Written By:
notices and features - Date published:
5:30 pm, December 20th, 2022 - 38 comments
Categories: Daily review -
Tags:
The current rise of populism challenges the way we think about people’s relationship to the economy.We seem to be entering an era of populism, in which leadership in a democracy is based on preferences of the population which do not seem entirely rational nor serving their longer interests. ...
The server will be getting hardware changes this evening starting at 10pm NZDT.
The site will be off line for some hours.
We have had some really heavy rain and thunder. It flooded our park and nearby road for the first time in years. Rotorua is on the edge of this, so we are hoping all are safe further inland. This is an intense area of storm and rain. Even the recent flood mitigation work could not cope. A window on our future?
Yes.
In Hamilton reports of continuous thunder for an hour. That's a bit apocalyptic aye! Hail the size of ten cent pieces.
That’s a summer crop wrecking event if it hits gardens.
NATs have a plan, hear me out – phase out 10c pieces.
https://i.stuff.co.nz/travel/green-travel/130816398/this-giant-jet-engine-could-pave-the-way-for-an-era-of-lowcost-green-flying
It says here that a jet engine using bio fuel is not emitting co2 instead it is just recycling it.
Surely a cow is doing the same,.
(Keep in mind ypu explaining things to the slowest student in the class)😉
I too am slow, but will offer my opinion: it's bullshit.
🙂
The bit about the bio gas as well?
a few problems I see in the article.
1. biofuels have to come from somewhere. If we use land to grow biofuels, will that be regeneratively or via soil and biodiversity killing conventional monocropping? Will it take the place of growing food? How will it stand up to extreme weather events?
2. the biofuel source material has to be industrially processed. They talk about chemicals but don't say what the impact of that is environmentally. I smell some greenwashing.
3. the claim is that aviation is only responsible for 2.5% of global emissions (I'd want that fact checked), but it's some neolib accounting. If you or I were to fly to London for a wedding and a holiday, we have to count all the emissions in that trip, not just those from avgas. eg the emissions from other travel on the trip, accommodation, restaurants and takeaways, and so on. Climate bods say the whole emissions % is higher.
4. flying is a commercial model that relies on increasing flights to make it work economically. This means more airports, runways, hotels, machinery etc, and all their emissions.
The Ultrafan proposal is trying to create green BAU. It's not that we can't have nice things (for now anyway), it's that there is simply no replacement for the dense energy and energy returned on investment of fossil fuels, and the only place we can get the additional resources needed is from nature. We are really really shit at doing that in a sustainable way. In large part because we insist on living beyond our means.
Instead of imagining a world where we can fly like we do now, we should be imagining a world where everyone has enough to eat, and the environment is being regenerated where we have degraded it. We might get to fly once every five years to the UK in that scenario, but we won't burnout the planet.
Dave's your man.
https://www.researchgate.net/profile/David-Lee-122
https://www.mmu.ac.uk/news-and-events/news/story/12787/
I was wondering about the thing of who takes responsibility for international flights.
How does a cow extract methane from the atmosphere?
Little-known valve.
Doesn't methane quickly breakdown into co2 and get taken uo by the plants a cow eats ,there by completing the circle
https://theconversation.com/climate-explained-methane-is-short-lived-in-the-atmosphere-but-leaves-long-term-damage-145040
In a natural system there's some kind of constantly shifting balance between emissions and sequestration (hence our relatively stable atmosphere and biosphere historically). Humans have interrupted that by creating way too many emissions at the same time as breaking the ecosystems that sequester. This is the whole point of climate change, we pushed things too far and how we have to scale back until things stabilise again. Running industrial dairy en masse on pasture cannot be mitigated. Because we're already too far in debt, and because in itself it's just not sustainable.
"Quickly"?
How many years, bwaghorn?
And what effect does that methane have while it's hanging about in the atmosphere?
Not arguing that methane is good.
Buuuuut
If you have six million cows magically appear, ypu get 10 years if a rising curve of methane, after 10 years does that curve keep rising or does it flat line?
I think of that methane as a lens that takes years in the making, then is maintained by the cows. It sits there in the atmosphere, burning us up.
