Government blocks off shore oil and gas drilling

Written By: - Date published: 10:13 am, April 12th, 2018 - 158 comments
Categories: business, capitalism, climate change, Economy, energy, Environment, global warming, greens, jacinda ardern, labour, megan woods, science - Tags:

Climate change is our biggest challenge.  If we do not get on top of the issue soon then we are facing catastrophic damage to our environment.  Yesterday’s Auckland storm is but a portent of what will happen.

To address it we have to deal with our addiction to oil.  As Bill McGibbon co founder of 350.org has said:

One lesson of this work is unmistakably obvious: when you’re in a hole, stop digging … These numbers show that unconventional and ‘extreme’ fossil fuel – Canada’s tar sands, for instance – simply have to stay in the ground.  Given these numbers, it makes literally no sense for the industry to go hunting for more fossil fuel. We’ve binged to the edge of our own destruction. The last thing we need now is to find a few more liquor stores to loot.

The IPCC has concluded that to prevent irreparable environmental disaster emissions need to be capped so that temperature increases no more than 2 degrees celsius from pre industrial ages.  There is a huge consensus reached between climate change scientists that currently discovered global oil reserves are greater than the amount that can be safely burned.

A few weeks ago Jacinda Ardern hinted that the annual block offer programme may be no more.  The block offer programme is set up by the Crown Minerals Act.  Each year the Crown consults on which areas oil explorers should have permission to explore for oil and gas and following consultation releases grants exploration permits to the oil industry.  But news of a possible change was reported by Lucy Bennett at the Herald:

Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern has given the strongest signal yet that the days of oil and gas exploration in New Zealand are numbered.

Ardern said the world had moved on from fossil fuels.

The Government is at a critical point in its decision-making over the future of its oil and gas exploration permits.

In a surprise appearance that stunned observers, Ardern appeared on Parliament’s forecourt on Monday to accept a 45,000-strong Greenpeace petition calling for an end to oil and gas exploration.

She asked the climate change activists for more time.

“I ask now for a bit more time. We’re working hard on this issue and we know it’s something that we can’t afford to spend much time on but we are actively considering it now,” she said.

And Megan Woods told the industry in very plain terms what the Government’s approach was going to be.  She said this:

We stand for transformational change – moving to an economy that is sustainable, inclusive and productive.

That is this Government’s overriding economic aim.

We aim to shape an economy where we work smarter, make better use of our resources, ensure everyone who wants to work can work, and ensure that the benefits of growth are spread across society

And we aim to shape an economy that is sustainable, that is not prone to major shocks, and that meets our obligations to our Paris commitments.

And that means having a plan to responsibly transition towards a low carbon economy.

Our goals in this area are ambitious and plainly stated.

A carbon neutral economy by 2050.

100% renewable electricity, in a normal hydrological year, by 2035.

These targets commit us to a long term transition away from fossil fuels and towards renewable energy.

And this morning it was announced that the granting of off shore exploration permits was not going to occur any more.  But the usual suspects were unhappy.

From Radio New Zealand:

The government has announced it will not grant new deep-sea oil and gas exploration permits, but New Plymouth’s mayor says he has not heard of a specific plan for transitioning to green energy.

Energy and Resources Minister Megan Woods announced this morning there will be no new offshore block offers, the annual tender process that allows corporations to bid for permits.

The Block Offer programme set up by the previous government annually invites bids for new onshore and offshore oil and gas exploration.

Ms Woods said the decision would not affect the 22 active offshore licences, which cover roughly 100,000 sqkm of ocean, with the last one to finish in 2030.

“In each of the last two years only one permit has been granted for offshore oil and gas exploration,” she said.

“This decision does not affect current reserves or the potential finds from current exploration permits. As the industry itself admits, there is good potential for more to be found.”

Exploration on land for petroleum products was not being halted however, with Ms Woods set to consult with iwi and hapū regarding a 1703sqkm area proposed in the Taranaki Basin.

She said all conservation land would be excluded from the final tenders.

However, New Plymouth mayor Neil Holdem said the move was a “kick in the guts for the future of the Taranaki economy”.

“The key thing for us is that we want to see a plan,” he said.

“Is the government going to put money to help us? It’s all very well for Shane Jones to come up here and give us $20 million in regional development but it will take a hell of a lot more than that to help transition us out of oil and gas.”

“We have the highest GDP in the country per capita – it’s concerning the government has made this announcement without a plan … or if they have one we haven’t seen it.”

There is a plan.  Carbon neutral by 2050 and 100% renewable energy by 2035. Taranaki’s engineering expertise can be diverted into these new programmes.  And the cancellation of the issuing of permits does not affect existing oil wells or existing exploration permits.

Petroleum and Production Association of New Zealand chief executive Cameron Madgwick said they were very dissapointed with the government’s decision.

He said there had been a complete lack of consultation with the industry.

Mr Madgwick said it would have a massive impact on jobs and other forms of fuel would become more expensive.

He also said it was an issue of energy security.

I am not surprised the industry is upset.  But their claims of being blindsided are not correct.  You just have to read Megan Woods’ recent speech to the Oil Industry to see that this is the case.

And consultation?  This issue and the need to stop further oil exploration has been talked about for decades.  The oil industry cannot claim to have been caught by surprise.

This is a good decision and the start of weaning our nation off oil.  But the development of alternative energy sources will be vital.

158 comments on “Government blocks off shore oil and gas drilling”

  1. Enough is Enough 1

    Excellent News

    We need to begin slapping tariffs on oil imports as well to incentivise the transition away from fossil fuels.

    • Chuck 1.1

      “We need to begin slapping tariffs on oil imports as well to incentivise the transition away from fossil fuels.”

      That’s ok for people who could afford to buy a non-fossil fueled vehicle.

      However, for the majority of people, it will just hit them in the pocket as they have no viable alternative atm.

      Research the makeup and age of the current NZ car and truck fleet. Would you be ok to slap tariffs on the population that can least afford to pay???

      • Enough is Enough 1.1.1

        No one is doubting that there will be some economic pain in this fight to save our world.

        But as you have noted below this will have absolutely no effect on oil consumption in New Zealand in itself.

        However if she backs this up (as I expect her to do in the next year or so) with something to deal with consumption then we are heading in the right direction.

        • Baba Yaga 1.1.1.1

          “No one is doubting that there will be some economic pain in this fight to save our world.”

          This is not going to save anyone. Not a single person. In fact it will increase emissions, reduce employment, and worsen our balance of payments, while not making a single difference to climate change.

          Meanwhile, we need fossil fuels for all manner of everyday activities and products. But Labour are happy for us to export jobs. A pathetic piece of virtue signalling by a bunch of nutters.

          • tracey 1.1.1.1.1

            This may be the best example of Nat meming ever. No actual evidence and a vacuous “virtue signal” for good measure.

            A statement that seems to say something but says nothing.

            BS mining 101

            • BabaYaga 1.1.1.1.1.1

              Tracey I’m still waiting for your responses on the Middlemore issues. Or have you realised it was all lies by Labour?

