Porirua GPs are sounding alarm bells after patients with body mass indexes ...
The Prime Minister says he's really comfortable with us not knowing the reoffending rate for his boot camp programme.They asked him for it at yesterday’s press conference, and he said, nah, not telling, have to respect people's privacy.Okay I'll bite. Let's say they release this information to us:The rate of ...
Warning 1: There is a Nazi theme at the end of this article related to the disabled community. Warning 2: This article could be boring!One day, last year, I excitedly opened up a Substack post that was about how to fight back, and the answer at the end was disappointing ...
This may be rhetorical but here goes: did any of you invest in the $Libra memecoin endorsed and backed by Argentine president and darling of the global Right Javier Milei (who admitted to being paid a fee for his promotion of the token)? You know, the one that soared above ...
Last week various of the great and good of New Zealand economics and public policy trooped off to Hamilton (of all places) for the annual Waikato Economics Forum, one of the successful marketing drives of university’s Vice-Chancellor. My interest was in the speeches delivered by the Minister of Finance and ...
The Prime Minister says the Government would be open to sending peacekeepers to Ukraine if a ceasefire was reached. The government has announced a $30 million spend on tourism infrastructure and biodiversity projects, including $11m spent to improve popular visitor sites and further $19m towards biodiversity efforts. A New Zealand-born ...
This is a re-post from The Climate Brink by Andrew Dessler “But what about when the sun doesn't shine?!” Ah yes, the energy debate’s equivalent of “The Earth is flat!” Every time someone mentions solar or wind power, some self-proclaimed energy expert emerges from the woodwork to drop this supposedly devastating truth bomb: ...
This post by Nicolas Reid was originally published on Linked in. It is republished here with permission.In this article I look into data on how well the rail network serve New Zealanders, and how many people might be able to travel by train… if we ran more than a ...
Hi,Before we get into Hayden Donnell’s new column about how yes, Donald Trump is definitely the Antichrist, I wanted to touch on something feral that happened in New Zealand last week.Members of Destiny Church pushed and punched their way into an Auckland library, apparently angry it was part of Pride ...
Despite delays, logjams and overcrowding in our emergency departments, funding constraints are limiting the numbers of nurses and doctors being trained. Photo: Lynn Grieveson / The KākāLong stories short, the top six things in Aotearoa’s political economy around housing, climate and poverty on Tuesday, February 18 are:A NZ Herald investigation ...
Now that the US has ripped up the Atlantic alliance, Europe is more vulnerable now than at any time since the mid-1930s. Apparently, Europe and Ukraine itself will not have a seat at the table in the talks between US President Donald Trump and Russian leader Vladimir Putin that will ...
Olivia and Noah and Hana are going to the library!It is fun to go to the library. It has books and songs and mat time and people who smile at you and say, Hello Olivia, what have you been doing this morning?The library is more fun than the mall. At ...
New World Orders: The challenge facing Christopher Luxon and Chris Hipkins is how to keep their small and vulnerable nation safe and stable in a world whose economic and political climate the forty-seventh American president is changing so profoundly.IT IS, SURELY, the ultimate Millennial revenge fantasy. Calling senior Baby-Boomer and Gen-X ...
“This might surprise you, Laurie, but I reckon Trump’s putting on a bloody impressive performance.”“GOODNESS ME, HANNAH, just look at all those Valentine’s Day cards!”“Occupational hazard, Laurie, the more beer I serve, the more my customers declare their undying love!”“Crikey! I had no idea business was so good.” Laurie squinted ...
In 2005, Labour repealed the long-standing principle of birthright citizenship in Aotearoa. Why? As with everything else Labour does, it all came down to austerity: "foreign mothers" were supposedly "coming to this country to give birth", and this was "put[ting] pressure on hospitals". Then-Immigration Minister George Hawkins explicitly gave this ...
And I just hope that you can forgive usBut everything must goAnd if you need an explanation, nationThen everything must goSongwriters: James Dean Bradfield / Sean Anthony Moore / Nicholas Allen Jones.Today, I’d like to talk about a couple of things that happened over the weekend:Brian Tamaki’s Library Invasion and ...
New reporting highlights how Brooke van Velden refuses to meet with the CTU but is happy to meet with fringe Australian-based unions. Van Velden is pursuing reckless changes to undermine the personal grievance system against the advice of her own officials. Engineering New Zealand are saying that hundreds of engineers ...
The NZCTU strongly supports the Employment Relations (Employee Remuneration Disclosure) Amendment Bill. This Bill represents a positive step towards addressing serious issues around unlawful disparities in pay by protecting workers’ rights to discuss their pay and conditions. This Bill also provides welcome support for helping tackle the prevalent gender and ...
Years of hard work finally paid off last week as the country’s biggest and most important transport project, the City Rail Link reached a major milestone with the first test train making its way slowly though the tunnels for the first time. This is a fantastic achievement and it is ...
Engineers are pleading for the Government to free up funds to restart stalled projects. File Photo: Lynn Grieveson / The KākāLong stories short, the top six things in Aotearoa’s political economy around housing, climate and poverty on Monday, February 17 are:Engineering New Zealand CEO Richard Templer said yesterday hundreds of ...
It’s one of New Zealand’s great sustaining myths: the spirit of ANZAC, our mates across the ditch, the spirit of Earl’s Court, Antipodeans united against the world. It is also a myth; it is not reality. That much was clear from a series of speakers, including a former Australian Prime ...
Many people have been unsatisfied for years that things have not improved for them, some as individuals, many more however because their families are clearly putting in more work, for less money – and certainly far less purchase on society. This general discontent has grown exponentially since the GFC. ...
A listing of 34 news and opinion articles we found interesting and shared on social media during the past week: Sun, February 9, 2025 thru Sat, February 15, 2025. This week's roundup is again published soleley by category. We are still interested in feedback to hone the categorization, so if ...
The Salvation Army’s State of the Nation report shows worsening food poverty and housing shortages mean more than 400,000 people now need welfare support, the highest level since the 1990s. Photo: Lynn Grieveson / The KākāLong stories short, the top six things in our political economy around housing, climate and ...
You're just too too obscure for meOh you don't really get through to meAnd there's no need for you to talk that wayIs there any less pessimistic things to say?Songwriters: Graeme DownesToday, I thought we’d take a look at some of the most cringe-inducing moments from last week, but don’t ...
Please note: I’ve delayed my “What can we do?” article for this video.The video above shows Destiny Church members assaulting staff and librarians as they pushed through to a room of terrified parents and young children.It was posted to social media last night.But if you read Sinead Boucher’s Stuff, you ...
Skeptical Science is partnering with Gigafact to produce fact briefs — bite-sized fact checks of trending claims. You can submit claims you think need checking via the tipline. Is sea level rise exaggerated? Sea levels are rising at an accelerating rate, not stagnating or decreasing. Warming global temperatures cause land ice ...
Here is a scenario, but first a historical parallel. Hitler and the Nazis could well have accomplished everything that they wanted to do within German borders, including exterminating Jews, so long as they confined their ambitious to Germany itself. After all, the world pretty much sat and watched as the ...
I’ve spent the last couple of days in Hamilton covering Waikato University’s annual NZ Economics Forum, where (arguably) three of the most influential people in our political economy right now laid out their thinking in major speeches about the size and role of Government, their views on for spending, tax ...
Simeon Brown’s Ideology BentSimeon Brown once told Kiwis he tries to represent his deep sense of faith by interacting “with integrity”.“It’s important that there’s Christians in Parliament…and from my perspective, it’s great to be a Christian in Parliament and to bring that perspective to [laws, conversations and policies].”And with ...
Severe geological and financial earthquakes are inevitable. We just don’t know how soon and how they will play out. Are we putting the right effort into preparing for them?Every decade or so the international economy has a major financial crisis. We cannot predict exactly when or exactly how it will ...
Questions1. How did Old Mate Grabaseat describe his soon-to-be-Deputy-PM’s letter to police advocating for Philip Polkinghorne?a.Ill-advisedb.A perfect letterc.A letter that will live in infamyd.He had me at hello2. What did Seymour say in response?a.What’s ill-advised is commenting when you don’t know all the facts and ...
NZCTU Te Kauae Kaimahi President Richard Wagstaff has called on OJI Fibre Solutions to work with the government, unions, and the community before closing the Kinleith Paper Mill. “OJI has today announced 230 job losses in what will be a devastating blow for the community. OJI needs to work with ...
NZCTU Te Kauae Kaimahi President Richard Wagstaff is sounding the alarm about the latest attack on workers from Minister of Workplace Relations and Safety Brooke van Velden, who is ignoring her own officials to pursue reckless changes that would completely undermine the personal grievance system. “Brooke van Velden’s changes will ...
