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.
Last year, Health Minister Shane Reti and Prime Minister Chris Luxon visited Auckland’s Ormiston private hospital to talk up privatisation.Everything was up for grabs, Luxon said - “schools, health, hospitals, roads, 3 Waters investment”1. The Prime Minister also inferred he was talking to finance related companies, echoing Former NZ Health ...
The Government is considering cutting sick leave entitlements for part-time workers. Brooke van Velden has introduced a new bill which legislate changes to personal grievances, the 30-day rule and the ability of workers to test their employment status in court. NZEI is considering legal action against the government’s decision to ...
The New Zealand Council of Trade Unions Te Kauae Kaimahi is urging all political parties to vote against Brooke van Velden’s new Employment Relations Amendment Bill, as it will severely undermine workers’ rights. “This new Bill will legislate many of the attacks on workers’ rights signalled by Brooke van Velden, ...
Hi,Firstly, I just wanted to say thanks for all the outpouring of comments you left under yesterday’s story about Alex — and thanks to all of those who shared the article. It’s a huge help to my work when you share it.Again, here is the link to Alex’s story ...
An executive order by the United States in April authorising expanded engagement in seabed mining reflects shifting approaches to the governance of critical mineral resources in areas beyond national jurisdiction. As legal frameworks evolve beneath ...
Morena, folks, I’m in a bit of a rush this morning with an appointment, so today it’s something short and silly.No, not your Miniature of Health, although Simeon certainly fits the description if that’s who came to mind. I’m talking about the grand Poobah, your Prime Minister, Christopher Luxon.Yes, our ...
Australia needs clearer guidelines around domestic deployments. Australia’s constitution mirrors many key features of the United States, including a provision that allows federal troops to intervene domestically in states. But unlike the US, Australia has ...
Van Velden shows her inexperience — and the privilege of the MPs surrounding her — as she announces potential new sick leave for part time workers doing the types of jobs she wouldn’t deign to call “real work”. Her older, more established colleagues are equally sheltered, or equally uncaring. David ...
Israel’s unprovoked airstrikes on Iran, justified by baseless claims of Iran’s nuclear ambitions, expose a glaring double standard in global politics. While Israel, an undeclared nuclear power, operates beyond international scrutiny, Iran faces relentless pressure, even as a signatory to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT), despite ...
Australia’s approach to the Israel-Iran war has so far been based on a flawed model of statecraft. It’s one that tends to balkanise problems into convenient buckets, to be tackled piecemeal, rather than recognising the ...
As climate volatility increases and regional instability looms, Australia should consider developing Darwin into the Indo-Pacific’s leading humanitarian assistance and disaster relief (HADR) hub. This will require recognition of Darwin’s strategic value beyond defence, funding ...
The big news this morning was that the Prime Minister thought the government he leads was going to steal your sick leave. But apparently even the ACT zealots could see that that would deeply unpopular, so they've "clarified" that the Prime Minister was wrong, and really they're just going to ...
The New Zealand Council of Trade Unions Te Kauae Kaimahi is dismayed by the Government’s decision to abstain from the new International Labour Organization (ILO) Convention on biological hazards that would strengthen worker protections. “This Convention provides a comprehensive framework for preventing and managing biological workplace health and safety issues,” ...
Back in 2016, the Panama Papers ripped the veil off New Zealand’s squeaky-clean image, exposing our foreign trust regime as a playground for tax dodgers and money launderers. The leak of 11.5 million documents from Mossack Fonseca, a Panamanian law firm, revealed how Kiwi lawyers facilitated secretive trusts for the ...
I’m pretty tied up for the next couple of weeks so unless there are significant new developments (things like, for example, complying with the OIA) this will be my final post on events around the Orr resignation for the time being. We know from what the Reserve Bank did choose ...
After the federal elections of 2022 and 2025, a certain supposed truth is taking root in Australian political discourse—namely, that discussion of potential conflict involving China is politically disadvantageous, because it is likely to have ...
For paid subscribers - Van Velden steers WorkSafe toward a softer touch has an interesting revelation about Brooke Van Velden’s Worksafe reforms.Not only is the Minister transforming Worksafe from enforcement to a soft ‘advisor’ mandate, she “wants to see more prosecutions of workers” and “reduce the obligations on directors.”Think about ...
You've got the words to change a nationBut you're biting your tongueYou've spent a lifetime stuck in silenceAfraid you'll say something wrongIf no one ever hears it, how we gonna learn your song?Songwriters: Emily Sande / Benjamin Kohn / Iain James / Peter Kelleher / Stephen Manderson / Thomas Barnes.Morena, ...
India strives to render Pakistan strategically irrelevant to better focus its attention on China. But neither Pakistan nor China has an interest in allowing that to happen. It’s an ongoing saga of which we saw ...