If the cows hadn't made the methane, the lens wouldn't exist and we'd not be being burnt by it.
I know it's only a model to help visualise/conceptualize, but if you have a better one, I'd like to read it.
OK ta I'm not locking for ammo just understanding.
Earlier this month the government passed legislation
National wants to delay the reduction in number of retail outlets selling tobacco
https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/political/480738/remaining-tobacco-outlets-might-become-magnet-for-ram-raids-nicola-willis-says
In a functioning market (such as supermarkets taking online orders and delivering to the home address) the reduced number of allowed retail outlets would result in the on-line order and delivery of packets of tobacco to nicotine addicts (who have acquired smoking behaviour routines/habits based around the addiction) who resisted the transition to vaping or patches.
So it seems National is really supporting the continuance of the dairy smokes sales turnover interests of businesses while exploiting crime for political purposes.
And of course the talk of a phase out of retail leading to a black market is nonsense – because on-line delivery continues. There is the matter of the gradual reduction in nicotine levels in smokes (so no immediate bump in demand for higher nicotine level tobacco product).
https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/national/476999/claims-illegal-tobacco-trade-will-boom-in-a-smokefree-nz-are-smoke-and-mirrors-experts-say
"Black market" (note the "colour" reference) sounds scary though, so, perfect for the white (not a colour!) Nat-voter!
There is currently a black market due to the high excise taxes, and the legislation will continue to allow growing tobacco for personal use, so I'm not really sure why anyone thinks the existing black market would significantly increase in size.
Given the number of courier package thefts (daily occurrence in our middle-class Auckland suburb), not to mention the legal requirement to ensure that the supply is to people meeting the legal age requirement – this seems like a thoroughly irresponsible method of delivery.
If you want to argue that tobacco should only be dispensed to 'addicts' – then it would be more effective to supply through chemists (though, I don't think they'd be keen).
But, of course, all of those without fixed addresses, without GPs, etc – will have a very strong incentive to get their tobacco 'fix' extra-legally. And, I think you radically underestimate the desperation of the tobacco addict – who has little or no interest in low-nicotine products.
Observationally (using the school my teenage son attends as a benchmark) – the number of teens vaping at school (which is against school rules, just as smoking is) – is really, really high. Far higher than smoking ever was. I'm not sure that this has actually been a health win.
It seems you are running through the National Party talking points in support of maintaining dairy retail supply of tobacco (catering to business greed), despite the associated risk (here crime).
The idea of rummaging through peoples on-line shopping delivery to find a packet of smokes seems a little far-fetched (when numbers using are going from 10 to 5%). And supermarket shopping delivery can be timed for the evening when people are at home (enabling the ID check).
By the end of next year – there will be 600, not 6000, retail outlets selling tobacco. The number of crime incidents involving tobacco will subside.
The same process, albeit more gradual, will occur with liquor outlets.
Despite the high tax on tobacco there has been little development of a black market, and experts believe that the decline in nicotine levels will make little difference either. Use is now well under 10%, and some will be weened off addiction via the lower nicotine rate and others will switch to the cheaper option of vaping.
Given the carcinogen in the tobacco method of delivery of the nicotine it has been a health win to transfer youth to vaping (and certainly it has been to reduce adult smoking rates to under 10%).
This doesn't seem to fit with the narrative that dairies are being ram-raided and having violent thefts because of the presence of tobacco.
I don't think that these (reportedly) teenagers conducting the thefts are smoking the lot themselves – of course there is a black market.
Where do you think these '600' outlets will be located? And what level of security do you think they will need (given the presence on-site of substantially higher levels of tobacco than the corner dairy)? And what methods will be used to provide access for homeless or no-fixed-abode people (often heavy smokers)?
It would be a health win if vaping just replaced tobacco among those already smoking – my point is that vaping has substantially increased nicotine usage amongst teens. You may see that as a health win, I don't.
The evidence dismissing the development of a black market was the related to offshore sourced tobacco. Not so much at present. Just the legal supply to the reducing in size local market (with some internal re-direction via theft).
The effect of lowering of nicotine levels is likely to reduce the size of that market further to 5% (as nicotine addicts switch to the far cheaper vaping and others die off).