Hi,When I started writing Webworm in 2020, I wrote a lot about the conspiracy theories that were suddenly invading our Twitter timelines and Facebook feeds. Four years ago a reader, John, left this feedback under one of my essays:It’s a never ending labyrinth of lunacy which, as you have pointed ...
And if you said this life ain't good enoughI would give my world to lift you upI could change my life to better suit your moodBecause you're so smoothAnd it's just like the ocean under the moonOh, it's the same as the emotion that I get from youYou got the ...
Aotearoa remains the minority’s birthright, New Zealand the majority’s possession. WAITANGI DAY commentary see-saws manically between the warmly positive and the coldly negative. Many New Zealanders consider this a good thing. They point to the unexamined patriotism of July Fourth and Bastille Day celebrations, and applaud the fact that the ...
The podcast above of the weekly ‘Hoon’ webinar for paying subscribers on Thursday night features co-hosts & talking about the week’s news with regular and special guests, including: and on the week in geopolitics, including the latest from Donald Trump’s administration over Gaza and Ukraine; on the ...
Up until now, the prevailing coalition view of public servants was that there were simply too many of them. But yesterday the new Public Service Commissioner, handpicked by the Luxon Government, said it was not so much numbers but what they did and the value they produced that mattered. Sir ...
In a moment we explore the question: What is Andrew Bayly wanting to tell ACC, and will it involve enjoying a small wine tasting and then telling someone to fuck off? But first, for context, a broader one: What do we look for in a government?Imagine for a moment, you ...
As expected, Donald Trump just threw Ukraine under the bus, demanding that it accept Russia's illegal theft of land, while ruling out any future membership of NATO. Its a colossal betrayal, which effectively legitimises Russia's invasion, while laying the groundwork for the next one. But Trump is apparently fine with ...
A ballot for a single member's bill was held today, and the following bill was drawn: Employment Relations (Collective Agreements in Triangular Relationships) Amendment Bill (Adrian Rurawhe) The bill would extend union rights to employees in triangular relationships, where they are (nominally) employed by one party, but ...
This is a guest post by George Weeks, reviewing a book called ‘How to Fly a Horse’ by Kevin AshtonBook review: ‘How to Fly a Horse’ by Kevin Ashton (2015) – and what it means for Auckland. The title of this article might unnerve any Greater Auckland ...
This story was originally published by Capital & Main and is part of Covering Climate Now, a global journalism collaboration strengthening coverage of the climate story. Within just a week, the sheer devastation of the Los Angeles wildfires has pushed to the fore fundamental questions about the impact of the climate crisis that have been ...
In this world, it's just usYou know it's not the same as it wasSongwriters: Harry Edward Styles / Thomas Edward Percy Hull / Tyler Sam JohnsonYesterday, I received a lovely message from Caty, a reader of Nick’s Kōrero, that got me thinking. So I thought I’d share it with you, ...
In past times a person was considered “unserious” or “not a serious” person if they failed to grasp, behave and speak according to the solemnity of the context in which they were located. For example a serious person does not audibly pass gas at Church, or yell “gun” at a ...
Long stories short, the top six things in Aotearoa’s political economy around housing, climate and poverty on Thursday, February 13 are:The coalition Government’s early 2024 ‘fiscal emergency’ freeze on funding, planning and building houses, schools, local roads and hospitals helped extend and deepen the economic and jobs recession through calendar ...
For obvious reasons, people feel uneasy when the right to be a citizen is sold off to wealthy foreigners. Even selling the right to residency seems a bit dubious, when so many migrants who are not millionaires get turned away or are made to jump through innumerable hoops – simply ...
A new season of White Lotus is nearly upon us: more murder mystery, more sumptuous surroundings, more rich people behaving badly.Once more we get to identify with the experience of the pampered tourist or perhaps the poorly paid help; there's something in White Lotus for all New Zealanders.And unlike the ...
In 2016, Aotearoa shockingly plunged to fourth place in the Transparency International Corruption Perceptions Index. Nine years later, and we're back there again: New Zealand has seen a further slip in its global ranking in the latest Corruption Perceptions Index (CPI). [...] In the latest CPI New Zealand's score ...
1. You’ve started ranking your politicians on how much they respect the rule of law2. You’ve stopped paying attention to those news publications3. You’ve developed a sudden interest in a particular period of history4. More and more people are sounding like your racist, conspiracist uncle.5. Someone just pulled a Nazi ...
Transforming New Zealand: Brian EastonBrian Easton will discuss the above topic at 2/57 Willis Street, Wellington at 5:30pm on Tuesday 26 February at 2/57 Willis Street, WellingtonThe sub-title to the above is "Why is the Left failing?" Brian Easton's analysis is based on his view that while the ...
Salvation Army’s State of the Nation 2025 report highlights falling living standards, the highest unemployment rates since the 1990s and half of all Pacific children going without food. There are reports of hundreds if not thousands of people are applying for the same jobs in the wake of last year’s ...
Mountain Tui is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.Correction: On the article The Condundrum of David Seymour, Luke Malpass conducted joint reviews with Bryce Wilkinson, the architect of the Regulatory Standards Bill - not Bryce Edwards. The article ...
Tomorrow the council’s Transport, Resilience and Infrastructure Committee meet and agenda has a few interesting papers. Council’s Letter of Expectation to Auckland Transport Every year the council provide a Letter of Expectation to Auckland Transport which is part of the process for informing AT of the council’s priorities and ...
All around in my home townThey're trying to track me down, yeahThey say they want to bring me in guiltyFor the killing of a deputyFor the life of a deputySongwriter: Robert Nesta Marley.Support Nick’s Kōrero today with a 20% discount on a paid subscription to receive all my newsletters directly ...
Hi,I think all of us have probably experienced the power of music — that strange, transformative thing that gets under our skin and helps us experience this whole life thing with some kind of sanity.Listening and experiencing music has always been such a huge part of my life, and has ...
Business frustration over the stalled economy is growing, and only 34% of voters are confidentNicola Willis can deliver. Photo: Lynn Grieveson / The KākāLong stories short, the top six things in Aotearoa’s political economy around housing, climate and poverty on Wednesday, February 12 are:Business frustration is growing about a ...
I have now lived long enough to see a cabinet minister go both barrels on their Prime Minister and not get sacked.It used to be that the PM would have a drawer full of resignations signed by ministers on the day of their appointment, ready for such an occasion. But ...
This session will feature Simon McCallum, Senior Lecturer in Engineering and Computer Science (VUW) and recent Labour Party candidate in the Southland Electorate talking about some of the issues around AI and how this should inform Labour Party policy. Simon is an excellent speaker with a comprehensive command of AI ...
The proposed Waimate garbage incinerator is dead: The company behind a highly-controversial proposal to build a waste-to-energy plant in the Waimate District no longer has the land. [...] However, SIRRL director Paul Taylor said the sales and purchase agreement to purchase land from Murphy Farms, near Glenavy, lapsed at ...
“The ACT Party can’t be bothered putting an MP on one of the Justice subcommittees hearing submissions on their own Treaty Principles Bill,” Labour Justice Spokesperson Duncan Webb said. ...
The Government’s newly announced funding for biodiversity and tourism of $30-million over three years is a small fraction of what is required for conservation in this country. ...
The Government's sudden cancellation of the tertiary education funding increase is a reckless move that risks widespread job losses and service reductions across New Zealand's universities. ...
National’s cuts to disability support funding and freezing of new residential placements has resulted in significant mental health decline for intellectually disabled people. ...
The hundreds of jobs lost needlessly as a result of the Kinleith Mill paper production closure will have a devastating impact on the Tokoroa community - something that could have easily been avoided. ...
Today Te Pāti Māori MP for Te Tai Tokerau, Mariameno Kapa-Kingi, released her members bill that will see the return of tamariki and mokopuna Māori from state care back to te iwi Māori. This bill will establish an independent authority that asserts and protects the rights promised in He Whakaputanga ...
The Whangarei District Council being forced to fluoridate their local water supply is facing a despotic Soviet-era disgrace. This is not a matter of being pro-fluoride or anti-fluoride. It is a matter of what New Zealanders see and value as democracy in our country. Individual democratically elected Councillors are not ...
Nicola Willis’ latest supermarket announcement is painfully weak with no new ideas, no real plan, and no relief for Kiwis struggling with rising grocery costs. ...
Half of Pacific children sometimes going without food is just one of many heartbreaking lowlights in the Salvation Army’s annual State of the Nation report. ...