The StrategistBy Rajeswari Pillai Rajagopalan and Linus Cohen
Note: This story contains sensitive content, including discussion of eating disorders and disordered eating. Please read with caution.Hi,Last week, Radio New Zealand published a story about a 17-year old trans man who had tragically died, alone, in 2023.It was an extensive, detailed piece from journalist Ruth Hill — over 3500 ...
Hi,In light of today’s piece about Alex, it’s important to share some places where support can be found.To prevent further loss of life, we need to help families support trans young people, ensure medical and social services are equipped to understand and respond to their needs, and resource community organisations ...
Clearly, the world needs to stop talking about Israel’s right to defend itself, and start talking about the world’s need to defend itself against Israel. Gaza, Lebanon, Iran….these have become the stepping stones in Israel’s plan to expand its rule, unrivalled, over all the land between the river and the ...
A listing of 28 news and opinion articles we found interesting and shared on social media during the past week: Sun, June 8, 2025 thru Sat, June 14, 2025. Stories we promoted this week, by category: Climate Science and Research (8 articles)Stefan Rahmstorf - Atlantic ocean circulation: a ...
As we all know, New Zealand Superannuation (NZ Super) faces a looming fiscal challenge, with costs projected to soar from $19 billion in 2025 (5% of GDP) to $45.3 billion by 2037 (~7% GDP) and 8% by 2060, driven by an ageing population (20% over 65 by 2036). As debates ...
Cartoonist: Musa GusmusOpinion:The assassination of Democrat lawmakers in America is regrettably predictable. Democratic House Speaker Emerita Melissa Hortman, 55, and her husband, Mark, 58, were both shot and killed at their home in Brooklyn Park in what Gov. Tim Walz called a “politically motivated assassination.”Another couple were also attacked: DFL ...
There’s a post still coming about farming and our future that spans oceans and centuries, but I’m sending something else today because time is of the essence. So: first some memories, and then some words from Sir Geoffrey Palmer about Seymour’s goddam bill.Before I share with you something written by ...
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. Was 1934 the hottest year in the global record? 1934 was a particularly hot year in the contiguous United States, but not globally ...
I have played less chess in recent times, largely out of frustration at my internet connection cutting out in the middle of Blitz games. But I have not given up my hope of ...
The NBR rich list has been published for 2025. The combined wealth of the 130 listed is $102.1 billion. In 2015 the 180 individuals and families listed had a combined wealth of $55 billion. According to the Reserve bank inflation calculator the percentage of change over the last decade was 32.9%. Given that ...
Yes, that subject again/still. Today, three main points: the comments by the Minister, including claims that she didn’t know why Orr had resigned the latest set of Quigley comments given to Newsroom’s Jonathan Milne, and (largely for the record) restating events around MPC appointments that are minimised by Milne ...
No hatred, no violenceNo starvation and no greedAnd no kings, no kingsNo kingsNo lies and no bulletsNo bombs and no needFor kings, no kingsNo kingsSong: Jesse Welles.Morena, all, as I begin writing, the missiles are flying, and it doesn’t matter which side is right or wrong to the people they ...
News that the US Department of Defence has launched an AUKUS review has Canberra’s defence circles in overdrive, with familiar critics already proclaiming the pact is ‘sinking’. Yet this outbreak of anxiety poses a bigger danger than ...
Hi,I have left the United States. But it’s much less dramatic than it sounds.This is a trip I’d been planning for months, and it has taken me out of the US. I’m in Manchester, here to see my best friend Rosabel who’s working on a project here in the land ...
Israel’s strikes against Iran will form the backdrop to New Zealand Prime Minister Christopher Luxon’s upcoming trip to China. Speaking in the immediate aftermath of the strikes at a scheduled press conference on Friday, Luxon characterised the strikes by Israel as ‘potentially catastrophic for the Middle East’, observing ‘the last ...
The Government’s plans to remove the wellbeing provisions in the Public Finance Act represents a reversal of the way society is travelling. I welcomed the Ardern-Robertson’s Government decision to focus on wellbeing in its budgets. It went on to amend the Public Finance Act to require the government to state ...
Australia must stop talking about being a middle power that punches above its weight. Talking about it is far less interesting to the rest of the world than Australia actually doing it. The occasion for ...
The Trump administration has ordered a review of AUKUS to be led by Undersecretary of Defense Policy Elbridge Colby. The review has some attendant risks, but also a potential upside for the three-way partnership. The ...
I do not mean to be pedantic about this sort of thing, but since it lies within my area of supposed “expertise,” here goes: Unlike what is being reported in the corporate media and by some defense officials, the Israeli strike on Iran was not “pre-emptive.” “Pre-emptive” means “a sudden ...
1. What would you let David Seymour or the people he put on a board decide for you?a. Whether to order the chicken or the flounderb. Whether to watch Dept Q or Sirens on Netflixc. Whether to read Ayn Rand or smack my head with a frypand. Nothing, not one ...
New story acceptance. My 2,000-word New Zealand folk-horror piece, The Patupaiarehe Concerto, has been accepted by Eternal Haunted Summer for their upcoming Summer Solstice issue, which has an overarching theme of music (https://eternalhauntedsummer.com/). ...