          • mikesh 1.1.1.1.2

            “This is not going to save anyone. Not a single person. In fact it will increase emissions, reduce employment, and worsen our balance of payments, while not making a single difference to climate change.”

            The assumption, which is probably correct, is that it will make a difference to climate change. But in any case petroleum supplies are not going to last forever so we may as well start facing up to shortages as early as possible. Also, it is unlikely to have much of a detrimental effect in the shorter term.

            • BabaYaga 1.1.1.1.2.1

              It will make no measurable difference to climate change.

              • Incognito

                It is about a paradigm shift, a fundamental sustained change in the way we think, talk and do things. This can start small but end up being big and important, like an avalanche.

                • Baba Yaga

                  No, it’s nothing more than an attempt to distract from the shambles this government is. That is evident in the lack of consultation, and the cowardice with which Ardern failed to address this directly with the people of Taranaki. And the stupidity of stopping gas exploration is the final piece of the puzzle.

                  • Incognito

                    There is no need to go all hysterical about the Government’s decision to discontinue new off-shore block offers while the 22 existing ones remain in place and active.

                    As Megan Woods said:

                    “In each of the last two years only one permit has been granted for offshore oil and gas exploration,” she said.

                    “This decision does not affect current reserves or the potential finds from current exploration permits. As the industry itself admits, there is good potential for more to be found.”

                    So, right now nothing is or has been “stopped”.

                    I think it is a pretty gutsy move for a ‘coward’ and it was well sign-posted, I thought, just like the storm(s) that hit Auckland.

                    It might be a ‘distraction’ to some but this Government has to fight many fires, not the least the ones lit and/or left burning in the previous 9 years, and fortunately it can walk and chew gum at the same time 😉

                    Whether this Government is a “shambles” really is a moot point; climate change is a global and growing problem and needs to be tackled globally. Thus, this Government does not operate in isolation and has taken one small step in the right direction.

                    Finally, if we are indeed weaning off fossil fuels it makes an awful lot of sense to now stop investing time, effort & money in exploration, don’t you think?

                  • Incognito

                    Judging by the hysteria it has created and the Opposition and their supporters going full-Viking frenzy (AKA berserkers) I’d say it is definitely not “largely meaningless”.

                    • BabaYaga

                      Meaning is not judged by the reaction, but by the impact. The reaction is understandable to a decision made without consultation, and announced on the eve of the PM heading overseas for more photo ops. She really is useless.

                  • Incognito

                    Are you implying that all the hysteria and panic by the Opposition and their supporters is about something that is “largely meaningless” and thus all a major fake? I’m almost inclined to believe that, almost; a fake reaction about something without any impact whatsoever – it sums up the current light-weight Opposition very nicely, I have to say 😉

                    • Baba Yaga

                      I haven’t seen any hysteria or panic form the opposition. What I have seen is a meaningless piece of virtue signalling (without notice or consultation btw) from a government desperate to change the narrative from their own incompetence.

          • Pat 1.1.1.1.3

            youre building a new house…useable life expectancy 50+ years and youre deciding on heating cooking options…where does gas now figure? Youre a townplaner…do you consent reticulated gas for that new subdivision?….youre in business and about to invest in plant…will it use LPG or electricity?

            The reason the Gas industry is in full anti mode is because they know demand for their product will fall in the foreseeable.

            This will indeed impact demand.

            • BabaYaga 1.1.1.1.3.1

              Gas is a great product. Ask the Auckkanders currently without electric power!

              • Pat

                wondered how long that one would take…..yep lets trash the only planet we have to avoid a little inconvenience paradoxically caused by the very product that that may temporarily provide some convenience….and we can do it all again (increasingly) next week/month /year…….surely you are smarter than that?

                • Baba Yaga

                  You do know about natural gas, and it’s environmental credentials, right?
                  But no, let’s shed jobs and use more coal so we can virtue signal to the world.

                  • Pat

                    “Whether natural gas has lower life cycle greenhouse gas emissions than coal and oil depends on the assumed leakage rate, the global warming potential of methane over different time frames, the energy conversion efficiency, and other factors [5]. One recent study found that methane losses must be kept below 3.2 percent for natural gas power plants to have lower life cycle emissions than new coal plants over short time frames of 20 years or fewer [6]. And if burning natural gas in vehicles is to deliver even marginal benefits, methane losses must be kept below 1 percent and 1.6 percent compared with diesel fuel and gasoline, respectively. Technologies are available to reduce much of the leaking methane, but deploying such technology would require new policies and investments [7].”

                    yep…definitely pays to read them before you link them, Baba

                    • BabaYaga

                      I did read it.

                      “Natural gas is a fossil fuel, though the global warming emissions from its combustion are much lower than those from coal or oil.”

                      “Natural gas emits 50 to 60 percent less carbon dioxide (CO2) when combusted in a new, efficient natural gas power plant compared with emissions from a typical new coal plant [1]. Considering only tailpipe emissions, natural gas also emits 15 to 20 percent less heat-trapping gases than gasoline when burned in today’s typical vehicle”

                      The benefits of natural gas are clearly set out in the entire post. But hey, keep reading the Guardian if it makes you feel better.

                      Ps from your own reference:
                      “Plugging methane leaks is widely seen as a fast, cheap way to tackle climate change. The International Energy Agency (IEA) estimates half of the gas leaks could be stopped at zero cost, because the cost of doing so is offset by the value of the extra gas captured and then sold.”

                      So your own source provides the solution. As I said, we should be extracting MORE natural gas.

                    • BabaYaga

                      Actually, Pat, this article sets it out very well.

                      https://i.stuff.co.nz/taranaki-daily-news/news/103094879/oil-and-gas-exploration-ban-is-a-mistake-says-mp-young

                      This government is getting more stupid by the day.

            • Chuck 1.1.1.1.3.2

              “youre in business and about to invest in plant…will it use LPG or electricity?”

              Industry if they have a choice will always go for gas…why? for process heat and other uses electricity is more expensive to use.

              • Pat

                beg to differ, that may currently be so in many (certainly not all) situations but that is the point, we no longer have the ‘current situation’ with this decision…and future availability will be a crucial factor along with price expectations.

    • SPC 1.2

      Why .. we already tax it and local oil with the petrol levy?

  2. Ad 2

    “There is a plan. Carbon neutral by 2050 and 100% renewable energy by 2035. ”

    That is not a plan. That is a slogan.

    Mayor Holden is right to request some actual plan to transition that region’s economy from one of the two major employment drivers in his region. It would be the same if they unilaterally stopped all future dairy industry growth, in any region (other than Auckland).

    Any fool with a pen can stop something.

    The Climate Commission hasn’t been formed, hasn’t met, hasn’t made any recommendations, and hasn’t made anything happen.

    Same for the legislation.

    We are not likely to see results on the ground from either the legislation or the Commission until the last year of this term, if then.

    That’s a term’s worth of economic uncertainty for Taranaki.

    We have yet another example of government making an announcement with neither the Green nor the NZFirst Ministers in the frame.

    No plan = No government.