The Salvation Army’s State of the Nation report is a bleak indictment on the failure of Government to take steps to end poverty, with those on benefits, including their children, hit hardest. ...
New Zealand First has today introduced a Member’s Bill which would restore decision-making power to local communities regarding the fluoridation of drinking water. The ‘Fluoridation (Referendum) Legislation Bill’ seeks to repeal the Health (Fluoridation of Drinking Water) Amendment Act 2021 that granted centralised authority to the Direct General of Health ...
New Zealand First has introduced a Member’s Bill aimed at preventing banks from refusing their services to businesses because of the current “Environmental, Social, and Governance (ESG) Framework”. “This Bill ensures fairness and prevents ESG standards from perpetuating woke ideology in the banking sector being driven by unelected, globalist, climate ...
Erica Stanford has reached peak shortsightedness if today’s announcement is anything to go by, picking apart immigration settings piece by piece to the detriment of the New Zealand economy. ...
Our originating document, theTreaty of Waitangi, was signed on February 6, 1840. An agreement between Māori and the British Crown. Initially inked by Ngā Puhi in Waitangi, further signatures were added as it travelled south. The intention was to establish a colony with the cession of sovereignty to the Crown, ...
Te Whatu Ora Chief Executive Margie Apa leaving her job four months early is another symptom of this government’s failure to deliver healthcare for New Zealanders. ...
The Green Party is calling for the Prime Minister to show leadership and be unequivocal about Aotearoa New Zealand’s opposition to a proposal by the US President to remove Palestinians from Gaza. ...
The latest unemployment figures reveal that job losses are hitting Māori and Pacific people especially hard, with Māori unemployment reaching a staggering 9.7% for the December 2024 quarter and Pasifika unemployment reaching 10.5%. ...
Waitangi 2025: Waitangi Day must be community and not politically driven - Shane Jones Our originating document, theTreaty of Waitangi, was signed on February 6, 1840. An agreement between Māori and the British Crown. Initially inked by Ngā Puhi in Waitangi, further signatures were added as it travelled south. ...
Despite being confronted every day with people in genuine need being stopped from accessing emergency housing – National still won’t commit to building more public houses. ...
The Green Party says the Government is giving up on growing the country’s public housing stock, despite overwhelming evidence that we need more affordable houses to solve the housing crisis. ...
Before any thoughts of the New Year and what lies ahead could even be contemplated, New Zealand reeled with the tragedy of Senior Sergeant Lyn Fleming losing her life. For over 38 years she had faithfully served as a front-line Police officer. Working alongside her was Senior Sergeant Adam Ramsay ...
Green Party co-leader Marama Davidson will return to politics at Waitangi on Monday the 3rd of February where she will hold a stand up with fellow co-leader Chlöe Swarbrick. ...
Te Pāti Māori is appalled by the government's blatant mishandling of the school lunch programme. David Seymour’s ‘cost-saving’ measures have left tamariki across Aotearoa with unidentifiable meals, causing distress and outrage among parents and communities alike. “What’s the difference between providing inedible food, and providing no food at all?” Said ...
The Government is doubling down on outdated and volatile fossil fuels, showing how shortsighted and destructive their policies are for working New Zealanders. ...
Green Party MP Steve Abel this morning joined Coromandel locals in Waihi to condemn new mining plans announced by Shane Jones in the pit of the town’s Australian-owned Gold mine. ...
The Green Party is calling on the Government to strengthen its just-announced 2030-2035 Nationally Determined Contribution (NDC) under the Paris Agreement and address its woeful lack of commitment to climate security. ...
The Government’s commitment to get New Zealand’s roads back on track is delivering strong results, with around 98 per cent of potholes on state highways repaired within 24 hours of identification every month since targets were introduced, Transport Minister Chris Bishop says. “Increasing productivity to help rebuild our economy is ...
The former Cadbury factory will be the site of the Inpatient Building for the new Dunedin Hospital and Health Minister Simeon Brown says actions have been taken to get the cost overruns under control. “Today I am giving the people of Dunedin certainty that we will build the new Dunedin ...
From today, Plunket in Whāngarei will be offering childhood immunisations – the first of up to 27 sites nationwide, Health Minister Simeon Brown says. The investment of $1 million into the pilot, announced in October 2024, was made possible due to the Government’s record $16.68 billion investment in health. It ...
New Zealand’s strong commitment to the rights of disabled people has continued with the response to an important United Nations report, Disability Issues Minister Louise Upston has announced. Of the 63 concluding observations of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (UNCRPD), 47 will be progressed ...
Resources Minister Shane Jones has launched New Zealand’s national Minerals Strategy and Critical Minerals List, documents that lay a strategic and enduring path for the mineral sector, with the aim of doubling exports to $3 billion by 2035. Mr Jones released the documents, which present the Coalition Government’s transformative vision ...
Firstly I want to thank OceanaGold for hosting our event today. Your operation at Waihi is impressive. I want to acknowledge local MP Scott Simpson, local government dignitaries, community stakeholders and all of you who have gathered here today. It’s a privilege to welcome you to the launch of the ...
Racing Minister, Winston Peters has announced the Government is preparing public consultation on GST policy proposals which would make the New Zealand racing industry more competitive. “The racing industry makes an important economic contribution. New Zealand thoroughbreds are in demand overseas as racehorses and for breeding. The domestic thoroughbred industry ...
Business confidence remains very high and shows the economy is on track to improve, Economic Growth Minister Nicola Willis says. “The latest ANZ Business Outlook survey, released yesterday, shows business confidence and expected own activity are ‘still both very high’.” The survey reports business confidence fell eight points to +54 ...
Enabling works have begun this week on an expanded radiology unit at Hawke’s Bay Fallen Soldiers’ Memorial Hospital which will double CT scanning capacity in Hawke’s Bay to ensure more locals can benefit from access to timely, quality healthcare, Health Minister Simeon Brown says. This investment of $29.3m in the ...
The Government has today announced New Zealand’s second international climate target under the Paris Agreement, Climate Change Minister Simon Watts says. New Zealand will reduce emissions by 51 to 55 per cent compared to 2005 levels, by 2035. “We have worked hard to set a target that is both ambitious ...
Nine years of negotiations between the Crown and iwi of Taranaki have concluded following Te Pire Whakatupua mō Te Kāhui Tupua/the Taranaki Maunga Collective Redress Bill passing its third reading in Parliament today, Treaty Negotiations Minister Paul Goldsmith says. “This Bill addresses the historical grievances endured by the eight iwi ...
"This is a crisis of the Government’s own making and the unit is another sign of desperation," said PSA acting national secretary Fleur Fitzsimons. ...
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Francesca Perugia, Senior Lecturer, School of Design and the Built Environment, Curtin University Australia’s housing crisis has created a push for fast-tracked construction. Federal, state and territory governments have set a target of 1.2 million new homes over five years. Increasing housing ...
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Ash Watson, Scientia Fellow and Senior Lecturer, UNSW Sydney Shutterstock When we’re uncomfortable we say the “vibe is off”. When we’re having a good time we’re “vibing”. To assess the mood we do a “vibe check”. And when the atmosphere in ...
What’s up with the man from Epsom? The leader of the Act Party has been in plenty of headlines in the last two weeks, ranging from a controversial letter to police on behalf of constituent Philip Polkinghorne (written before David Seymour was a minister) to an attempt to drive ...
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Elise Stephenson, Deputy Director, Global Institute for Women’s Leadership, Australian National University Newly published research has found clear evidence that openly lesbian, gay, bisexual, trans, intersex, and queer+ (LGBTIQ+) Australian politicians were disproportionately targeted with personal abuse on social media at the ...
Gilmore Girls, Schitt’s Creek, even The Vampire Diaries – they’re all set in tight-knit neighbourhoods where everyone knows everyone. So what is it like to actually know your neighbours? My favourite television shows are set in tight-knit neighbourhoods where everyone knows everyone. Characters attend town meetings where they debate local ...
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Yanyan Hong, PhD Candidate in Communication and Media Studies, University of Adelaide IMDB On the surface, Ne Zha 2: The Sea’s Fury (2025), the sequel to the 2019 Chinese blockbuster Nezha: Birth of the Demon Child, is a high-octane, action-packed and ...
Wellington travellers say their buses are so hot they’re often forced to get off early and walk. Shanti Mathias explores the impact of non-functioning air conditioning on public transport. When Bella, a young professional living in Wellington, thinks about taking the bus, her first thought is “Ugh”. The bus might ...
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Annette Kroen, Research Fellow Planning and Transport, RMIT University The cleanup is underway in northern Queensland following the latest flooding catastrophe to hit the state. More than 7,000 insurance claims have already been lodged, most of them for inundated homes and other ...