Excerpt: Open Letter to the Prime Minister of Aotearoa New Zealand, the Rt Hon Christopher LuxonRe: The Regulatory Standards Bill..This legislation would:Impose financial penalties on environmental action, making it a new and unprecedented expectation that the Crown would compensate corporations when laws to protect nature or the climate affect the ...
The post-coup Ukrainian government was the first to declare an anti-terrorist war – although their forces were the ones carrying ut terrorist acts against civilians in Eastern Ukraine. Russian politicians are starting to discuss the necessity of escalating the Russia-Ukraine war from a limited military operation into ...
Australia faces a growing dilemma: in attempting to ease genuine climate challenges, it is creating national security vulnerabilities by embedding Chinese smart technologies in critical infrastructure. This includes solar inverters and batteries. Electric vehicles, too, ...
The StrategistBy Tilla Hoja, James Corera and John Coyne
This morning as the Quigley/Orr/Board saga rumbles on I wanted to touch on three items: the latest comments from Board chair Neil Quigley (and the Minister’s comments on and to him) a reminder of where this all started, with the Board unanimously approving a budget last year far in ...
Australia’s long-term interests in space are best served by independent capability, diversified international partnerships and a civil-led strategy that reflects national priorities. As global competition intensifies, Australia must avoid tying its trajectory to the political ...
The podcast above of the weekly ‘Hoon’ webinar for paying subscribers on Thursday night features co-hosts and talking with regular guests and about the week’s news in geopolitics and climate. This week’s Hoon featured special guest New Zealand freelance journalist Andrew Gunn speaking from Kyiv.The Hoon’s ...
It’s a rare day when the New Zealand courts deliver a sharp reminder to the right-wing that actions have consequences, even for those who’ve built a career on peddling disinformation. Chantelle Baker, the self-styled “citizen journalist” and darling of New Zealand’s anti-vax, anti-government fringe, has been ordered to pay a whopping ...
..The latest two out of three polls for National are - to put it mildly - troubling.Fresh on the heels of Minister Nicola ‘NoBoats' Willis' austerity budget and the scrapping of thirtythree pay equity agreements to fund tax cuts for the already-rich, the public's appetite for this rightwing coalition government ...
Shane Jones is an outdated fossil of a minister. Born in 1959, his model of how our economy and society should look is stuck sometime in the late 70's: a dirty, fossil-fuel powered, racist, sexist, homophobic shitstain of a country which most of us never experienced, and most of those ...
Australia’s defence manufacturers are essentially a cottage industry, with the average supplier employing only 13 people and achieving net annual sales of about $2.2 million. These averages, drawn from the annual review of the industry ...
Dr Robert Howell UN Secretary General: We are sleepwalking to climate catastrophe. In facing this wake up call, Dr Howell will describe the lessons to be learned from Wesfamers; the work of the External Reporting Board; the National Climate Change Risk Assessment for New Zealanders; and the Dasgupta Review.Dr Robert Howell ...
Beneath Taiwan’s high-profile fight for global recognition lies a parallel contest in capitals scattered across the Caribbean and the Pacific. This is Beijing’s relentless campaign to isolate Taiwan diplomatically—country by country—until Taipei is left with ...
There is no depression in New ZealandThere are no sheep on our farmsThere is no depression in New ZealandWe can all keep perfectly calmPerfectly calm…Songwriters: Donald Bain Mcglashan / Richard Paul Von Sturmer.The National Party and farmers go together like Vogels and Vegemite - a classic Kiwi combo, based on ...
My Food Bag Co-Founders’ Tend Health approved to become a Government Primary Health Organisation (PHO)Opinion and analysis:In April, I wrote about My Food Bag Co-Founders James and Cecilia Robinson telehealth organisation, Tend, and its positive chances of securing government contracts.An industry contact wrote this in response to me at the ...
A hardy perennial in Ottawa politics is whether Canada should create a foreign intelligence service equivalent to the United States’ Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) or Britain’s Secret Intelligence Service (SIS, aka MI6). If it does, ...
Council of Trade Unions Secretary Melissa Ansell-Bridges has taken New Zealand’s pay equity fight to the International Labour Organisation conference in Geneva. Opposition parties say the government should be going much further, much faster in sanctioning Israel. Government ministers did not get advice on what the changes to pay equity ...
The recent sanctions placed on just two Israeli ministers, Itamar Ben-Gvir and Bezalel Smotrich, by New Zealand, alongside Australia, Canada, Norway, and the United Kingdom, mark a timid but critical step toward halting Israel’s relentless genocide.However, targeting these two for their vile incitement of violence against Palestinians is the bare ...
In my post yesterday, I documented a whole series of ways in which Neil Quigley, Reserve Bank board chair (appointed by the Minister of Finance) appeared to have actively misled the public (and overseen the misleading of Reserve Bank staff) on the day Adrian Orr’s resignation was announced. Some of ...