    • red-blooded 2.1

      Just because the announcement has been made by Megan Woods, that doesn’t mean that the Greens and NZF haven’t been “in the frame”. And Taranaki has plenty of time to make some plans for itself about transitioning away from oil and gas. Production from current permits is predicted to run for another 10-12 years. I expect that there will be some government support to help them find a new direction for their regional economy, but it’s also something they have to take ownership of. After all, they can’t have expected to keep on mining for ever.

      And your “no plan = no government” trope simply doesnt apply in this instance. This government have taken a decision that starts a process we should have started a long time ago. They’re delivering on their promise to prioritise climate change. Good on them!

    • Draco T Bastard 2.2

      Mayor Holden is right to request some actual plan to transition that region’s economy from one of the two major employment drivers in his region.

      No he’s not as he’s abrogating his responsibility that comes with being mayor.

      That’s a term’s worth of economic uncertainty for Taranaki.

      Bollocks.

      Their oil industry will keep going for at least a decade and probably more. Pretty solid that.

      And then, of course, there was no guarantee that any regions opened up for exploration would either be in the Taranaki region or find oil.

      They’re no worse off now than they were.

      We have yet another example of government making an announcement with neither the Green nor the NZFirst Ministers in the frame.

      They’re there – there’s no way that the government could have made this decision without them.

      • Pat 2.2.1

        Listening to him this morning on RNZ his protest appeared obligatory…his heart wasnt in it.

      • Whispering Kate 2.2.2

        I agree, I thought it was a bit rich the Mayor asking the Government for a plan for transitioning off fossil fuel. Surely the oil industry itself has had enough forewarning of climate change and the need to research for alternative fuels – they are the ones with the money and the brains to get on with the job and should be looking with vision into the future and doing prep work/research. It’s their livelihood at stake, enough said.

        Passing the buck on to the government is typical.

  3. Chuck 3

    “This is a good decision and the start of weaning our nation off oil.”

    Disagree…it will have no effect on weaning NZ off oil. It will only result in importing more oil and gas.

    “But the development of alternative energy sources will be vital.”

    Fully agree… let us see if this Government will make available the required funds to enable the scaling up of alternative energy sources.

    • Draco T Bastard 3.1

      Disagree…it will have no effect on weaning NZ off oil. It will only result in importing more oil and gas.

      Wrong.

      1. NZ doesn’t actually use any of the oil we extract from our territory. It’s all sold offshore. Marsden point can’t even refine it as it’s designed around the heavy crude from the Middle East. So it won’t increase the oil that we import.
      2. It will help wean us off of the oil extraction industry which is a Good Thing as it will allow us to utilise those engineers in a better, more sustainable way.

      Fully agree… let us see if this Government will make available the required funds to enable the scaling up of alternative energy sources.

      I’m pretty sure a large part of the Regional Development Fund will be put towards it. One of the things that the Greens wanted done was the developing our own silicon industry. You know, the stuff used to make solar panels.

        • Draco T Bastard 3.1.1.1

          Oil

          New Zealand exports local crude and imports both crude and refined petroleum products.

          While there are several producing oil fields in New Zealand, we are a net importer of oil. New Zealand’s locally-produced oil is generally exported because of its high quality and therefore high value on the international market.

          • alwyn 3.1.1.1.1

            In the comment above you say.
            “Marsden point can’t even refine it as it’s designed around the heavy crude from the Middle East”.
            That doesn’t fit in with the comment you link to here that says
            “New Zealand’s locally-produced oil is generally exported because of its high quality and therefore high value on the international market.”.
            They are totally different things. There is no reason at all that I am aware of for claiming that the Marsden Point Refinery cannot process the light, sweet condensate that New Zealand produces.
            Where do you get the idea that it “cannot” refine New Zealand produced crude?

            • Pat 3.1.1.1.1.1

              “But should there be any disruption to oil imports could the Marsden Point refinery be re-engineered to accept New Zealand’s domestic oil, and if so how quickly? 41% of New Zealand’s oil consumer energy is diesel and 6% is aviation fuel. But according to the July 2010 report of the Parliamentary Commissioner for the Environment on Biofuels “New Zealand crude oils are generally too light and waxy to make good aviation and diesel fuel”. If these limitations are correct then New Zealand’s oil import dependency is closer to 97% — as shown in the red line in the graph — than the 65% official position.

              In the event of an oil supply shock, New Zealand’s almost 100% import dependency would remain unchanged for months, perhaps years, until the Marsden Point refinery could be transformed to accept New Zealand oil. The government has powers to require New Zealand oil to be refined within New Zealand and prohibit its export in the Crown Minerals Act. Even then we would remain around 70% dependent on imported oil. ”

              http://oilshockhorrorprobe.blogspot.co.nz/2011/06/new-zealands-oil-security-how-dependent.html

              • alwyn

                Thank you. I didn’t realise it had now been configured so that processing the condensate was not viable any longer. I knew about the diesel but I thought producing motor spirit was still available.

              • Exkiwiforces

                I think you find that NZ’s 90 days of emergency fuel supply as stipulate as by the IEA to held in each member country. NZ is the only country that has over 3/4 quarters of its 90 day emergency fuel supply held outside NZ by a 3rd party!!!

                If the NZDF can’t maintain NZ Sea Lanes Of Comminution (SLOC), so what’s the best way to sink a ship???

                Has anyone seen this of late?

                http://www.news.com.au/technology/environment/climate-change/this-is-uncharted-territory-key-ocean-circulation-is-weakening/news-story/5320c5f1490b18c60ed6a430fe6a59ec

                • Pat

                  Which sector of our society requires fuel above all others to do its job?

                  Why are the UK Gov so keen to enable a fracking industry despite the fact they have a CC Act?

                  What is Martial Law?

                  • Exkiwiforces

                    To your questions,

                    1. The NZDF, 1st responders, back up power for a essential services (hospitals, transmissions towers for Radio as they use less power than TV in big scheme of things. I can live a life without most things for day to day life if need too, but I’ll be lose without a radio. As my beautiful other half would say I’m her Bush Tucker man, her Bear Grylls/ Loffy Wiseman and Chuck Norris roll into one.

                    Not sure what the meaning of your 2nd question is? I really have no idea or views on the Uk fracking, but I do on fracking in Oz ATM and more than happy to discuss that. Just note my disclaimer as I have shares in regional oil and gas companies, the nuclear industry and I don’t hold shares in oil and gas fracking companies. So fire away at will if you want too.

                    Martial Law in a nutshell is when Military Law or civilian Law with the back of the Police Force is imposed on an area or in a country by the Military Forces of the said country when civil authority/ rule has broken down for whatever reason, or by a foreign force has invaded and the civil authority/ rule has gone tits up.

                    • Pat

                      the questions were (semi) rhetorical …and with the exception of the second non country specific, that was indicative and was the origin of my reasoning..so perhaps should have been the first.

                    • Exkiwiforces

                      No worries Pat,

                      There is a big push here ATM here in the Northern Territory for fracking and there has been a lot of push back the community. Which has result the Labour Government in the territory to a inquiry into fracking and the findings into inquiry werer release about a week with a 135 recommendations. The inquiry said for the fracking to go ahead all 135 recommendations must be in aspected and if it isn’t then fracking shouldn’t go ahead full stop.