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Subha Parida, Lecturer in Property, University of South Australia Carl Oberg/Shutterstock Houses and fire do not mix. The firestorm which hit Los Angeles in January destroyed nearly 2,000 buildings and forced 130,000 people to evacuate. The 2019–20 Australian megafires destroyed ...
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By David Bowman, Professor of Pyrogeography and Fire Science, University of Tasmania Tasmania has been burning for more than two weeks, with no end in sight. Almost 100,000 hectares of bushland in the northwest has burned to date. This includes the Tarkine rainforest ...
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Martin Loosemore, Professor of Construction Management, University of Technology Sydney This week, the Productivity Commission released its much-awaited report into productivity growth in Australia’s housing construction sector. It wasn’t a glowing appraisal. The commission found physical productivity – the total number ...
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Pascale Lubbe, Postdoctoral Research Fellow in Molecular Ecology, University of Otago Royal spoonbills are among several new species that have crossed the Tasman and naturalised in New Zealand. JJ Harrison/Wikimedia Commons, CC BY-SA When people arrived on the shores of Aotearoa ...
Stats NZ’s head is stepping down over the agency’s failure to safeguard census data, and more officials may soon be in the firing line, writes Catherine McGregor in today’s extract from The Bulletin. To receive The Bulletin in full each weekday, sign up here. An ‘absolutely unacceptable’ failure Stats NZ chief ...
Health NZ is under greater government scrutiny, with the new health minister setting up a unit he says will "drive greater accountability and performance". ...
Manurewa Marae acknowledges should have done better at handling completed census forms, following an inquiry into steps government agencies took to protect data. ...
Police failed to protect people from protesters at a high-profile rally and made unlawful arrests at another, the Independent Police Conduct Authority says. ...
Comment: Crypto exchange-traded funds (ETFs) are making it easier for people to invest in cryptocurrencies such as Bitcoin and Ethereum without having to handle digital wallets or private keys. These allow investors to buy and sell cryptocurrency through their regular brokerage accounts.This has opened the door for billions of dollars ...
Two long-awaited reports into alleged personal data misuse, centred on census collection and Covid-19 vaccination efforts at Manurewa Marae, were released yesterday. Here’s what you need to know.“Very sobering reading” was how public service commissioner Sir Brian Roche described his organisation’s long-awaited report into the alleged misuse of census ...
Backbench MPs reached new levels of patsy questions in an extraordinarily dull question time on Tuesday. Echo Chamber is The Spinoff’s dispatch from the press gallery, recapping sessions in the House. Columns are written by politics reporter Lyric Waiwiri-Smith and Wellington editor Joel MacManus. “MPs ask questions to explore key issues ...
The New Zealand Government says the Cook Islands must share more information about the deals it has signed with China, following the release of an ‘action plan’ in the face of protests in the Pacific nation’s capital.The Cook Islands government has also revealed plans to spend $3 million on a ...
Loading…(function(i,s,o,g,r,a,m){var ql=document.querySelectorAll('A[data-quiz],DIV[data-quiz]'); if(ql){if(ql.length){for(var k=0;k<ql.length;k++){ql[k].id='quiz-embed-'+k;ql[k].href="javascript:var i=document.getElementById('quiz-embed-"+k+"');try{qz.startQuiz(i)}catch(e){i.start=1;i.style.cursor='wait';i.style.opacity='0.5'};void(0);"}}};i['QP']=r;i[r]=i[r]||function(){(i[r].q=i[r].q||[]).push(arguments)},i[r].l=1*new Date();a=s.createElement(o),m=s.getElementsByTagName(o)[0];a.async=1;a.src=g;m.parentNode.insertBefore(a,m)})(window,document,'script','https://take.quiz-maker.com/3012/CDN/quiz-embed-v1.js','qp');Got a good quiz question?Send Newsroom your questions.The post Newsroom daily quiz, Wednesday 19 February appeared first on Newsroom. ...
Comment: The recent attack by Destiny Church front groups on a Drag science show at Te Atatū library crossed a line. This wasn’t the first time that Brian Tamaki, the multimillionaire self-appointed ‘apostle’, has ordered acts of aggression against the queer community. Last year, Drag Story Time events were targeted, ...
Martina Salmon is well versed in the fast-paced action on a netball court, but even she was caught by surprise with the speed at which her career changed tack last year.Staying in the fast lane is only part of her drive this season.Fresh off a nine-day camp in Sydney with ...
Last night I may as well have been in Taihape. Or, closer to home, for me at least, somewhere in the Wairarapa. Or Tūrangi, even – which is near where we used to spend the summer when I was a child. For there was that same gorgeous small town feeling ...
Having Auckland’s food scraps dumped onto your rural backyard sounds scandalous, but in the North Island town of Reporoa there’s no fuss about the thousands of tonnes carted here every week.From the same site as one truck drops the waste, another truck picks up fertiliser to spread on local sheep ...
Have a good day and keep the banners flying!
The government is being very irresponsible by keeping secret the magnitude of the risks of deep sea oil exploration.
From this side of the Ditch, the view is that things are worsening for folks back in Aotearoa.
Please explain the risk because what I’ve been reading seems to point in the direction that Greenpeace and the Greens are telling total bullshit about the risks associated with deep sea oil drilling off the cost of NZ.
What have you been reading?
I’ve been reading that the oil fields found around NZ are mostly low pressure.
To extract oil from these fields, the oil has to be pumped out unlike the gulf of Mexico where the oil fields are under pressure.
Turn off the pump the oil stops flowing.
Makes a Gulf of Mexico scenario basically impossible.
“Mostly”. I note you are talking about existing wells.
Please look up the definition of “exploratory”.
According to Petroleum Exploration & Production Association chief executive David Robinson all the wells in Taranaki are all low pressure wells.
Anadarko is scheduled to begin drilling at two deep-sea sites
1. Taranaki Basin
-Chances of a blow out here is nil
2.Canterbury Basin.
– Don’t know and not sure where one would find that information, but I’d take a guess and say it’s along the same lines as the Taranaki Basin.
Plenty of information available on the geology of the Canterbury Basin, along with some quite specific predictions of hydrocarbon traps and seals.
It would be quite a coincidence if the geology there were similar to that off Taranaki, what with them being on different tectonic plates and all, but it’s your guess, not mine.
You need to understand the difference between shallow water drilling and the proposed deep water wells. There is no such thing as nil risk as you suggest. The government’s assessed risk at Taranaki site is 10%. At the deep water sites, it’s 70%. Whilst it’s true that a ‘notifiable incident’ includes injury to staff, collisions, fires and spills, at 7 times the risk of Taranaki is a heck of a chance to take with our coastline.
The government’s tide and wind modelling shows a single blow out at Raglan would gradually pollute the top half of the west coast of NI. I think it’s reprehensible of Minister Amy Adams to change the word when ‘quoting’ from a risk report. She described the consequences of any spill as ‘significant’. The actual word used was ‘catastrophic’.
And because Anadarko have set up Anadarko NZ Ltd, they can walk away from the cost of the clean up once their assets are taken. Here is a list of the safety equipment listed onboard the Noble. Like many others, I honestly thought it was a spoof article, but it’s not.
http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/PO1311/S00274/anadarko-oil-spill-equipment-grossly-inadequate.htm
As an American judge said to a corporation recently, “I’m going to judge you on what you do, not what you say you’re going to do.” How well do you think they would cope with a spill?
The law of averages tells us there will be a major spill in New Zealand waters at some point in time. That is fact.
The only way to prevent the inevitable spill is to pull all wells out now.
Yes, that is a fantastic solution.
@ BM
Oil is on the way out. It is a backwards approach to pursue such. It not only endangers the environment it also has been creating a lot of wars and suffering (indirectly I guess, due to the greed of the individuals profiting from it). It is a backwards move to start drawing NZ deeper into this filthy (physically and morally) industry.
Humans are extremely clever (well some are) and can devise other ways to propel vehicles and ‘industry’; it is time that we started investing in green technology.
It would be nice to have a government that was looking toward the future and being real about this issue of energy. Not one that attempts to fool its citizenry into believing that this is the way to create jobs and that the risks are minimal. Just so a few can profit at the expense of everyone else. That approach is really simply a waste of all our time and energy.
Not for a long time.
We could have a huge revenue stream sitting 100k off shore and you don’t want to touch it?
Can you not think of all the good this money could make to our country?, do you want people to stay poor?
Great free health care, free education and you want to turn that down because oil’s supposedly on the way out, unbelievable!.