Australia needs to coordinate national digital infrastructure investment and resilience or risk falling behind in security and missing economic opportunities. For the past decade, Australia has focused outward on projects such as funding regional telecommunications ...
Hi,I don’t think any Webworm readers will be surprised to know that I’m drawn to stories of narcissistic men getting away with terrible things for decades. Tickled was about a New Yorker pulling the strings from behind a computer. Mister Organ saw an over zealous parking attendant who liked to ...
The abrupt resignation of Reserve Bank Governor Adrian Orr is a blaring siren that New Zealand’s economic foundations are being relentlessly jackhammered by Nicola Willis’ unyielding austerity obsession. Orr was effectively ousted after a fierce funding dispute with the Finance Minister, who appears determined to gut budgets left, right, and centre ...
My blog-post the other day alludes to the divergence between what J.R.R. Tolkien was, and what people think Tolkien was. And, while I was at it, to the similar divergence concerning George R.R. ...
After decades of watching the US prop up dictatorships in Central America, South America and the Middle East, there’s a certain irony in seeing authoritarian rule play out on the streets of Los Angeles. No doubt, Donald Trump’s deployment of the National Guard – and the US Marines! – to ...
This video includes personal musings and conclusions of the creator climate scientist Dr. Adam Levy. It is presented to our readers as an informed perspective. Please see video description for references (if any). To stop global warming, carbon emissions need to be cut to net zero as quickly as possible. And ...
The United States is moving to integrate its land-based PAC-3 surface-to-air missile onto warships. This effort presents an opportunity to enhance key Australian Defence Force capabilities and support sovereign R&D and industry—but quick work is ...
Surprises I will always greet with astonished delight:ChocolatesFlowersChocolate FishSeveral hundred lawyers suing the government for being absolutely useless about the climate crisis Two groups representing over 300 environment lawyers are suing the New Zealand government over its "dangerously inadequate" emissions reduction plan. They say the coalitio… Read more ...
Months after various OIAs had been lodged on the question of Adrian Orr’s sudden departure on 5 March, we finally got a partial dump of documents this morning. (Sufficiently mishandled that at 10:04 this morning they’d send an email to OIA requesters saying they’d email out the response at 10:45 ...
As South Korea’s new administration takes office, the country has the opportunity to recalibrate its alignments in the Indo-Pacific, especially around closer defence and technology cooperation with Australia. The strategic rationale for this becomes stronger ...
Last night, after nearly two years of genocide in Gaza, the New Zealand government finally began to do the right thing, and sanctioned two Israeli cabinet ministers for promoting genocide. Which is a good first step, but its not enough. Firstly, the sanctions are just a travel ban, saying "you ...
There's an interesting article on The Spinoff, worried that with so many parties ruling out working with each other, MMP is collapsing back into left-right, "winner take all" politics. It points to a shift back to the pre-MMP elected dictatorship model of government by decree, "outsized" influence of small parties, ...
The recent drone attacks on Russian strategic bombers were welcomed by many Western politicians but condemned by some US politicians. Why the controversy? After all, it is widely accepted that the Ukrainian military has a right to attempt to disable or destroy those Russian long-range bombers that are ...
The Government’s directive to give private hospitals 10-year outsourcing contracts to perform elective surgeries is yet another step down the path of privatisation in our healthcare system. ...
Te Pāti Māori is calling out the Government’s proposed changes to sick leave entitlements as a cruel step backwards that punishes low-income, part-time, single parents and essential workers. We staunchly support the concerns raised by PSA National Secretary, Fleur Fitzsimons, that this move will disproportionately harm wāhine, who are most ...
The Green Party has released its fiscal strategy, demonstrating how we can and must invest in the real-world needs of our country, planet and people. ...
Te Pāti Māori Co-leader and MP for Waiariki, Rawiri Waititi, has slammed the Rotorua Lakes Council’s treatment of homeless whānau as “inhumane and disgraceful,” following the forced police removal of people sleeping outside the Salvation Army on Amohia Street yesterday. “Our most vulnerable whānau were woken by police, trespassed like ...
The Green Party says the Government’s newly announced Biodiversity Credit scheme is a tiny positive that doesn’t undo the biodiversity harm caused by the Luxon Government. ...
A new report, ‘Outcomes for tamariki and rangatahi Māori and their whānau in the oranga tamariki system 2023/24,’ has confirmed that Oranga Tamariki is severely failing our most vulnerable Māori youth. ...
Last week, world-leading climate scientists called out the Government’s approach to agricultural emissions. This week, climate lawyers have sued the Government because its Emissions Reductions Plans do not add up. ...
Te Pāti Māori condemns the Israeli navy’s armed interception of the Madleen, a civilian aid vessel carrying food, medical supplies, and international activists to Gaza, including Greta Thunberg. Communications of the Madleen have been cut, and there is no knowing if the crew are safe and unharmed. This is the ...