                      The most tellingly part this inquiry was that the 135 recommendations must be in place before fracking goes ahead and you’ve heard the whining from the Country Lib Party etc etc but on the OH the Feds were very quite apart from a big cut in our GST refund to try and the us into Fracking. As my partner said when was the last a Government listen to an inquiry and our biggest concern here is our water comes from source which is underground which usually depends on our wet season. Everyone knows Chemicals and Limestone rock don’t mix to well when they interact with other! Stuff that up and we screwed big time.

      • Baba Yaga 3.1.2

        “NZ doesn’t actually use any of the oil we extract from our territory. It’s all sold offshore. ”

        If that’s true, then this will harm our balance of payments.

        • Pat 3.1.2.1

          not if we reduce oil consumption in total which is the goal…we currently spend approx 4 billion a year importing the stuff and only export around 600 million worth. USD

          • Baba Yaga 3.1.2.1.1

            Not going to happen. Oil is an important element in a huge range of items we rely on everyday.

            • Pat 3.1.2.1.1.1

              then quite simply we’re fucked

              • Baba Yaga

                Not at all. The impact of NZ’s emissions on climate change is so low as to be irrelevant.

                • Pat

                  If thats the basis of your thinking then why did National sign the Paris accord…surely we claim there was no need and everyone would nod and say oh thats ok then…its a bogus argument….every country needs to reduce emissions and fast, some faster than others and especially the wealthier countries as they produce a disproportionate amount per capita…there are more and more exploration bans being implemented around the world and whether you agree or not the systems we have available to use will change (maybe fast enough maybe not) and the longer we wait the harder and more disruptive it will be…..if you are incapable of thinking beyond next week get out of the way and let those with some vision get on with it.

                  • BabaYaga

                    The Paris accord was a global agreement, not a unilateral decision to harm our own people for no gain.

              • Baba Yaga

                What % of total global emissions is produced by NZ?

                • Pat

                  including its share of aviation and shipping emissions?

                  • BabaYaga

                    You know the question. Provide the answer.

                    Meanwhile suck on the irony of Andrew Little driving to New Plymouth and Jacinda Ardern flying on her next junket. Fossil fuels anyone?

                    • tracey

                      We didnt prodice nuclear weapons or power and yet we took a stand on that issue. We were told our economy would collapse as we were punished by australia and usa and maybe other allies. NZs world was going to metaphorically end.

                      Every time Labour leads a govt, the Chicken Lickens pile out of the woodwork and into print.

                      Being totally fixated on self interest, as you are, is why we have CC issues and why our Health system is fucked, growing teacher shortages, increased poverty and homelessness. State funding tents for families to live in for fs,

                    • BabaYaga

                      “why our Health system is fuckeD”

                      It isn’t, and you’re incredibly dishonest continuing to make that claim.

    • SPC 3.2

      Yes the issue is continuing use of gas.

      How long will local supply last, and will we import to replace it when existing fields run out.

      • Pat 3.2.1

        existing tapped fields approx 10 years but there are already other known reserves not yet tapped…so Id suggest that we wont be importing. If we havnt found a better way by the time our discovered reserves are used I doubt we will be worrying about such niceties.

  4. Chris T 4

    National will just open them up again next time they are in

    • Muttonbird 4.1

      That won’t be for a long, long time and by then other forms of energy will be more accessible and viable.

      • Baba Yaga 4.1.1

        It will be in 2020.

        • Muttonbird 4.1.1.1

          Ok, then.

          They’ll have to get rid of Bridges first. He’s not got it and the more the public see of him the more damage he’ll do to National.

          Who would you replace him with?

          • Baba Yaga 4.1.1.1.1

            I would have preferred Judith Collins. She’s mincing Twyford in QT (but then so is Jamie-Lee Ross), and would mince Ardern too. But Bridges is still a bit improvement on Jacinda. Unless you count the number of committees and conversations as successes.

    • Draco T Bastard 4.2

      I do hope that they promise to do that every time an election comes round.

      • Chris T 4.2.1

        They probably will

        The majority of polls I have seen such as the AM this morning say most people disagree with Labour’s policy of stopping it.

        • Draco T Bastard 4.2.1.1

          I just had a look at that poll and it gave 100% against.

          It was, of course, a completely unscientific poll and not worth the time to even make it.

          I found the results of a similar poll from Gisborne Herald that showed most people support it. By the looks of things that, too, was an unscientific poll but considering the protests over the last few years on oil drilling in NZ I’d say that it was probably a better indication.

          • Chris T 4.2.1.1.1

            Think it is probably about 50/50

            It would probably help Labour if they made a better job of selling it, cos so far it has been atrocious

            • Enough is Enough 4.2.1.1.1.1

              Yep – They are doing very good things but their political messaging is abysmal.

            • Hanswurst 4.2.1.1.1.2

              Really? What has been wrong with it? Ardern accepting a petition in person, taking a small amount of time to consider the issue, then acting upon it, while the government sends signals of medium-term stability to the industry seems like a fairly textbook case of a listening but proactive government to me. Taking issue with this government’s PR has been a fair stance on a few occasions, but it really does run the danger of becoming a right-wing meme to be trotted out without engaging the critical faculties every time the government does anything.

            • Ed1 4.2.1.1.1.3

              Perhaps you have been misled by the heading “Government blocks off shore oil and gas drilling.” As far as I am aware all they have said is that further sales of new permits will not happen this year or as long as the current government lasts. The impression I got from the government statements is that there may well be new drilling if oil or gas was found under existing permits – a possible field off Oamaru mentioned?

              The decline in take-up of permits has apparently been underway for some time – warning an industry (and a region where a large part of that industry is located) that change is already under way seems to be responsible, unless of course shooting the messenger has more appeal than recognising reality.

              I listened to the announcement; it certainly wil not have sold well to the opposition – should we care?

    • red-blooded 4.3

      This government can’t be blamed for things a future government may (or may not) do. What they can do is try to change the mood of the nation about issues like climate change. If they succeeed in that, then a future government would have to think vey hard about bringing this back. think the anti-nuke policy of the 80s. The Nats were implacably opposed, desperate to reinstate ANZUS, but it didn’t happen because it would have been too politically costly for them.

  5. timeforacupoftea 5

    Its all over for Labour !!
    Silly bastards, obviously don’t want to be in government.

    Who the hell do I vote for now ?

    • Draco T Bastard 5.1

      The same party you should have been voting for for decades – the Greens.

      • timeforacupoftea 5.1.1

        Voted for the Greens until we had a Co-leader admitting she stole money from the state she was not entitled to.

        • Hanswurst 5.1.1.1

          Act, if that’s how your reasoning goes. They’re the party that define theft as anything that gets in the way of private profiteering, then champion draconian law and order so long as it fits in with that.

          • tracey 5.1.1.1.1

            ACT has the highest percentage of MPs to be found guilty of a crime so cuppa cant go there.