Free Health Care and Education is available to us today without these unecessary wells. All we have to do is elect a government that will do that [i.e. the Greens]
This country is extremely wealthy. The only problem is the nation’s wealth is not distributed evenly amongst the nation’s people.
A truly progressive tax system would reap the benefits you refer to.
Gifting dirty oil to foreigners will not achieve that.
If that’s your belief, then it is a blind one.
See how well your socialism is working out in Venezuela.
How’s the ongoing determined effort to overthrow Venezuela’s democratically elected government going?
Newsflash: destabilisation destabilises. Oh, and “my” Socialism looks a lot more Nordic in origin.
Nordic? what as in Norway, the great oil producer of the north.
Do you think that socialist utopia would have happened without the revenue raised from oil?
Norway?
You mean the country that allowed oil drilling by US oil giants, which, once discovered, Norway created their own national oil company. The oil pays for their generous “socialism”, not redistribution.
Something to think about.
Always someone elses fault, eh.
Just can’t admit that destroying production and distribution incentives quickly destroys an economy.
At some point, you’re going to need to admit the socialism experiments do not work.
Someone else’s fault? What new drivel is this? Oh, no wait, it’s the old drivel, the zombie argument walks again.
Why can’t you parrots ever say anything original? So tiny is your intellect that you spend hours desperately trying to come up with new ways to say someone else’s lines.
Take this witless shite, that Socialism is somehow about deflecting blame, based on the notion that reasons are excuses. Do you enjoy espousing illiteracy or are you just too stupid to understand the difference?
We need better wingnuts.
PS: Perhaps if you could comprehend, you might have comprehended some of my other remarks on this thread, and noticed that they undermined your stupid assertion that I deny the value of hydrocarbons before you even made it. What kind of fuckwit makes a basic mistake like that?
PPS: Higher per capita GDP, lowest unemployment in NZ history, lower GINI. If these are examples of my “Socialism” not working, then your National Party must be completely shit, failing as they do to even match these paltry achievements.
Your eloquence is really something, One Anonymous Knucklehead
Your anger is understandable, because. once again, there is living proof that socialist economic principles don’t work in practice. Venezuela is collapsing from self-inflicted ideological idiocy, and Chavez is to blame.
They implemented it, they need to take the blame for the predictable results.
Regarding your suggestion to read your other posts, I’m not sure I want to read them as I fear the level of rhetorical flatulence involved. If you want to calm down and discuss things like a reasonable adult, then perhaps there is a way forward.
Argues in circles,
Like an absurd wingnut bird,
Flapping makes no sound.
Venezuela is under the usual massive banking/US sanctions pressure.
You must call 48M Americans on food stamps a success of capitalism then. And Walmart organising public donations for their own underpaid staff.
We can play this game all day: USA recidivism rate: 50-odd percent. Nordic nations: twenty-odd percent.
“Venezuela is under the usual massive banking/US sanctions pressure.”
Always someone else’s fault, eh. Funny how the failure of socialism is always the capitalists fault. The US doesn’t blame the faults of capitalism on Greece, or Russia, or China, or North Korea does it? No, it blames it on their own people, namely banks.
If socialism is that vulnerable to US policy, then perhaps that tells you something about one of the many flaws of socialism.
Maybe you can explain why you present the weird imperialist adventures of the USA as some sort of natural order, rather than continuing with this failed attempt to draw conclusions about Socialism based on cherry-picking Chavez’s populism rather than Holland’s reduced prison population, or some of the other available comparisons.
Oh, and perhaps, while you’re at it, you can explain why you and the other wingnuts all rehearse the same lines. Not an original thought among you.
Lift your game, it’s like Sarah Palin hour.
Well, Europe is in trouble.
Their level of state spending is not sustainable, which is why the likes of Sweden have swung right. The Netherlands is another interesting example when it comes to dealing with offenders. They use containers as housing to isolate problem families. The Dutch are quite Germanic when it comes to dealing with people who don’t play nicely.
I’m not sure why so many on the left seek to put people in boxes and stamp a label on them. Perhaps it makes life appear more simple. I don’t see myself as being right or left, but issue based and pragmatic. If something makes sense to me, I’ll support it, and I don’t really care where the idea comes from. The Greens are right about drug law, for example, and National are wrong.
Chavez style socialism sounds nice, but the evidence is that people soon go without. The lesson seems to be that incentives and market signals are important.
A poor argument BM
Green technology can provide the funds we require…that is if our stupid bloody government started encouraging it.
There is a good chance that more alternatives would already have been developed if it weren’t for the greedy monopolistic behaviour of this fossilized industry.
I suggest that you start thinking outside the fossilized square that’s been provided for you care of the industry players and our current idiotic government, BM.
That is false.
If that opportunity existed, the private sector would be all over it. There is no shortage of investment money chasing projects, but there is a shortage of good projects.
You don’t get a profitable enterprise just because you throw money at something. See the myriad of failures in those industries, prime examples being Suntech, Solyndra and the Spanish solar industry. They threw billions at it, and got absolutely nowhere.
I suggest you start thinking in terms of comparative and competitive advantage, not fanciful ideological wish lists.
Where will the competitive and comparative advantages be? Geography, obviously plays a part. We can’t change that, but maybe we’ll get lucky.
The oil is getting harder and harder to access, weaning ourselves off it is not an option, it’s going to happen whether we like it or not.
So the other advantages can be delivered by successful adaptation, but research involves going down blind alleys occasionally; whoopdeedo, you can point at one.
I note the private sector manufactures solar panels and windmills. Does that count as “all over it”, or does it just throw your shallow “argument” a bone?
We’ll replace oil one day. Until then, we need oil.
So, if the hippies and peaceniks don’t like oil, then they’re going to need to come up with a lot more alternative energy at a lot lower price point in order to substitute. The first world isn’t going to stop using the energy oil provides for ideological reasons. Even hippies like Hughes makes substantial use of plane travel in order to be “effective”. Well, so does everyone else, Mr Hughes.
Shrugs.
So get inventing. Trying to stop oil use without equivalent energy replacement at reasonable cost won’t work.
Oil companies already have access to enough oil that if it were all used, the effect on our climate presents an existential threat to humans.
We have enough oil. There is no need to drill for more.
This is known as an argument from ignorance.
Labelling those who disagree with you with regard to the danger presented by fossil fuel use as “hippies and peaceniks” shows that you are disingenuous.
It’s also an example of an ad hominem.
This is correct as far as it goes, but it makes the assumption that profit is the primary consideration for any activity. The profit motive may well be the root of the problem facing the world.
You are also ignoring the fact that the oil industry is heavily subsidised, and does not price in a lot of the cost of extracting and using the stuff.
Pollution produced during extraction and consumption is externalised and some of that is paid for with public monies.
The increased number of fires in Australia, the additional damage caused due to increased intensity of storms. Oil spills where the state (our taxes) pick up the bulk of the clean up costs.
No. But they may stop using it for existential reasons. However it may be too late by then.
Gareth Hughes also makes a point of being carbon neutral and has initiated sequestration measures (planting a shit load of tree mainly) to cover his carbon use.
Even so, I think air travel will be one of the last things to go.
In the mean time;
* closing coal powered generation
* redirecting the subsidies that currently go to oil companies toward clean end point generation (solar and wind generation on every house and building).
* a commitment to quality public transport which will reduce emmissions per journey for commuters, reduce the driving time when do actually use a car.
* continuation of the Greens insulation initiative, which has produces great results reduced power costs and health savings.
The area of alternate energy is currently worth billions, and in the next couple of decades will be worth tens of billions. For New Zealand, it’s a massive opportunity. The current government, they really have no clue.
This is a red herring.
Many people are actively working toward alternatives, however currently there is not a level playing field. If the actual costs of oil were included into the price, you would see a massive shift to alternative power sources.
“Oil companies already have access to enough oil that if it were all used, the effect on our climate presents an existential threat to humans.We have enough oil. There is no need to drill for more.This is known as an argument from ignorance.”
There is no evidence using oil presents an existential threat to humans. If a company thinks it needs to meet demand with supply, then they do so.
“Labelling those who disagree with you with regard to the danger presented by fossil fuel use as “hippies and peaceniks” shows that you are disingenuous.It’s also an example of an ad hominem.”
Perhaps, but it’s also descriptive. People often use the term “right-wing” or “Tories” or “wing-nuts”. Should they?
“This is correct as far as it goes, but it makes the assumption that profit is the primary consideration for any activity. The profit motive may well be the root of the problem facing the world.”
Well, you could generate energy at a loss, but it isn’t sustainable. Eventually, you get Greece, where they can no longer pay for many essential services.