The Green Party is calling for the safe passage of the Madleen, a civilian aid vessel on course to Gaza, following the Freedom Flotilla being seized by the Israeli Military and urging the New Zealand Government to sanction Israel for its illegal occupation of Palestine. ...
Thanks to a successful community-led campaign backed by Labour, Lower North Island locals are today celebrating the toll-free opening of Te Ahu a Turanga – Manawatū Tararua Highway. ...
The Green Party is calling out the Government’s parent boost changes that benefit a wealthier minority while doing nothing to help reunite thousands of migrant families. ...
The Green Party condemns the unprecedented decision to suspend Te Pāti Māori co-leaders Debbie Ngarewa-Packer and Rawiri Waititi for 21 days, and MP for Hauraki-Waikato Hana-Rāwhiti Maipi-Clarke for 7 days. ...
The Government is quietly leaving some of our poorest families hundreds of dollars worse off, ignoring warnings that changes to the accommodation supplement and public housing subsidies will disproportionately target disabled, older, Māori, Pasifika, and young people. ...
Today, Te Pāti Māori co-leader Rawiri Waititi slammed the Finance and Expenditure Select Committee’s refusal to extend the public submission period for the Regulatory Standards Bill, calling it a deliberate act to silence whānau, hapū, iwi, and community voices. Waititi had urged the Committee to extend the submission period by ...
Workforce shortages that mental health Minister Matt Doocey tried to hide are now resulting in increasing pressure on our emergency departments as people needing help have nowhere else to go. ...
Te Pāti Māori join health professionals, medical bodies, and community organisations across Aotearoa in calling on Te Whatu Ora to immediately release the updated Guidelines for Gender Affirming Healthcare. The guidelines were developed by medical professionals with expertise in this form of care and approved by Te Whatu Ora’s National ...
Today’s sweeping changes to environmental protections paint a damning picture of a government hellbent on profit at all costs, openly allowing more environmentally harmful activities under the guise of progress. ...
The Government’s latest move to unwind the ‘pay parity’ regime carefully negotiated between government and the sector is a kick in the teeth for already undervalued and underpaid kaiako. ...
Good Morning. It is a pleasure to be in Jakarta again today. Indonesia is an absolute priority for the New Zealand government, which is why we have now visited here four times since re-taking office as New Zealand Foreign Minister in late 2023. Indonesia is one of New Zealand’s oldest friends ...
Foreign Minister Winston Peters’ visit to Indonesia today has secured tangible progress in New Zealand’s relationship with Southeast Asia’s most populous nation. “Indonesia is an indispensable partner for New Zealand,” Mr Peters says. “Demonstrating our commitment to the relationship, this is our fourth visit to Indonesia in the past 18 ...
His Excellency Sugiono, Minister for Foreign Affairs of the Republic of Indonesia, and Rt Hon Winston Peters, Minister of Foreign Affairs of New Zealand, convened the 12th meeting of the Joint Ministerial Commission (JMC) on 13th June 2025 in Jakarta, Indonesia. The Ministers welcomed meeting in person, underscoring the importance ...
At least four new rapidly deployable relocatable inpatient units will be rolled out across the country to ensure hospitals can continue delivering care to patients while major infrastructure projects are underway, Health Minister Simeon Brown says. “These new inpatient units – part of the Government’s $1 billion Budget 2025 investment ...
The Government is tackling talent shortages in manufacturing and boosting New Zealand’s economic recovery by fast-tracking residency for skilled tradespeople. “We know how important skilled workers are to the resilience of the manufacturing sector. When we don’t have enough people to fill these roles, productivity slows, business growth stalls and the ...
Attorney-General Judith Collins today announced the appointment of Liz Gellert as an Associate Judge of the High Court. Associate Judge Gellert graduated from the University of Auckland in 2003 with a Bachelor of Laws (Honours) and a Bachelor of Arts. She was a law clerk with David Williams KC before ...
The Government is delivering 32 more safe, warm and dry classrooms and a major school redevelopment for Kiwi kids living in the Central North Island. “As communities continue to grow, we remain committed to future-proofing our education system so parents have certainty about where to send their child to school. ...
The Government is expanding the permitted voltage range for electricity networks, so Kiwis with solar panels can send more power back to the grid. Changes are being made to clarify that a building consent is not needed to install rooftop solar panels on existing buildings. Councils will be required to ...
A successful programme to help Māori health providers lift childhood immunisation rates will be renewed, Health Minister Simeon Brown says. "The Immunising our Tamariki programme, originally launched in 2023 by Hon Dr Shane Reti, invested $50 million in Māori health providers to deliver targeted, community-based immunisation outreach. It aims to ...
Forestry, Trade and Investment Minister Todd McClay, today announced at the Fieldays Forestry Hub, both inbound and outbound forestry trade missions with India this year, aimed at strengthening trade links, deepening industry ties, and unlocking greater value for both countries’ forestry and wood processing sectors. “India is one of the ...