        • greg 5.1.1.2

          emigrate to America you may be happier with trump

        • Ed 5.1.1.3

          You sound like an ACT voter.

        • Incognito 5.1.1.4

          I’m curious, how long will you hold this against the Green Party?

        • Draco T Bastard 5.1.1.5

          What you seem to have missed is that the system forces many people on the benefit to lie just to survive. The Greens were going to fix that. Nobody else was.

    • rod 5.2

      National no boubt !!

    • red-blooded 5.3

      Take a deep breath – maybe have a cup of tea. Calm down and think it through – do you really want to keep on pushing those carbons into the atmosphere for ever? If not, there has to be a series of decisions that change how we operate. This is one of them.

      • alwyn 5.3.1

        Did they also announce that the Government needed to set a good example with personal transport?
        All the Cabinet Ministers will give up their rights to those enormous luxury BMW limousines and from now on they are going to travel by bus.
        Yes, and pigs might fly.

        • arkie 5.3.1.1

          Who kept buying those “enormous luxury BMW limousines” despite the Greens calling for electric or low emission cars be considered?

          Who said of the new BMWs for the govt fleet; “it was not a good look when the public service was being asked to tighten its belt” but then did it anyway?

          Now in 2018 James Shaw has said “The Government intends to lead from the front, moving the Crown fleet to electric over the next few years.”

          So it seems the bacon is already airborne

          • alwyn 5.3.1.1.1

            Once they owned the BMWs it made good sense to replace them after 3 years, which is what the Key Government did.
            BMW gave them an incredibly low price on the cars and after 3 years they could sell them for enough to replace them.

            I would think that Hybrid Camry’s would be quite enough for anyone though and buses would be good enough for people who really claim to be Green.
            Shaw may talk the talk but does he walk rather than travel in luxury. I suspect you will find that when he talks of moving over to electric he either means for the plebs in the Public Service or he wants S class Teslas for himself.
            To be fair I haven’t seen Shaw in a limo. I have seen Genter on several occasions in the back of one of the beemers though. Floating around Oriental Bay on the way to the airport I would think.

      • Graeme 5.3.2

        Why take a deep breath? Every time we exhale we are putting more carbon into the air so we are doomed anyway.
        Watch out for the Government to starting taxing your breath to try and prevent people breathing – We are doomed if you listen to their rubbish.

        • mikesh 5.3.2.1

          The CO2 that we exhale is part of the natural cycle that includes photosynthesis.

          • Graeme 5.3.2.1.1

            You are correct but all CO2 is natural and is required in ALL life forms.
            Perhaps people should understand that the earth is nearly 5 Billion years old and we have been only keeping records for about 150 years. It would have heated up and cooled down millions of times in the past and will do so in the future – the scare mongering among the climate changers is nothing less that contemptible and whenever they get challenged they become unhinged like savage animals but that’s alright because the more they do that the less I listen

            • McFlock 5.3.2.1.1.1

              That’s very philosophical, but you do realise that many of those extremes in climate change over the aeons were completely catastrophic for all but the simplest and most basic life forms?

              Nobody’s worried about climate change because of some innate conservative bias for the current climate.

              The worry is famine, displacement, war, flooding, storms, and the eventual stagnation of our oceans. All of which would make life a shedload more difficult and even impossible for billions of people.

              Active volcanoes have existed for billions of years, too, but I wouldn’t want one erupting right next door to me.

  6. Alan 6

    Massive blunder, no matter how well intended, this will be a disaster for the COL

  7. Draco T Bastard 7

    However, New Plymouth mayor Neil Holdem said the move was a “kick in the guts for the future of the Taranaki economy”.

    Typical fucken moron.

    Thinking that there is only one thing that a region can do is what limits that region’s economy far more than having that one thing removed – in 20 or 30 years.

    “The key thing for us is that we want to see a plan,” he said.

    How about you, as mayor of the region, actually do your job and come up with one rather than waiting around for central government to do it for you?

    This issue and the need to stop further oil exploration has been talked about for decades. The oil industry cannot claim to have been caught by surprise.

    True but there’s also the other rather important point – we don’t need to consult with them about allowing them to explore our region for oil. We could even simply ban all extraction immediately as well and we still wouldn’t need to consult with them.

    This seems to be a major problem that business has now – they think that they’re in charge and not the people.

    • Enough is Enough 7.1

      “Thinking that there is only one thing that a region can do is what limits that region’s economy far more than having that one thing removed – in 20 or 30 years”

      The industry needs to end a hell of a lot quicker than in 20 or 30 years. National will be back in power at some point in the next 15 years. If this industry is still alive at that time then they will simply start issuing permits again.

      If the industry has closed it will be far to and costly to revive it. Plant and the skilled workforce would have moved on by then making further exploration impossible.

  8. bwaghorn 8

    Good on them I just hope it makes a real would difference . and isn’t like our honorable by pointless nuclear ban( I mean pointless because the world didn’t follow)

    • JohnSelway 8.1

      No but it is good to know we won’t stand for nuclear armament. Nuclear power though….I’m pretty keen on that

      • bwaghorn 8.1.1

        Nuclear power plant for new Plymouth and sustainable logging for the west coast so we can shut down the coal mines whadda ya reckon?

      • Draco T Bastard 8.1.2

        About the only place that I’d be happy with nuclear power in NZ is powering ships. The land is too unstable to have land based nuclear power – as Japan found out.

        That said, I’d probably also go for a small experimental reactor for all the medical radio-isotopes that we use. Small enough to be easily contained when the brown stuff hits the whirly thing.

        • McFlock 8.1.2.1

          Oceans aren’t known for their stability, either.

          There are more than a few littoral and oceanic wrecks in our EEZ to testify to that.

          • Draco T Bastard 8.1.2.1.1

            Ships seem to have a better chance of surviving a storm than a nuclear plant an earthquake.

            • Chuck 8.1.2.1.1.1

              NZ would need to double its current electricity generating capacity if the majority of the countries cars, buses, trucks were electric.

              As well as upgrading transmission capacity countrywide.

              Solar and wind are not going to make up the difference (especially as a base load supply)…so nuclear may be a valid option.

              At some point in the future petrol/diesel, fuel vehicles will be a thing of the past. However, we are nowhere near the tipping point yet.

              Arderns announcement of no new oil and gas permits this morning will have no effect whatsoever on the introduction of non-fossil fueled vehicles or energy sources.

              Gas is the major issue here, used in residential, commercial and industrial processes. If we run out then its back to coal until we have a reliable replacement.

              • Draco T Bastard

                NZ would need to double its current electricity generating capacity if the majority of the countries cars, buses, trucks were electric.

                But we wouldn’t need to if we didn’t include cars and thus proving the inefficiency of cars.

                Solar and wind are not going to make up the difference

                Actually, they could do so easily.

                At some point in the future petrol/diesel, fuel vehicles will be a thing of the past. However, we are nowhere near the tipping point yet.

                They should have been a thing of the past about ten years ago. There shouldn’t have been even a consideration of dropping the electric trains from the main trunk line but discussions about making our entire train fleet electric.