“You are also ignoring the fact that the oil industry is heavily subsidised, and does not price in a lot of the cost of extracting and using the stuff.”
How is it subsidised? Are you against subsidy?
“The increased number of fires in Australia, the additional damage caused due to increased intensity of storms. ”
That is false. There is no evidence to connect oil use to storm activity.
“No. But they may stop using it for existential reasons. However it may be too late by then.”
I see no evidence to suggest this is true.
“Gareth Hughes also makes a point of being carbon neutral and has initiated sequestration measures (planting a shit load of tree mainly) to cover his carbon use.”
How about he stops flying and plants trees? Because he seems to be missing the point as trees eventually release carbon. They are a medium term store, not elimination.
“The area of alternate energy is currently worth billions, and in the next couple of decades will be worth tens of billions. For New Zealand, it’s a massive opportunity. The current government, they really have no clue.”
Just because a market is worth billions doesn’t mean you can get a share of it just because you throw money at it. The silicon chip industry is worth billions, but if we have no competitive advantage, then we will command no market share.
If it were as easy as deciding to do it and throwing money at it, I’d be all over it. Business is not that easy and suggesting it is shows a fundamental misunderstanding on how businesses are created and thrive.
“Many people are actively working toward alternatives, however currently there is not a level playing field. If the actual costs of oil were included into the price, you would see a massive shift to alternative power sources”
Great. I’m not sure about the subsidies you’re talking about, and whether you reject all subsidy.
Government can step in and get the research done as government has got a longer time horizon than the private sector and no need to meet the requirements of profit demanding shareholders.
Most of this private sector money is afraid of real risk.
That’s why they park up with T Bills.
So, what you’re saying is that the taxpayer will keep making a loss for a lot longer. Sounds great!
There is also no assurance taking a long time horizon in new energy tech will turn to profit one day. It might, but more than likely won’t.
@JLTigerWoods,
Who exactly do you think is going to fork out for the bill in the event of an oil spill occurs in one of these deep sea drill sites proposed for the coasts of New Zealand?
Who has lost revenue in the event that that occurs?
The taxpayer.
It’s like asking who will fork out for a 747 crash into Central Auckland. The taxpayer, mostly. Could it happen? Yeah, it might, but it’s not likely.
Same with pumping out sluggish, mud-like oil. There’s a very low likelihood of a major problem. Meanwhile, the upside benefit is significant.
It’s a tiny risk I don’t mind taking. The fact it makes the Greens go into comical hysterics is a nice bonus.
Not so JLTW
You appear to be omitting to factor in the negative effects of monopolies that are clearly evident these days.
The advantages that those already in large industries are receiving – tax ‘incentives’, cheap finance and lobbying power.
‘Investment money’, in case you haven’t noticed (and obviously you haven’t) has been more interested in making money off things like mortgage debt recently than investing in something that might actually give benefit to people.
To join the dots for you: being ‘too big to fail’ is a negative monopolistic effect. A sector being so huge they get bailed out when ‘market discipline’ rears its stern head is an example of why market theory is defunct at present.
You are citing ideology that has failed and is failing us in front of our very eyes – not least due to the monopolistic effects that you are refusing to acknowledge.
Wake up
You’re arguing a straw man. I’m not advocating monopolies. Do you advocate state monopolies?
Not strawman at all. By your comment I believe that you are not acknowledging the destructive effect of monopolies that is going on at present across the western world. You can’t keep arguing ‘standard business practice’ theories when the pivotal mechanism of that ideology is currently so corrupted it isn’t functional.
Blueleopard, I dislike monopolies as much as you do. They are a clear sign of market and regulatory failure.
I don’t see why some then champion state monopolies, as the graft and inefficiency and destruction is just the same.
How much does BP pay you?
I think that’s a simplistic view. Most of our technological achievements are down to the energy density of oil. There’s a good reason why life expectancy has improved so dramatically in the last hundred years.
You might call it greed, but people like having the security that cheap energy brings.
We have to stop using it, but a strategy that pretends the only people with skin in the game are oil barons is doomed, and that’s before we even begin to address the military implications.
My personal view is that the weather will degrade our capacity to emit carbon before any real progress is made. I hope to be proved wrong.
Hi OAK
I am unclear whether your comment is in response to mine or not, however you referred to greed and that is a word that I used and so I am guessing you are responding to my comment.
I am of the opinion that green energy technology has likely been slowed down by the oil industries need to continue to profit through their monopoly (I accept this isn’t cold hard fact, I think it is a reasonable call though.) Some may call this ‘profiteering’ rather than greed, or perhaps ‘a pragmatic approach of looking after one’s own interests [profits]’ however when this occurs at the expense of a greater good, this is when a more pejorative term such as ‘greed’ can become a more accurate term to use.
Out of a similar such ‘phenomenon’ – keen to profit- I believe the oil industry is now researching green technologies with the understanding that their resource is on the way out. So why does our Government not take such an intelligent approach?
You appear to be arguing that we all have a vested interest in oil, yes we certainly are reliant on oil at present, however we also have a [greater] vested interest in having a healthy environment and energy sources that create less damage to our environment and that are renewable. So lets get on with dealing with that interest.
I’m arguing that a strategy that pretends oil barons are the only people with vested interests is doomed. Leave the super-villains to Batman.
Having described them as greedy you then credit them with intelligence. Perhaps they’re just becoming more ethical with the introduction of unleaded petrol.
OAK,
A greedy group is capable of pursuing an intelligent idea. Or do you not think so?
I believe it is not only intelligent to to invest (time and money) into green technology it is sensible. I believe the oil industry is now doing that. I think that the lack of investment into this area is and was not intelligent and some of this lack was driven by greed. I am relaying the picture as I see it occurring and sorry this doesn’t fit in with your apparent need for everything to be either something for ‘Batman’ to deal with if they are not perhaps ‘Mary-Poppins-like’ non-perjorative. These are the facts as I understand them and this is what I put forward.
I think that ‘calling’ a sector’s behaviour as it is can be very helpful, especially when it is that quality that is tripping everyone else up. I fail to understand why your view that doing so leads to a strategy that is ‘doomed’? I have supplied a reasoned response as to why I referred to them as greedy. I would appreciate the same from you.
OAK’s simply saying that there are far wider interest groups who favour the continued use of fossil fuels than just the fossil fuel barons.
Most people who live in the modern world for instance.
Who may say that they are keen to stop deep sea oil drilling. But aren’t going to give up their summer holiday to Australia, nor their purchases of imported goods, because they enjoy the benefits of fossil fuels too much.
@ CV
As stated in my first reply:
“yes we certainly are reliant on oil at present, however we also have a [greater] vested interest in having a healthy environment and energy sources that create less damage to our environment and that are renewable. So lets get on with dealing with that interest.”
That’s pretty much it CV, and it isn’t just trips to Aussie. Cosmetics, plastics, ink, sellotape, aspirin etc. etc.
You’re going to have a hard time convincing people that the manufacturers and consumers of these goods are all a pack of bastards.
It comes down to a choice between seriously diminished quality of life administered voluntarily and seriously diminished quality of life administered by the weather.
I’m sorry to say my money’s on the weather. It’s not going to stop me trying to make a difference, but.
Who is this “we” business? The people with the most power, capital and authority in society don’t care.
All they are doing is lumping most of the costs of their recent decisions on to those under 30.
It’s what they’ve been doing since Thatcher, and it’s what they’re still doing now. Inter-generational inequity is booming, not receding.
Look at rich countries in Warsaw telling poorer and developing countries like the Philippines to fuck off, during the climate talks.
OAK
I think that the voluntary and conscious move can create a society where our material standard of living is unavoidably significantly less, but our cultural, spiritual and community standard of living is overwhelmingly high.
If we leave it to the climate and unmanaged break downs in complex civilisation systems, its gonna be way uglier.
“Don’t care”?
You think they are completely unconcerned with the loss and destruction of all that precious real estate they’ve hoarded?
“Way uglier”. Oh agreed. Our culture, spirit and community will help mitigate this.
@OAK
I think that I understand where you are trying to say now and it appears that you are missing what I am am attempting to say.
I am emphasizing research because it is always easier to make a change when one is swapping from one thing to another, rather than completely removing something from our lives.
I mentioned ‘greed’ in that it seems reasonable to conclude that the reason we have not a huge variety of options already is due to the profiteering of a certain industry – not because we are not capable of finding alternatives. We are.
I think you are picking up on the word ‘greed’ and fixating on that and not actually looking further into what I am putting forward.
Sorry if my writing style confuses – sometimes don’t put things in the simplest of terms.