A Judicial Conduct Panel will inquire into and report on the alleged conduct of acting District Court Judge Ema Aitken, Acting Attorney-General Paul Goldsmith says. “Judge Aitken’s alleged conduct at the Northern Club on 22 November 2024 was the subject of a preliminary examination by the Judicial Conduct Commissioner. “The ...
Prime Minister Christopher Luxon will travel to China and Europe next week. He will be joined in Shanghai and Beijing with a delegation of senior New Zealand business leaders. “China is New Zealand’s largest trading partner and a vital part of our economic story,” Mr Luxon says. The visit will focus on ...
Forestry Minister Todd McClay today congratulated the winners of the inaugural Growing Native Forests Champions Awards for driving real progress in native forest establishment and land use innovation. “This is what good land management looks like — native forests that support both the environment and the rural economy,” Mr McClay ...
New Zealand has extended its commitment the Operation Gallant Phoenix multinational intelligence mission in Jordan, the Government announced today. The deployment of up to 10 New Zealand Defence Force and Police personnel has been extended for two years until June 2027. “This operation is essential to our commitment to a ...
Health Minister Simeon Brown has today announced funding for the first stage of a major project to upgrade and expand interventional radiology services at Auckland City Hospital. “This project will significantly improve access to radiology services for patients across Auckland and beyond,” Mr Brown says. “A $41.2 million investment will ...
The return of wool carpets to state homes has been welcomed by Economic Growth Minister Nicola Willis and Associate Agriculture Minister Mark Patterson. State housing agency Kāinga Ora announced today that from next month, a new supplier agreement will deliver woollen carpets for the fit-out of new state homes. “The ...
The Government is supporting the expansion of a voluntary credits nature market through the running of pilot projects across New Zealand. Establishing a market that is durable, measurable and transparent will help farmers, landowners, iwi, and conservation groups unlock new income streams for looking after nature on their land, Associate ...
Farmers, growers, foresters, fishers and primary processors are driving New Zealand’s economic recovery with export revenue on track to surpass $60 billion for the first time, Agriculture and Forestry Minister Todd McClay announced today at Fieldays. “The latest Situation and Outlook for Primary Industries (SOPI) report forecasts export earnings of ...
A key milestone in the push for a more connected digital economy has been reached, with over one million businesses now registered with a New Zealand Business Number (NZBN), Small Business and Manufacturing Minister Chris Penk says. “The NZBN is a simple idea with a big impact. It gives each ...
New Zealand’s aquaculture sector has experienced double-digit growth in export revenue over the past year, sending a clear signal that more is to come from the enormously promising sector, Oceans and Fisheries Minister Shane Jones says. The forecast export results were released today as part of the latest Situation and ...
More than 9,500 additional procedures have now been delivered as part of the Government’s elective boost, Health Minister Simeon Brown says. “This is what putting patients first looks like. We are focused on increasing delivery of elective treatments – across both public and private hospitals – to reduce wait times ...
Foreign Minister Winston Peters has concluded a constructive visit to Italy, marking 75 years of diplomatic relations. Mr Peters and Italy’s Foreign Minister Antonio Tajani met in Rome overnight and confirmed the strength of the bilateral relationship that New Zealand and Italy share. “New Zealand and Italy are long-standing ...
A new agreement between the Government and key livestock industry groups marks a major milestone in New Zealand’s readiness for a potential foot and mouth disease (FMD) outbreak, Biosecurity Minister Andrew Hoggard announced today. “The Foot and Mouth Disease Operational Agreement confirms how Government and industry will jointly prepare for, ...
Public consultation begins today aimed at improving the legal aid scheme for those who cannot afford advice and representation, Justice Minister Paul Goldsmith says. “We have a duty to ensure all New Zealanders have access to justice by means of a fair and open process. “To do so, we need ...
Energy Minister Simon Watts has announced the Government’s new Solar on Farms initiative, which will support farmers in taking the next step towards installing solar and battery systems, helping them reduce energy costs, increase on-farm resilience, and allow farmers to gain greater control over their power use, leading to increased ...
New Zealand is raising its game on the global stage with a new Grass-Fed certification scheme to help our red meat and dairy producers go head-to-head with competitors in premium international markets, Prime Minister Christopher Luxon and Agriculture Minister Todd McClay announced today at Fieldays. “International consumers are increasingly willing ...
The Government is backing a $17 million partnership with farmers to boost productivity, profitability, and sustainability by identifying the most resilient, high-performing pastures for New Zealand conditions, Agriculture Minister Todd McClay announced today at Fieldays. Minister McClay confirmed the Government will invest $8.269 million in the Resilient Pastures project through ...
Health Minister Simeon Brown has welcomed the clearance of a significant radiology backlog at Taranaki Base Hospital, calling it a practical outcome that puts patients first. “In March, more than 6,000 x-ray reports were sitting unprocessed at Taranaki Base Hospital. That was causing unacceptable delays for patients needing diagnosis and ...