                Gas is the major issue here, used in residential, commercial and industrial processes.

                You’re misunderstanding the difference between use and burning. And between oil and gas.

                • Chuck

                  DTB The link you provide mentions solar and wind along with hydro and geothermal.

                  While solar has its place it will not dominate the field because of…

                  – A 1 GW PV installation requires 12,000+ acres of land.
                  – Cloud cover can drop output as much as 60% very suddenly.

                  As for wind, a wind farm requires 3 x the capacity to generate the same amount of electricity as a coal-fired plant.

                  And NZ has one of the best profiles globally for wind farms. While we don’t subsidize wind farms outright, they do receive special treatment (feed-in infrastructure and no need to have back up generation capacity).

                  Which is my point that solar and wind are not viable to generate another 40 GW+.

                  Geothermal will help…base load is the key.

                  Along with the ability to use local generation, so the wasteful loss of electricity over long transmission lines is minimized.

                  • Draco T Bastard

                    The link you provide mentions solar and wind along with hydro and geothermal.

                    So? They’re all renewable and that’s all that really matters.

                    And you said that they wouldn’t make up the difference and they can.

                    A 1 GW PV installation requires 12,000+ acres of land.

                    1.5m * 150m^2 = 22500 hectares.

                    So, that would be the land covered by the houses in NZ all of which are suitable to put solar panels on. And all of which would benefit from have solar water heating as well.

                    Cloud cover can drop output as much as 60% very suddenly.

                    Which is why use of multiple renewable generators is needed.

                    As for wind, a wind farm requires 3 x the capacity to generate the same amount of electricity as a coal-fired plant.

                    And can be put at sea, doesn’t cost as much and we get to use all those resources that coal power burn for other purposes.

                    Which is my point that solar and wind are not viable to generate another 40 GW+.

                    Except that they are – in a balanced package of other renewables.

                    • halfcrown

                      “So, that would be the land covered by the houses in NZ all of which are suitable to put solar panels on. And all of which would benefit from have solar water heating as well.”

                      Well said Draco I remember way back in Clarks time when the housing boom was just starting I suggested to a Labour MP I know “Why don’t you make it compulsory to have Solar Panels fitted on the roofs of every new build?” I pointed out to him the cost of having Solar Panels fitted would be a small percentage of the overall cost of a new building. I heard all manner of excuses like the technology is not all that good would not last long etc etc.
                      What he was really telling me was, we would reduce the amount of power required from the Prat Bradford power companies he set up, and they would not be able to have their, as
                      a lot would say “ticket clippers” and massive bonuses as the need for power generation would drop considerably.

                    • Draco T Bastard

                      What he was really telling me was, we would reduce the amount of power required from the Prat Bradford power companies he set up, and they would not be able to have their, as a lot would say “ticket clippers” and massive bonuses as the need for power generation would drop considerably.

                      Yep.

                      Way to be cleared for big electricity players to prey on low-income households

                      The New Zealand electricity industry is not, however, a competitive industry subject to market forces. The production and retailing of electricity is done by a tight oligopoly of five big companies, while distribution of power takes place through natural-monopoly networks whose prices and asset values are protected by a compliant Commerce Commission.

                      Over the three decades of so-called “reform” the big players have written into their balance sheets over $14 billion of “revaluations” – pure capital gains, representing the value of wealth extracted from electricity consumers via the industry’s successful rent-seeking.

                      Those huge wealth transfers, and the price-gouging of captive customers to sustain them, are directly threatened by the arrival of independent supply based on economically viable renewables technology. Faced with the reality, rather than just the mirage, of real choice for consumers, the industry has rushed to hide behind the skirts of the Commerce Commission and the Government.

                      Such protection of big business by the government became obvious a while ago if anybody was willing to look. The dismantling of government services and then getting them done by the private sector was actually just a means of propping up big business and supporting their rent seeking.

                    • Chuck

                      In a perfect world…maybe 6 to 7 acres per MW.

                      However solar PV for commercial use, i.e. feed into a national or local grid requires redundancy. They need to compensate in regards to the capacity factor which varies depending on location.

                      If they say they will produce 1 MW/hr they need to, regardless if output drops (redundancy option).

                  • Pat

                    lol 100% + redundancy eh….think youll find even the commercial supply dosnt work that way.

                    http://powersmartsolar.co.nz/commercial-solar-power

                    With Hydro as a security there is no reason why solar/wind cant make up the 20% needed…or more for that matter…and there are increasingly storage options..i.e. the Tesla example in SA

                    • Chuck

                      Hydro is not security, that’s why we still have gas and coal-fired stations on standby. If the lakes are empty, Hydro can’t deliver.

                      Wind requires 300% redundancy.

                      Baseload is whats required, otherwise, we will become a 3rd world basket case.

                      Geothermal might meet the requirements…

                      And yes storage options will help solar and wind.

                      “think youll find even the commercial supply dosnt work that way.”

                      Go and set yourself up as a commercial wholesaler into the electricity market. If you commit to 1MW/hr of baseload and don’t deliver…you are in breach of your contract. That’s why at the moment wind generators do not need to comply with those requirements…because well they can’t.

                    • Draco T Bastard

                      Hydro is not security, that’s why we still have gas and coal-fired stations on standby. If the lakes are empty, Hydro can’t deliver.

                      It is if we have wind, solar and geothermal. We could even use the excess solar and wind to pump water back up into the lakes if needed.

                      And they react far faster than gas powered generators.

                      Wind requires 300% redundancy.

                      [Citation Needed]

                      Baseload is whats required, otherwise, we will become a 3rd world basket case.

                      We’re already doing that especially under National’s economic mismanagement.

                  • Pat

                    Hydro CAN however be security if its not used up for baseload….meet a greater proportion of baseload with renewables and you can maintain hydro storage for security.

                    As to commercial supply the system through third parties requires no such guarantee from the generator…without the third party perhaps so…I may be able to answer definitively in the not too distant future.

            • McFlock 8.1.2.1.1.2

              Don’t get me wrong, I’m not advocating that every TLA in NZ has it’s own 2ndgen fission reactor and “temporary” storage pools for spent fuel. Hell, even thorium and propsective fusion reactors have their issues (although much safer and cleaner).

              But it’s difficult to drive a reactor building onto rocks (and it’s funny where they randomly stick up in the ocean), or fail to close the bow door properly and turn your ferry into a submarine.

              The sea is a fucking insane place for a nuclear reactor, especially given our coastline and currents. Cook Strait especially is a dodgy bit of water on a bad day – one mariner in the family reckoned it was worse than Cape Horn.

              • alwyn

                I wouldn’t hold my breath while waiting for fusion reactors.
                They have been touted as being available within 50 years. For the last 70 years that has been the story and they seem to be as far away as ever.

                You do comment that thorium reactors are safer and cleaner. Why is that? The only advantage I can see for using the thorium cycle is that you don’t get fissionable plutonium 239 produced and they don’t therefore lend themselves to making nuclear weapons.

                I find the whole debate rather amusing. If we had banned off-shore exploration for oil back in 1960 or so we would have had a nuclear reactor on the Kaipara Harbour for the last 40 years. The only reason its development was stopped was because the Maui field was discovered.