Nicotine use is not a health problem (though there are doubts about the safety of some vaping).
The 600 outlets are likely to be supermarkets (they are set up to prevent ramraids) and the 4 Square type dairies (it's notable so far how few of these attacks have occurred in the provinces).
The difficulty of the homeless (on the streets) and those with no fixed address (hostels) without cars (or means to order deliveries) accessing their daily needs from further afield than a local dairy or liquor outlet, is akin to that of every variety of addict to a substance. Suppliers will move in, they probably already have. But there is a much cheaper alternative for the nicotine addict – vaping.
And there is still the option of kiosks (refilled each day) on a trial basis.
The current situation of 6000 outlets for targeting (fog cannons will just lead to the fast raid) so youth can supply gangs ($20,000 tobacco for $5000 cash and supply to controlled addicts/associates on DPB and into prisons) is far from ideal and National's support for its continuance (while grandstanding on law and order) is absurd.
Oh, and stealing groceries from doorsteps is already a thing. Cigarettes would just be an unanticipated bonus.
https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/thieves-target-supermarket-grocery-deliveries-left-on-customers-doorsteps/GNJ5RV263UBWYGX3JJL6SLRHKE/
ATM, it's not a big issue (much easier for the criminals to just walk into the supermarket and walk out with a trolley full of high-end groceries, without paying) – but if there are easily resalable items (cigarettes) included – then door-step theft becomes more attractive.
And, the idea of any courier driver waiting around to do an ID check is completely ridiculous – you're lucky to get them to drop the package at the door, rather than the letterbox.
Supermarket deliveries are in house, not by courier.
And
Given the little more than 5% who smoke targeting grocery deliveries to find a packet of smokes is unlikely.
Scratching that scab…
“This is not a Māori newsletter; it is a community newsletter and everyone in this community speaks English.
“I, as well as many New Zealanders am not in favour of giving one cultural group special privilege regarding their language simply because they (falsely) claim first nation status.”
Editor of Woodville newsletter apologies (sic) for comments on Māori language, culture
https://www.stuff.co.nz/pou-tiaki/300770392/editor-of-woodville-newsletter-apologies-for-comments-on-mori-language-culture
– Jane Hill
Yeah, nah, you fucking liar. That was your only intention.
Rabuka is back https://i.stuff.co.nz/world/south-pacific/300770546/fiji-set-to-get-a-new-prime-minister-dethroning-bainimarama-after-nearly-16-years
Maybe; Sacha, and with any luck yes. But as a certain Fijian wrote elsewhere today: " I will believe it when I see them shake hands".
https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/pacific/481170/fiji-has-a-new-coalition-government-rabuka-to-be-pm
Fiji has had 4 coups over the past 35 years. I find it amazing how the major players in each coup (Rabuka, Speight, Bainimarama, etc) seem to a) be prominent in Fijian politics and b) play major roles in each of the coups).
Millsy; the hands they had in crafting the laws under which they were judged goes a fair way to explaining that. This is from 2013, when the current constitution was adopted:
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-10-23/an-constitution-expert-yash-ghai-says-he-doubts-if-fiji-pm-has-/5039704
Clare Daly’s words of wisdom.
”We must recognise our media – strangled by money, more interested in access to power than holding it to account – is anything but free, a water carrier for political and corporate power, dedicated to enforcing the demands of global capital.“
Kicking back with the Saudi bros.
https://twitter.com/ThisIsSoliman/status/1604543495477174272
Mush said he would abide by the wish of a poll of Twitter users
The result was 57.5% wanted him to step down for being Chief Twit.
Afterwards he said “Twitter would make a change to allow only Twitter Blue subscribers to vote in policy-related polls”
https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2022/12/19/musk-twitter-ceo-poll/?
The ego crash landed
The overextended one
Space X rocket man (and satellites encircling the globe for communications*), Tesla (electric cars replacing petrol driven ones), AI ("threat to humanity" says Musk and so he goes all in to save us) and defender of free speech* on Twitter.
https://www.newshub.co.nz/home/technology/2022/12/elon-musk-says-he-will-step-down-as-twitter-ceo.html