City-shaping changes are coming to New Zealand’s largest city, ensuring that Auckland can fully harness the economic growth benefits of the new City Rail Link, RMA Reform Minister Chris Bishop and Auckland Minister Simeon Brown say. The Resource Management (Consenting and Other System Changes) Amendment Bill (the Bill) has been ...
The Government is stepping up support for rural New Zealand with a $4 million Rural Wellbeing Fund to expand investment in community-based initiatives, Agriculture and Forestry Minister Todd McClay announced today at Fieldays. “The establishment of this fund is a result of advocacy by Federated Farmers Chair, Wayne Langford, who ...
Applications have opened for a $30 million fund for projects that will enhance the resilience of New Zealand’s coastal shipping connections and help boost economic growth, Associate Transport Minister James Meager has announced. The Coastal Shipping Resilience Fund was established through the Government Policy Statement on land transport. Funding will ...
Foreign Minister Winston Peters has taken part in two major international events in Nice, France this week, focused on Pacific resilience, prosperity and security. The sixth Pacific-France Summit, hosted by French President Emmanuel Macron, took place in Nice overnight. “The Summit brought together Pacific countries for discussions with France on ...
New Zealand has joined Australia, Canada, the UK and Norway in placing travel bans on two extremist Israeli politicians, Foreign Minister Winston Peters says. The bans will prevent Israel’s Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich and National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir from travelling to New Zealand. “Our action today is not against ...
6th Pacific-France Summit Intervention by New Zealand Minister of Foreign Affairs, Rt Hon Winston Peters Nice, France, Tuesday 10 June 2025 Thank you, President Macron, for convening this meeting today, the sixth Pacific-France Summit. We were privileged to have also been at the second Pacific-France Summit, during the Presidency of ...
Tēnā koutou katoa. Thank you for the warm welcome. It is my pleasure to welcome you all to MEETINGS 2025. First, I would like to acknowledge Mayor Wayne Brown attending MEETINGS 2025 today and a special acknowledgment to Ngāti Whatua Orakei for their pōwhiri and welcome. I would also like ...
The Government is increasing funding for attracting overseas visitors and investing in tourism infrastructure as part of its new Tourism Growth Roadmap, Tourism and Hospitality Minister Louise Upston says. “We’re investing $35 million to deliver the first stage of the Roadmap, which sets out the Government’s plan to double the ...
Justice Minister Paul Goldsmith is welcoming changes to toughen up the proposed anti-stalking law, including being triggered after two specified acts within 24 months. “This change better recognises patterns in stalking behaviour and time that can pass between incidents. For example, stalking that occurs around anniversaries would not be covered ...
I am delighted to be here in Singapore once again, to speak to you in my capacity as New Zealand’s Minister for Resources and Associate Minister for Energy. If you haven’t heard of me before today, I’m proud to declare myself the champion of New Zealand’s petroleum and minerals sector. ...
Thank you all for the invitation to speak with you this morning. I have been looking forward to this opportunity. May is a busy month for the Government, and it is always a relief to have the Budget delivered. Today, I would like to speak about what I see as ...
The government is boosting support for rural resilience and wellbeing announced by Mental Health Minister Matt Doocey and Rural Communities Minister Mark Patterson. “We’re backing Rural Support Trusts by committing $3 million over the next four years, to help improve rural communities’ access to primary mental health services and specialist ...
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Sora Park, Professor of Communication, News & Media Research Centre, University of Canberra As consumption of traditional news continues to fall, audiences are turning to social media personalities and influencers for their information. These figures are increasingly shaping public debates. But Australian ...
The most dangerous change is a rewrite of the law that determines whether a worker is an employee or a contractor. E tū says this would make it harder for exploited workers to challenge unfair contracts and win the rights they are legally entitled ...
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Jairo Gutierrez, Professor, Department of Computer and Information Sciences, Auckland University of Technology Tada Images There’s a certain feeling I get in the pit of my stomach when I’m waiting for an important call to come through. You know the type ...
New Zealand is already an extremely unequal society. According to Statistics NZ’s Household Economic Survey in 2021, the richest 5 percent of individuals owned 43.1 percent of the country’s wealth, while the bottom 50 percent held just 2.1 percent. ...
Books editor Claire Mabey talks with Emily Broadmore, one of the people behind a contentious AI workshop for creative writers, to try and understand the why of it. On Friday June 6, the Wellington Writers’ Studio held an AI workshop run by Heft Communications (a PR company based in the ...
In episode six, our goblins hit the town, the dance floor and several dead ends as they try to uncover the whereabouts of the halfling bard. Fury of the Smallblends radio drama, improv comedy and tabletop roleplaying into a unique audio experience. In our story, four stalwart heroes ...
Taxpayers’ Union spokesman James Ross said: “Rates bills went up 15 percent on average last year. Farmers just like everyone else are being fleeced by a local government sector more focused on vanity projects and bureaucratic bloat than getting the basics ...