                • McFlock

                  agreed on fusion, but they might get going.

                  I might have tumbled the thorium name. Isn’t there one that requires feedback loops to maintain the reaction, so doesn’t strictly need a shutdown mechanism in case of catastrophic damage to the facility? ISTR one like that which can also process fission waste into less active products as a normal part of its operation – but your basic uranium reactors are cheaper to run ans easier to make and control.

              • Draco T Bastard

                Nuclear ships have been around for awhile. How many have sunk?

                In fact, how many conventional ships have sunk in relation to how many conventional ships are in use? What’s the accident rate?

                It’s a matter of risk and which is more likely to cause calamitous poisoning of the surrounding landscape.

                • alwyn

                  I’m not sure you would get very relevant figures from a comparison.
                  There are, according to Wiki, 140 currently operating nuclear powered ships. Most are submarines. The nuclear powered vessels are kept well away from other vessels I suspect. If you got within 250 miles of one of the US CVNs you would have half a dozen fighter jets round you.

                  All the nuclear powered vessels today are military craft. There were only ever 4 nuclear powered merchant vessels. None of the 4 sank but they had very short operational lives. One apparently only made a single voyage.
                  There have been 9 nuclear submarines that have sunk. 2 US, 5 Soviet and 2 Russian. Can you really compare submarines with surface vessels?

                  There are about 52,000 currently operating merchant vessels with conventional power. I don’t know how many sink each year but comparing a largish ferry in the Philippines with the CVN Nimitz seems a little silly.

                • McFlock

                  I can immediately think of two nuclear-powered vessels that have sunk.

                  Maybe a couple of hundred nuclear-powered vessels constructed?

                  What percentage of land nuclear reactors have been destroyed by earthquakes?

                  Calamatous poisoning of the surrounding ocean would also suck, btw.

            • bwaghorn 8.1.2.1.1.3

              Ships don’t go so good if sone barstards starts a decent sized war .

      • Ovid 8.1.3

        You should read Mad on Radium: New Zealand in the Atomic Age by Rebecca Priestly. It’s a history of the use of nuclear science in NZ. There were several investigations into bringing nuclear power here. The Americans even offered a subsidised power station under their “Atoms for Peace” programme. All were rejected for various technical, economic and geological reasons. Quite aside from the environmental risks.

        Canterbury University did operate a subcritical nuclear reactor for a while, though. This means the neutrons for nuclear fission came from an outside source rather than through a sustained chain reaction. So far as I know, it didn’t generate electricity.

        Edit: in fact, Priestly has a brief article at https://www.noted.co.nz/archive/listener-nz-2012/nz-s-nuclear-jubilee/

  9. Cinny 9

    Excellent, a big thanks from our family as well as the YOUTH of NZ, a generation that does understand why this is an important step.

  10. Mark 10

    Immense damage to some regional economies for virtually zip environmental gains, relatively speaking. I fear for NZ under this mob.

    • Draco T Bastard 10.1

      Chances are those regions will actually do better under this government. The NZ economy has always done better under Labour led governments than under National.

      And all the crises that we’re seeing from underfunding are from National’s poor economic management. I’m pretty sure that’s because they don’t understand economics at all. They seem to think making rich people richer is economic when it’s actually the exact opposite.

      • tc 10.1.1

        The rats jumping ship (starting with Shonky) IMO understand it perfectly well and made their decisions accordingly.

        Note that Ryall/Power shot through to their sinecures as soon as they completed their ‘work’.

    • Cinny 10.2

      Time to move into the future then and start up some new industries in such regions 🙂

      Electric car manufacturing plant maybe?
      Factories of weather-protected hydroponic gardens?
      Massive IT town?
      Solar or wind turbine manufacturing plant?

      No planet, no people, no money….. every bit helps.

      When future generations turn around and ask what did we do to help save the planet, what do we tell them?
      That money was more important than life?

      PS Thanks NZ First, thank you 🙂

      • Bearded Git 10.2.1

        Quite right Cinny.

        What gets me is how few people on this blog are talking about SOLAR POWER. This is coming on in leaps and bounds in terms of efficiency and innovation-soon new houses will be able to have solar roofs.

        I have seen huge banks of solar panels in Spain-much less intrusive in the landscape than windfarms.

        NZ is perfect for solar-the government needs to put some money into subsidising this, at the same time this will create jobs.

  11. Booker 11

    Sounds like the New Plymouth mayor has been living under a rock – what did he think was going to happen to oil and gas jobs? They’d go up or continue indefinitely despite all the global agreements and coverage about climate change!?

  12. CHCOff 12

    I do not see why developing these potential resources, under the umbrella of a framework that siphons a proportion of their NEW revenues into energy diversification is not a good option on the surface of it.

    I do understand that politics is not skin deep however.

  13. AB 13

    The demand for ‘certainty’ comes from a business community (and their enablers in the National Party) who are perfectly happy to rain uncertainty down on their own employees through such things as 90-day fire at will, zero-hours contracts and the perpetual threat of offshoring.
    Whining, entitled hypocrites, just about every one of them.
    But I guess the government has to treat them like the ethically immature children they are, and show them a plan.

    • Muttonbird 13.1

      Bloody good point, AB. Industry demands certainty while providing none. The scale of it matters not.

    • Muttonbird 14.1

      Bridges said if National won the 2020 election it would reverse the Government’s decision to end oil and gas exploration.

      Neither of those things is going to happen though, so that’s a convenient out for him 🙂

      Bridges needs to stop trivialising when he speaks to the media. He did it there saying, “(Taranaki got) a refurbished church, and one or two rinky dinky tourist operations”.

      Yesterday he claimed that school principals would be “looking for doors that won’t shut”. This was in reference to massive and proven underinvestment over the last 9 years of his government.

      People don’t like it when a bully in authority trivialises their efforts or their concerns. It comes across as smarmy. And that’s what Bridges is increasingly looking like – a smarmy man, a bully, mean, and out of touch.

      It’s not going to go well for him.

    • Draco T Bastard 14.2

      Nats admit that they’re either stupid, ignorant or psychopathic.

      News at 11:00

    • Robert Guyton 14.3

      “Nations confirm they will reverse this.

      Excellent!”
      Plus!! Nations (sic) gunna have another go at foisting a new flag on us all!

      Excellent!

    • Incognito 14.4

      Mr Bridges has got blood oil on his hands and grease in his hair and he’s a very lubricated smooth operator with a slick appearance. In other words, he’s a slippery customer.

    • Bearded Git 14.5

      Dinosaurs. Well let National campaign on reversing the policy and we will see who wins.

      Times are changing James-its no longer cool to say bollocks to the planet I need to go for a spin in my V12.

      • james 14.5.1

        “Dinosaurs. Well let National campaign on reversing the policy and we will see who wins.”

        indeed.

  14. patricia bremner 15

    National and Bridges will not get the chance. The changes in climate and the need to stop feeding carbon and methane into our atmosphere will see National alone at the next election if they do not show leadership in this area.