@ CV
“Who is this “we” business? The people with the most power, capital and authority in society don’t care…”
So what are you trying to say? “Oh, so now that those with power, capital and authority in society don’t care, then we should all just give up and stop thinking about ways to deal with the issue.”
This is defeatism
And yep, I know, having read your comments elsewhere, it is unlikely that ‘giving up’ is what your view is, however, just take a look at what you are really saying here.
Yes, I agree, people effecting public decisions at present don’t appear to care (or think further ahead than the length of their noses). However last I checked the Roman Emperor is not the main power in the West anymore….surprising perhaps, but things have a habit of changing.( /sark)
And how does this occur? People change their minds in response to circumstances and through talking together.
Enough people change their minds and things start happening.
It appears that OAK and you are saying “oo don’t talk about greed and research because people won’t do it anyway because it might mean a massive change in their lifestyles”.
You are bound to say this is a strawman, and perhaps it is somewhat, however, really take a look at what you are implying by what you write.
Actually there might not be a massive change required if new forms of energy are cultivated…and as you say in response to OAK, any changes required (where ‘conveniences’ can’t be replaced) might end up enhancing our lives, not being a degeneration of them.
They would be concerned if they allowed themselves to believe that the next 50 years might be very different to the last 50.
But hindsight bias means that its extremely difficult for humans to view things as being much different to their recent past.
Also many of these people know that they won’t be around in 15 years let alone 50. So as a mate of mine says – if you know oil is going to run out, you should make sure to use your fair share right now.
@BL: I don’t think much further research is required. The changes we need to enact now are well well within our current capabilities.
(I will respond to your longer comment in a moment) 🙂
BL, I always appreciate your points of view.
In reply I would say:
1) Defeatism: a captain who does not know what is possible and what is not will surely lead his entire crew and passengers, however bravely, to disaster.
2) Roman Empire. The Empire fell. Massive knowledge and wealth was lost. Peoples were scattered and millions lost. It took mankind centuries to recover, although recover they did through a very painful and dark time. The lessons of the end of empire are there, except ours is a global empire. So no /sarc there at all.
<blockquote.Actually there might not be a massive change required if new forms of energy are cultivated…
Certainly, there are opportunities there. But nothing will beat a 20L can of diesel.
And yes, I agree that life may actually be much better for us at generally lower levels of available energy and material resources.
It’s important to talk about what we want, and about issues of greed and avarice.
Research as I noted above is a bit beside the point. Everything we need to have for a solid sustainable civilisation is well within our grasp now.
@ CV
It is a little amusing that you cite in the same comment that “defeatism is a captain that doesn’t know what is possible” and then go onto say that “we probably don’t need more research”!
I was reading [only a wee bit] of information on energy and it seems that so far nothing has been discovered that is as powerful as fossil fuels is for creating energy. I was of the understanding that this is one of the reasons that we continue to use it.
There is a possibility that there is some way to create energy that is cleaner and as powerful, however it seems from what I read [and again, I can’t say it was extensive reading] this is yet to be discovered and would require more research.
Research was not actually my main point – I did say I wanted a government that “encouraged” green technology. This means encouraging the use of it, not just researching it. [I am all for research though too for the reason cited in the above paragraph.]
I am of the understanding that the oil industry get some sort of subsidies to make it more affordable for people (bit unclear on this point) and it is this type of thing that is ‘skewing’ people’s perception that it is more cost effective or irreplaceable.
I do agree that we have enough knowledge to get moving on a greener lifestyle now however having observed things like the improvements in the efficiency of cars over my lifetime, I deduce that more research is likely to provide better efficiency for green energy devices aswell.
Thanks for the positive feedback, coming from someone whose views and extensive knowledge I admire – that is very pleasing!
Blue Leopard, I get your objection, but I’m not really saying that. Practically speaking, if we can’t replace the benefits that hydrocarbons represent, then we face Hobson’s choice: between reduced life expectancy – to put it another way increased infant mortality, plus weather related damage (and associated risks) which is going to happen anyway – cf: the forty-year lag between CO2 emissions and climate change, or, BAU and the inevitable weather related damage.
This is why “our” “leaders” are (present tense) planning for a medium to high level catastrophe: because that’s the most likely scenario no matter which path we choose.
When enough people get this – that sacrifices are going to be made, then maybe we’ll start working out how to address this in a concerted effort, and we will keep doing what we can as individuals in the meantime.
I can’t see any value in apportioning blame, or judging people for being curious and inventive. We have enough on our plates already.
OAK
Of course, it’s also possible to accomplish good life expectancies with much less spending and resources. Cuba being a good example. Less easy availability of McDonalds and private motorised transport plus more requirement for physical work and bicycling. Fewer Playstations and less broadband = organise more community get togethers and local bands.
BL
We should start with the understanding that energy is neither created nor destroyed…
Move on to the understanding that the power of fossil fuels comes from embodying millions of years of energy captured from sunlight, heat, pressure and gravitational forces, stored in highly concentrated, convenient, relatively safe to handle and simple to transport forms.
Then recognise that it takes 50-100 years (or more) to move a civilisation from one power source to another. People power to beasts of burden to wood/charcoal to coal to oil to building out a power grid which covers a nation. The transition to nuclear is very slight and incomplete because nuclear is bad, expensive, low energy.
Therefore – any really good energy source which is going to come along and save us from fossil fuels in time would already be well on the scene. Put another way: the cards we have in our hand right now, are the only cards we have to play.
The cornucopian fantasy that mankind is going to discover and commercialise cold fusion (or dilithium crystals or tylium or zero point energy) in time is at this stage a true deus ex machina worthy of an SF show.
Personally, I’m betting on the true old faithfuls, things like hydro, coal, geothermal to see us through.
btw the only truly green kW of energy is the one which is not used.
@ OAK
“I can’t see any value in apportioning blame, “
Addressing the ’emotions’ driving a problem is helpful in the process in of working out how to solve that problem.
A bit of exaggeration :
“or judging people for being curious and inventive. We have enough on our plates already.”
Nope, there is no way I promoted such views. In fact, I was promoting ways to encourage the curious and inventiveness of humans.
@ CV
Same message to you. A bit of exaggeration:
“The cornucopian fantasy that mankind is going to discover and commercialise cold fusion (or dilithium crystals or tylium or zero point energy) in time is at this stage a true deus ex machina worthy of an SF show.
Nope, I was not aiming at such, just believe that we are likely to discover improved energy sources/ways to use the energy we have.
@OAK & CV
Apart from these ‘errors’ I think you both make some good points and debating like this deepens my understanding. Thank you 🙂
Always welcome…we need a lot more people to understand…then we need to make the politicians realise that a lot of people get it and want it.
‘
Your question is misdirected. Ask Anadarko what the risk is . . . only trouble with that, though, is that they are not saying. Nor is the John Key led National Ltd™ government. Its a secret.
The main thing is to understand the difference between Taranaki wells in shallow waters and the proposed deep water drilling. Using the government and Anadarko’s own criteria, the risk of a reportable incident at a Taranaki well in shallower, calmer waters is 10%. Using the same criteria, the risk balloons to 70% in deep water sites. Following an OIA, the government’s modelling, based on tides and winds, shows one blowout at Raglan would eventually pollute the top half of the west coast of NI. (The rescue rig is 15 days away). Amy Adams changed the wording in the risk analysis report, describing any incident as ‘significant’. The word used was ‘catastrophic’. Anadarko has set up Anadarko NZ Ltd as a stand-alone company who can just walk away from a spill once their relatively meagre assets are taken. We are are left with polluted beaches and 99% of the clean up costs. I’ll get Anadarko’s safety equipment list – what they currently have on the drilling ship – barely enough to clean up a spill on the forecourt of your local gas station. No wonder the EPA has abdicated its responsibility by not sighting their ERP. This isn’t tree hugging stuff, there are plenty of alternatives in bio fuels and solar/wind. Create the jobs and industry in NZ and keep the profits here. We’re playing for keeps here. Let’s have a New Zealand we can be happy to pass on to future Kiwis.
How long do the protests go on for? Would it be worth me going to one of Auckland’s west coast beaches after work?
good bit of info here karol
http://www.getfree.org.nz/banners/
You can put a “virtual” banner and message on the beach of your choice if you cannot make it in person, which will be conveyed to the flotilla. I’ll take a sign with dog to Kakamatua inlet but more formal things are planned for Piha and Bethells etc.
That virtual banner idea is excellent. I have been watching that page since it started and it is so lovely to see the whole map of New Zealand being increasingly covered by virtual banners. Truly heart warming and good stuff NZ and Greenpeace!
Yes. Submitted.