Taxpayers’ Union spokesperson Tory Relf, said: “We’ve long said that heritage rules are being abused by bureaucrats and activists to block development and dump costs on the public.” ...
This is plainly and simply a fundamental erosion of workers’ rights to secure employment - the Minister is effectively giving employers the green light to fire workers at will," said Fleur Fitzsimons, National Secretary for the Public Service Association ...
"When elections happen this October, voters should back candidates who commit to capping general rate increases at inflation - unless there’s a genuinely extraordinary reason not to," Feds local government spokesperson Sandra Faulkner says. ...
Stripping money out of the public health system to pay private, for-profit providers will not solve the Government’s underfunding of health, Public Service Association Te Pūkenga Here Tikanga Mahi National Secretary Fleur Fitzsimons says. ...
As part of our series exploring how New Zealanders live and our relationship with money, a recent arrival from the UK talks us through their financial comings and goings. Want to be part of The Cost of Being? Fill out the questionnaire here.Gender: Female. Age: 34. Ethnicity: European (moved to ...
Forecasts diverge on the price of electricity in the next few years – and that’s critically important to whether it becomes cost-effective for NZers to install solar panels on their roofs to sell back into the national grid The post Don’t expect rooftop solar to power NZ’s future, says new ...
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Colin Alexander, Senior Lecturer in Political Communications, Nottingham Trent University Jaws turns 50 on June 20. Last year, Quentin Tarantino called Stephen Spielberg’s film “possibly the greatest movie ever made”. Though he was quick to add that it isn’t the best film ...
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Alistair Evans, Professor, School of Biological Sciences, Monash University Witsawat.S/Shutterstock Imagine a lush forest with tree-ferns, their trunks capped by ribbon-like fronds. Conifers tower overhead, bearing triangular leaves almost sharp enough to pierce skin. Flowering plants are both small and rare. ...
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Delyse Hutchinson, Associate Professor, Clinical Psychologist, and NHMRC Leadership Fellow, SEED Centre for Lifespan Research, School of Psychology, Deakin University D-BASE/Getty In Australia, an estimated one in ten men experience mental health issues such as anxiety and depression before and after ...
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Douglas Hilton, Chief Executive, CSIRO Andy Young Boronias, known for their showy flowers and strong scent, are a quintessential part of the Australian bush. They led Traditional Owners to the best water sources and inspired Australian children’s author and illustrator May ...
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Lucy Lu, Adjunct Senior Lecturer, Faculty of Education and Social Work, University of Sydney Rawpixel/ Getty Images About one quarter of Australian school students are learning English as an additional language or dialect. This means their first language or ...
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Erin Wilkins, Aboriginal Cultural Educator, Trainer and Facilitator, Indigenous Knowledge Artist’s impression of Dargan Shelter as it would have looked during the last Ice Age.Painting by Leanne Watson Redpath Travel back 20,000 years into the last Ice Age, to a ...
Starting today, single-use vapes are outlawed, advertising and displays severely restricted, and promotions banned. The new rules have young vapers in their sights, writes Catherine McGregor in today’s extract from The Bulletin. To receive The Bulletin in full each weekday, sign up here.Strict new vaping rules kick in today From ...
Samantha Lissington is riding the crest of a wave. In the space of a week, across two European nations, the Kiwi eventer has made equestrian history – and followed it up with the best result of her career. On Monday morning (NZ time), Lissington finished second at the elite CCI5* ...
The sport and police minister says the $2.9m Sport NZ is redirecting to new initiatives for reducing youth offending will not go into the government's "boot camps". ...
Prime Minister Christopher Luxon is pledging to continue a "considered" course amid "choppier waters" worldwide - even as former political leaders call for a rethink. ...
Private hospital outsourcing contracts tended to be short-term in the past, but Health NZ has been negotiating three-year panel agreements with private hospitals. ...
After police decided against laying charges against his deputy press secretary, who was accused of secretly recording women, the prime minister said he was open to looking at the law. So when two victims of secret recordings met up for the first time, they decided to draft Luxon a legislative ...
From Mount Roskill to Waiheke to London and back, Whau ward councillor Kerrin Leoni explains her path to politics, what she’s learned from Wayne Brown and why she’s making a bold bid to take his job. “Isn’t he funny?” says councillor Kerrin Leoni. She’s talking about current Auckland mayor Wayne ...
Campbell Smith joins Duncan Greive to discuss the current state of live music, while explaining his decision to wind down his management career, and his involvement with the campaign to turn Western Springs into a permanent music venue. Campbell Smith trained as a lawyer, but was quickly drawn into ...
Grace was 11 when she started hearing voices and seeing visions. She heard a man’s voice telling her to harm herself and had repeated visions of a man watching her. She’d begun suffering flashbacks, nightmares and disturbed sleep after watching her father assault her mother nine months early. A chapter ...
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