    Continual storms are bringing the facts home, and people will when faced with rising seas and ever increasing business and home insurances, will demand the change.

    The cries of the oil mob remind me of the crowd who made cars go 5 miles an hour with a man with flag walking in front calling “Car coming”, so as to avoid scaring the horses. LOL LOL. So out of touch.

    • Chuck 15.1

      “Continual storms are bringing the facts home”

      Total storm energy was the highest since 1896 in the year 1933. 2004 got close to 1933, however, 2016 was back around the average since 1896. In other words, the climate and weather are always changing.

      “the changes in climate and the need to stop feeding carbon and methane into our atmosphere will see National alone at the next election if they do not show leadership in this area.”

      People also care about energy security and the price they pay for their energy…and don’t forget Carbon – CO2 is vital for life on this planet.

      • patricia bremner 15.1.1

        But they will care when they can’t insure or have to pay huge amounts to insure.

        People in Tugun QLD now pay S10 000 in rates on the beachfront, and $1oo ooo to repair the wave damage. It is real for them… They dread every cyclone, and that is our future. Ask Auckland after this next lot!!

      • patricia bremner 15.1.2

        I notice you don’t mention 2017 … hottest ever recorded. Seas 6 deg hotter!!

        We are at the tipping point. Sometimes it needs courage to admit the dire situation and to begin change.

        I know weather is not climate, but weather patterns are alarming, and are pointing to long term shifts.

        We are here for 75+ years if we are lucky. This is for the children yet to be born.

        Oil in plastic form is also doing great harm, so we have to change. Now.

        What happened today is very measured and considered.

    • James 15.2

      “The cries of the oil mob remind me of the crowd who made cars go 5 miles an hour with a man with flag walking in front calling “Car coming”, so as to avoid scaring the horses. LOL LOL. So out of touch.“

      Don’t laugh. We may be back to this under this governments “zero road deaths” goal.

  15. James 16

    to quote Regional Economic Development Minister Shane Jones assertion that offshore oil and gas drilling was “an essential feature of domestic and export growth, and business and enterprises enabling it will get full government support”.

    So this is “full government support”

    NZFirst are really working to be under 5% next election.

  16. UncookedSelachimorpha 17

    The fossil fuel industry needs to be wound right back, so good news.

    This alone might not make a huge difference, but the example and leadership it shows will have a positive effect out of proportion to New Zealand’s size.

    We are a very wealthy nation and do not need an oil industry here for everyone to prosper. We just need to share what we have a lot better.

  17. Observer Tokoroa 18

    The True Cost of Oil

    Although vehicle manufacturers fudge their specifications and their information in order to confuse their customers, the Particulates that seep out of burning Diesel and Petroleum are trapped into the lungs and tissue of living things.

    Young people especially suffer. So too older people. But all humans are being constantly poisoned by oil toxicity in every motorised place on the planet. Including New Zealand.

    Within a few years all citizens will be able to claim massive compensation from the Oil Producers, Motor Industries, Vehicle owners and Oil Merchants for causing severe personal damage and death.

    Mr Holden is ” kicking New Zealanders in the guts”. Who does he think he is. ?

  18. Graeme 19

    An aspect of this that hasn’t been mentioned is that there have been no viable finds in the last 10 years, despite the past government going all-out with exploration. And this exploration wasn’t starting from scratch, but standing on the shoulders of a lot of work done in the past.

    So our exploration industry was just a high stakes tax deduction for profitable parts f the global industry. OK, so someone was spending money in NZ, but what were we getting for it besides environmental disruption and the mess left over. Kind of like international education sector. Oh, and lots of “donations” to the National Party?

    Anecdotal bit, talking to a neighbour who owns a mechanical engineering business, he’s pleased to see some capacity come back into his sector, he might be able to recruit some qualified staff and not have to compete with petroleum guy’s “promises”

    • james 19.1

      “Anecdotal bit, talking to a neighbour who owns a mechanical engineering business, he’s pleased to see some capacity come back into his sector, he might be able to recruit some qualified staff and not have to compete with petroleum guy’s “promises”

      So an opportunity for him to hire staff at lesser wages. Thanks to the government taking out the opposition.

      If he thought they were worth it – he would have matched the “promises” of the petroleum guys.

      • Graeme 19.1.1

        Na, nothing about lesser wages, just an opportunity to hire qualified staff. He’d be paying as much, maybe more than the pet sector in NZ, but there just aren’t the people.

  19. Durf 20

    People will still drive their cars and buses.

    This just means that instead of oil being drilled in New Zealand where the workers are protected by Labour laws, the oil will be drilled in places like Nigeria where black lives are cheap.

    • alwyn 20.1

      Perhaps Shane Jones can really be persuaded to put his home where his mouth is.
      Why does he insist on living in Kerikeri and have the taxpayer fly him backwards and forwards several times a week?
      He’s only a list MP. He doesn’t have an electorate to service. Let him move to Wellington to live. He can still have his unlimited air travel but we could limit it to just him and only if it is on Parliamentary duties.
      Set a good example Shane. And then insist that all the list MPs follow your example.
      You can also give up the Limo while you are about it. In terms of harm to humanity those great big things with their diesel engines do far more harm than a petrol/electric hybrid like a Camry taxi does.

Leave a Comment

Show Tags

Recent Comments

Recent Posts

  • Government to compensate Tyson Redman for wrongful conviction, imprisonment
    The Government has provided Tyson Gregory Redman more than $500,000 in compensation for wrongful conviction and imprisonment, Justice Minister Andrew Little announced today. ...
    2 days ago
  • Andrew Little enters Pike River portal
    Minister Responsible for Pike River Re-entry Andrew Little, and Pike Family representatives Anna Osborne and Sonya Rockhouse have entered the Pike River Mine portal. ...
    1 week ago
  • Minister welcomes Wakatohea report
    Treaty of Waitangi Negotiations Minister Andrew Little has welcomed the Waitangi Tribunal’s report on the Whakatōhea mandate. “The Tribunal acknowledged that the package on the table is a good package but there are some concerns about the process. ...
    1 week ago
  • Privacy Bill to protect and promote privacy risks
    A Bill introduced by Justice Minister Hon Andrew Little to replace New Zealand’s Privacy Act has had its first reading. ...
    2 weeks ago
  • Bill protects Māori protocols around death
    Justice Minister Andrew Little’s Māori death protocols Bill had its first reading in Parliament last night.  “The Bill requires coroners to consider Māori cultural protocols when determining who can view, touch or remain near a tūpāpaku - body of deceased. ...
    2 weeks ago
  • Poroti land secured for Treaty settlement
    Treaty Minister Andrew Little has announced the Government has secured land near Whangarei that’s been the focus of Ngāpuhi concerns about the health and well-being of Porotī Springs. ...
    2 weeks ago
  • Ngai Tahu and Waikato-Tainui payments
    Payments have been made to Waikato-Tainui and Ngāi Tahu under their Treaty of Waitangi settlements, Minister for Treaty of Negotiations Hon Andrew Little announced today. ...
    2 weeks ago