Cool! Another banner to add to the thousands! 😀
Hi Karol
They are pretty sharp. At Piha there is a 12 pm meet up, short speeches 12:30 or so, 1 pm haka and after that people can do what they want.
OK. Thanks, TM and micky. Those beaches are still quite a long drive to get to after work.
Banner painted. I am heading to Muriwai tomorrow to support those heroes who are in the protest flotilla.
Hmmm…. welcome (return) to the west.
If people think that there is no reason to be concerned they should check out the inventory of safety equipment on the drill ship. Apparently “[t]he documentation lists the Contents of the “Environmental Spill Response Kit” to be carried on board the drill ship:
The kit on the drillship includes:
• 15-4’ socks, 5-8’ socks, 190 pads, 16 pillows;
• 2-10 lb Albozorbit, 15 disposable bags with ties;
• 4 pair of nitrile gloves, 4 pairs silvershield gloves;
• 4 each splash resistant goggles, 4-Tyvek coveralls XL;
• 1 non-sparking shovel; and
• 1 emergency response guidebook.”
(page 58-59, Anadarko Discharge Management Plan from the Environmental Impact Assessment.)”
The link is at http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/PO1311/S00274/anadarko-oil-spill-equipment-grossly-inadequate.htm
They should add one super duper bit of legislation that is apparently capable of absorbing oil spills all by itself …
What a very sad little list.
That’s fucked.
Bottom line is that they should not be allowed to drill unless there is a full clean-up ship/s in port in NZ ready to pounce instantly there is a problem.
We don’t let motor racing happen unless there is an ambulance at the track.
We don’t even let a house be built unless there is a sediment catch mound built before starting.
“They should add one super duper bit of legislation that is apparently capable of absorbing oil spills all by itself …”
haha. compare and contrast NZ’s world best practice legislation with the new EU legislation…
http://register.consilium.europa.eu/pdf/en/13/st09/st09633.en13.pdf
btw: Do they have a sub-sea well capping device located in NZ? I hear that is important – plus the people with the expertise on standby to deploy it?
Probably because that’s all they’d need if there was a spill.
Why stock the ship with stuff that won’t be of any use.
spill but be much much more stuff in needed in the ship stocks with paper bags, under the keel Hawaii and rover.
fuck you say dumb shit
Are you pissed?
I thought you were with what you had posted.
Me, I’m off to deliver flowers to old folk. later.
If you have to pump the oil to get it to move, as you do in NZ, then the chance of a blow-out is almost non-existent. The danger is the pump stops working and you lose production until you can lower another one down.
Therefore, there is no need for instant response, just in the same way there is no need for a fire-truck standing besides your TV in case it bursts into flames.
This is the stupidest thing you’ve ever said, and that’s something.
Give him (or her) a break CV.
You and I know that we wouldn’t need a fire truck next to the TV. Our TVs are quite small and a small CO2 extinguisher would be adequate.
JLTW might have one of those enormous TVs though and would be likely to have a truely enormous fire.
ps How do you get those faces to display? I would hate for anyone to take this particular comment seriously.
If you have to pump oil to even get it to move, then why would you need instant clean-up response in case of a high pressure rupture?
Please supply evidence that during a rupture, no oil would escape without being pumped.
Andarko themselves stated:
Currently the only modelling we have was created by the data science agency Dumpark.
We do not have access to Andarkos modelling becuase they won’t release it, and neither will our government.
If its safe as houses as you state, why does Andarko disagree with you, and why won’t our government release the data?
A loss of a high pressure well control would have consequences, but they aren’t likely to find a high pressure well, and even less likely to lose control of one.
If they did find one of significant size, that would be very interesting. We could start planning for Norway level state spending. Even if they did find one, there is nothing to suggest it is at a high-risk of blowing out.
She’ll be right eh ‘mate’, and the wife will never come after me with a golf club either….
Please cite your source for your assertion that the modelling is based on a high pressure blowout.
And please supply the data that disproves Andarkos statement that “loss of well control would hold significant impacts for the environment”
Just as an aside, the way you argue is dishonest. You dont back up any claims with data, and in almost every post you rely on the following logical fallicies;
* Ad Hominem
* Appeal To Emotion
* Appeal to Fear
* Appeal To Majority
* Argumentum Ad Nauseam
* False Dilemma
* False Premise
* Red Herring
* False Analogy
I will no longer responding to most of your posts.
However when I do it will be to point out the logical fallicies therein.
Aren’t you something.
When you get a break from being superior, Mr Viper, perhaps you could tell us why you’d spend a lot more on risk mitigation than the situation requires.
Because that would be stupid.
@JLTiger Wood
…yeah! Like the financial system did. They worked out a fabulous new way to mitigate [ignore more to the point] risk. That worked. LOL
If there is virtually no chance of a high pressure blow-out due to low pressure oil extraction, then why would you mitigate as if you were expecting a high pressure blow-out as being highly likely?
Everything is a risk, and we mitigate to a level appropriate. We can never eliminate risk. Anyone expecting to is not being realistic.
The argument going on here really is whether a person considers any risk ‘worth it’.
You are either creating a strawman by citing ‘as if you were expecting a high pressure blow-out as being highly likely?’ or completely missing the point…or both.
The point being relayed by some, I believe, is that any chance of an oilspill is not worth the risk, whether the risk is small or large. Never mind ‘highly likely’, which I don’t think anyone has put forward.
I hold to this view; any risk is not worth it. And this is based on the level of devastation that occurs when these events happen. You appear to ignore this perspective and continue to think that arguing the risk being small …or ‘virtually no chance’ is relevant.
It might be more helpful to your case if you could attempt to argue the point that the devastation caused by recent deep sea oil disasters – the people dying due to the toxic clean up chemicals, the toxic beaches, the businesses ruined, the lives ruined, the environmental damage wasn’t all that bad. Did the oil company cover all the expenses of that damage? That would be a good start wouldn’t it? I don’t imagine that they did. I am guessing there’s been court-cases and the American government had to meet the shortfall.
Perhaps this is why you are bringing in the concept of ‘high pressure’ wells. You are saying the risk to the environment is not going to be like the Gulf of Mexico disaster, that the risk is ‘almost non-existent’. You expect the reader to take that as fact, however Naturesong has linked to information from Anadarko themselves that states if something went wrong there would be ‘significant impacts’ on the environment and I note that you haven’t responded to that comment.
So get to it and argue the point that it fine for companies to come in, take the oil, take the profits and in the event that anything goes wrong its perfectly o.k that they are not prepared to pay for the whole lot of damages they caused. Taxpayers will. And even if they did pay for everything, please explain to me how some of these damages can be corrected by money?
If you manage that, you might just change my opinion. Otherwise I’ll just stick to hoping that we get a community and government that starts putting real focus on green technologies and makes a concerted effort to move away from the on-its-way-out-dinosaur industry that is oil.
Correction – I apologise, I see you have replied to Naturesong’s comment. Good to see you didn’t simply ignore it.
Now it would be good to see you taking up Naturesong’s suggestion and supply some links 😉
There are 2 strawmen here.
“If there is virtually no chance of a high pressure blow-out due to low pressure oil extraction, then why would you mitigate as if you were expecting a high pressure blow-out as being highly likely? ”
The answer is of course, that you would not. And no one is suggesting that happen.
However, Andarko has admitted that loss of well control would have significant impacts, but the likelyhood of that happening is low.
Thus, we should mitigate the risk at 2 levels;
1. Best practice during the exploratory phase.
2. Should the well become uncontrolled, that the response happen as quickly as possible.
New Zealand has not ratified the International Convention on Civil Liability for Bunker Oil Pollution Damage, which was adopted to ensure that adequate, prompt, and effective compensation is available to persons who suffer damage caused by spills of oil. Or the International Convention Relating to Intervention on the High Seas in Cases of Oil Pollution Casualties which affirms the right of states to “take such measures on the high seas as may be necessary to prevent, mitigate or eliminate grave and imminent danger to their coastline or related interests from pollution or threat of pollution of the sea by oil”.
The second strawman is this:
We are not mitigating to a level appropriate.
No one is saying that you can remove risk.
You end by casting all those who are calling for considered risk mitigation as being unrealistic.
‘
Simon Bridge’s story – a tale of hot bottoms, chocolate and oil.
Get the kids painting and take em all to the beach tomorrow. Be part of history on a beautiful day.
Then chip in for an ad on the way home.
NO means NO Mr Key. Hands off our assets.
Nothing like a confused protest, then.
Will we be seeing the red n’ black flags, too?
Foxton Beach
Banners done and more joining tomorrow.
wooohooo